Lord Scriven (LD)

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Wheeler, for her clear and helpful introduction to the regulations. This is, quite rightly, a moment for us all to express collective support. The measure before us today is fundamentally about the moral application of public money. The NHS is arguably one of the largest single procurers, if not the largest, of goods and services in the country. When taxpayers’ money is spent, it must not, in any circumstances, inadvertently finance or sustain the abhorrent practice of modern slavery or human trafficking. This instrument, which is rooted in the Health and Care Act 2022, serves as a powerful declaration that our healthcare system will not tolerate this barbaric crime. Having said that, I am a little confused on a point of governance and accountability. The Government’s Procurement Policy Note 009 Tackling Modern Slavery in Government Supply Chains already states unequivocally: “This Procurement Policy Note (PPN) applies to all central government departments, their executive agencies, and non-departmental public bodies and NHS bodies when awarding public contracts”. Given that PPN 009 already binds the NHS to a risk-based approach, will the Minister explain the precise interplay between these two existing policy requirements and the new statutory instrument? In answer to questions placed by the Secondary Legislative Scrutiny Committee in its 37th report, on page 23, the Government seem to suggest that somehow this will be a more mandatory approach. I therefore seek to find out exactly how that interplay works out. Importantly, we need to understand what the fundamental flaw is in the existing PPN system that has led the Government to conclude that a policy note is insufficient to protect public money, compelling them to introduce new secondary legislation to ensure that the NHS supply chain is truly free from the stain of modern-day slavery and human trafficking. Are they saying that for other departments the PPN is not sufficient and there is a weakness within other public sector procurement if they do not introduce the equivalent of what the NHS is doing in this statutory instrument? If these new duties are to be introduced over and above the existing PPN 009, we must be clear-eyed about the significant practical challenges that may arise during the implementation of these regulations. It is in the space between legislative intent and practical realities on the ground that problems can and sometimes do emerge. First, on the scale of the administrative burden, the NHS supply chain is vast and notoriously complex, involving millions of different products—from common consumables to highly specialised medical devices—that are often sourced globally through multiple tiers of contractors. Imposing a mandatory risk assessment before every procurement process, as set out in the regulations, will place a substantial and, so far, uncosted administrative burden on already stretched NHS procurement teams. We must ensure that this work is not simply devolved to front-line staff without the requisite funding, training and specialist tools.