EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Transport

EU Exit Preparations: Ferry Contracts

David Hanson Excerpts
Tuesday 5th March 2019

(5 years, 1 month ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Chris Grayling Portrait Chris Grayling
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will leave my right hon. Friend to make his point, because I do not want to start debating discussions within the Government.

The hon. Member for Kilmarnock and Loudoun asked why we started this procurement when we did. As I have said, we and the national health service had been preparing for disruption at the ports lasting approximately six weeks after exit day. However, based on the negotiations, on comments coming from Brussels and on what we saw happening on the other side of the channel, the analysts changed that assumption late last autumn and recommended that Government prepare for a longer period of disruption.

At that point, the Department of Health and Social Care rightly highlighted the fact that that would put significant pressures on their stockpiles of drugs. The Government therefore collectively decided following discussions in Cabinet Committees to go to the ferry industry to secure capacity to guarantee the delivery of drugs to this country in the event of a no-deal Brexit. That was a collective decision, and it was the right decision. We talked to all the current ferry operators working across the North sea and the English channel, plus any other operator with tangible plans to do so. That is where the procurement came from.

David Hanson Portrait David Hanson (Delyn) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

Is this not the key question, however? Did the right hon. Gentleman have advice from his officials that negotiations solely with ferry companies would result in a legal challenge by Eurotunnel, which ultimately he has now paid off with a £33 million investment from taxpayers?

Chris Grayling Portrait Chris Grayling
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We knew, in accelerating the procurement process, that there was a legal risk. That has been highlighted in the NAO report. However, it was my judgment, the judgment of my accounting officer and the judgment of those who vetted the plan across the Government that that was a risk that we should take, given the need to ensure that we had a supply of drugs into the country in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

David Hanson Portrait David Hanson
- Hansard - -

The right hon. Gentleman has said that there was a legal judgment that there was an element of risk. He took that risk, and his actions have therefore cost the state £33 million.

Chris Grayling Portrait Chris Grayling
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

We took a collective decision, in the light of the legal advice, which was taken by me, by my accounting officer, and by those who approved this across the Government, and we did so—[Interruption.] We did so because we judged it important to ensure that we had a proper supply of drugs to the NHS in the event of a no-deal Brexit. I challenge Labour Members, as they chunter from the Front Bench, to say that they disagree with ensuring a supply of drugs to the UK in a no-deal Brexit.