National Health Service (Procurement, Slavery and Human Trafficking) Regulations 2025 Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Wheeler
Main Page: Baroness Wheeler (Labour - Life peer)National Health Service (Procurement, Slavery and Human Trafficking) Regulations 2025
Baroness Wheeler Excerpts
Baroness Wheeler
That the Grand Committee do consider the National Health Service (Procurement, Slavery and Human Trafficking) Regulations 2025.
Relevant document: 37th Report from the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee
Captain of the King’s Bodyguard of the Yeomen of the Guard and Deputy Chief Whip (Baroness Wheeler) (Lab)
It is a privilege to represent His Majesty’s Government in bringing forward this important secondary legislation, and I am very grateful for the opportunity to present it for your Lordships’ careful scrutiny today.
Slavery remains one of the greatest evils in human history. This Government cannot and will not accept that we might inadvertently support forced labour or human trafficking through our supply chains. I wish to acknowledge the cross-party and Cross-Bench support on this issue, both in this House and in the other place. I pay tribute to all noble Lords, and to distinguished Peers such as the noble Lords, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath and Lord Alton, and the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, who have all worked tirelessly to keep modern slavery at the forefront of our national conversation.
I will begin by setting out why these regulations are necessary. Many are shocked to learn that there are more enslaved people now, in absolute terms, than at any point in history. It is estimated that around 50 million people worldwide are living in modern slavery. Globalisation has brought immense opportunities for trade, but also for exploitation. We in the United Kingdom are not immune from these global networks of human trafficking.
In late 2023, the previous Government published a review into NHS supply chains, covering 60% of medical consumables—£7 billion of spend across over 1,300 suppliers, representing 600,000 products. The review found that just over a fifth of suppliers represented a risk. We know that staff working in the NHS would be appalled to learn that surgical items and face masks could be contaminated by modern slavery. I know I share this revulsion with colleagues across the NHS and across this House.
The review also recognised the wider benefits to the NHS of a better understanding of our supply chains, including improved product quality and supply resilience. It gave us clear recommendations, and today I am proud to present landmark modern slavery legislation to put these policies into practice. This is a first for England, and I hope our colleagues in the devolved Administrations will follow suit.
The NHS is one of the largest public sector procurers in the world, with an annual spend of around £35 billion and business with over 80,000 suppliers. We have a duty to ensure that no products we procure are tainted by forced labour, and an opportunity to use our purchasing power for good. These regulations will require all public bodies to assess modern slavery risks in their supply chains when procuring goods and services for the health service in England. They give effect to a duty established by the Health and Care Act 2022 requiring the Secretary of State to eradicate modern slavery wherever it is found in NHS procurement.
Public bodies will be asked to take reasonable steps to address and eliminate modern slavery risks, especially when designing procurement procedures, awarding and managing contracts, and setting up frameworks or dynamic markets. Reasonable steps may include enforcing robust conditions of participation, monitoring supplier compliance, reassessing risk through the contract’s life and requiring immediate mitigation where instances of modern slavery are discovered.
The regulations also require public bodies to have regard to relevant guidance issued by DHSC or NHS England for consistency and accountability across the system. The updated guidance is now published and publicly available, and the Explanatory Memorandum has been updated to share a link to it.
Some noble Lords may be concerned about legislative overlap, questioning the need for new regulations when modern slavery is already illegal. These regulations have been carefully drafted to fit in with existing statute, building on measures such as the Modern Slavery Act 2015 and the Procurement Act 2023, not replacing them. We are bringing all NHS England procurement into scope and creating a stronger legislative footing for enforcement. The aim is to introduce a single, enforceable risk management approach to modern slavery across the NHS, and we will continue to review our arrangements to ensure their effectiveness.
I do not pretend this will be easy. NHS supply chains are vast, making it difficult fully to assess the scale. The 2023 review was a snapshot, but it is likely that more than a fifth of our supply chains remain at high risk, as the review said and as I have previously stressed. Items included cotton-based products, surgical instruments and PPE gloves, all vital for hospitals across the country. That is why NHS organisations will be supported with clear guidance and resources to root out modern slavery wherever it is found.
It would be abhorrent to think that we procure such items cheaply by turning a blind eye. Ethical supply chains have been proven to be cost-effective in the long term, helping us to avoid litigation and supplier collapse, but even if this were not the case, I am confident that decent people across this country would never put a price on eliminating modern slavery.
In today’s debate we are considering the public and the NHS, but, most importantly, we remember the victims of modern slavery. We have a chance to send a message to enslaved people across the world: “What is happening to you is unjust. We have not forgotten you. We will ensure that our money does not go to those who keep you in chains”. I hope this proves that the Government are committed to rooting out and addressing modern slavery in NHS supply chains. I hope that I have been able to set out the purpose of and a clear rationale for the regulations. I look forward to what will, I am sure, be an informed and constructive debate. I beg to move.
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.
The Earl of Effingham (Con)
My Lords, His Majesty’s loyal Opposition are grateful to the Minister for introducing these regulations, which seek to extend and strengthen the framework for addressing modern slavery and human trafficking risks in NHS supply chains. This is an issue on which there is—and must always remain, ad aeternum—cross-party consensus. No public body, least of all our flagship National Health Service, should ever be associated, however indirectly, with the exploitation of vulnerable people.
The Minister confirmed that this will not be an easy task. We must acknowledge the scale of the challenge to be addressed; this is absolutely not a storm in a teacup. The department’s own review in 2023 found that 21% of NHS suppliers were assessed as being at high risk of slavery or human trafficking, particularly in the supply of gloves, gowns and surgical instruments—essential items that are used day in, day out in our hospitals to save lives. The findings were deeply troubling and underlined the need for consistent, enforceable action.
When we were in government, we took the first steps to make this situation good through Section 81 of the Health and Care Act 2022, which provided the legal foundation for these regulations. We therefore welcome the fact that this Government have now chosen to bring that framework into effect. However, it is not entirely clear cut; we therefore request further clarity from the Minister on a number of areas.
First, the noble Lord, Lord Scriven, highlighted implementation and enforcement. The regulations will require public bodies to take “reasonable steps” to address modern slavery risks, but what will that actually mean in practice? What exactly will constitute a reasonable step? Who will be monitoring compliance with the regulations? What benchmarks will they use to judge whether a body is meeting all of its key performance indicators—indeed, who will set those key performance indicators? The Explanatory Memorandum refers to judicial review as a possible route of challenge, but surely the system should not have to rely on the courts to act as a last line of defence and to identify failings. Who will actually be the first line of defence?
Secondly, on guidance and accountability, Regulation 11 gives NHS England the power to issue guidance, but, as noble Lords know, NHS England is about to be abolished. Can the Minister confirm, therefore, which body will assume those obligations and when that transition will occur? A responsible and decisive Government would want to ensure that there is no period of uncertainty or inconsistency in oversight.
Thirdly, on support for NHS procurement teams, many procurement officers are already under pressure and, understandably, may not have the expertise or know-how to assess complex global supply chains. What specific training and resources will the department provide to help them meet these new legal duties effectively?
Finally, the noble Lord, Lord Scriven, also flagged up the impact on suppliers. It is obviously essential that the new requirements do not create unnecessary bureaucracy and red tape or deter smaller, ethical businesses from bidding for NHS contracts. Can the Minister assure the Committee that the Government’s approach will be proportionate and sensitive to the realities of different markets?
Modern slavery is one of the most serious human rights abuses of our time; the NHS, as a symbol of our national values, should lead by example in confronting it. The previous Conservative Government laid the groundwork and this Government are now taking the next step. His Majesty’s loyal Opposition therefore support the intention behind these regulations but, as ever, the devil is in the detail. Principles must be matched by effective implementation, proper scrutiny and absolute, measurable outcomes. This is a matter not of political division but of national responsibility. We will hold the Government to account in ensuring that these regulations deliver the changes that they promise.
Baroness Wheeler (Lab)
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord and the noble Earl. I apologise that I will have to write on a number of issues, but I will try my best.
The noble Lord, Lord Scriven, asked what the difference is between PPN 009 and the regulations. PPN 009 sets out policy expectations, but the new regulations provide a statutory basis for enforcement, ensuring stronger accountability and compliance in NHS procurement.
On the impact on SMEs, the regulations do not impose direct duties on suppliers, including SMEs. We cannot accept any amount of modern slavery in our supply chains. The regulations allow for a proportionate approach to avoid deterring SME participation. Early market engagement and tailored procurement design will help SMEs compete fairly.
I turn to implementation, training and support. Guidance, training and tools, such as a central risk assessment tool, are being provided to support NHS bodies. The Department of Health and Social Care will take over guidance responsibilities from NHS England. I was asked what will happen and how the expected powers will be used when NHSE is abolished. All the powers will transfer to the Department of Health and Social Care. They have worked together so far and will continue to do so.
On compliance and monitoring, compliance checks are integrated into the NHSE procurement system that is used by more than 300 NHS bodies. We are encouraging commercial teams to embrace these checks as part of good governance. Line managers have real-time data monitoring, which enables effective oversight and accountability. Procurement regulations allow bodies to exclude suppliers and terminate contracts where risks are not remediated.
On the general concern, I understand totally the pressure on the NHS and on local authorities, which was not raised but is in the back of our minds. It is important that we use the NHS’s purchasing power—estimated at £35 billion—to raise standards across the globe without harming domestic suppliers. Ethical supply chains can still be cost effective in the long term by avoiding scandals, litigation and sudden supply collapse. I can reassure the noble Lord, Lord Scriven, and the noble Earl, Lord Effingham, on the point about NHS burdens and the impact on suppliers.
Lord Scriven (LD)
It is all right for the Minister to reassure the Committee, but have organisations such as the Federation of Small Businesses been consulted and given a view? Have they seen the regulations? Which small and medium-sized businesses have been involved and given the Minister the reassurance to be able to say that?
Baroness Wheeler (Lab)
Again, there was certainly full consultation. I will have to write to the noble Lord on the individual quotas, but we were very concerned to ensure that there was consultation across a wide range of groups.
I thank noble Lords for their valuable contributions to today’s debate and their commitment to ensuring that no goods or services procured are tainted by modern slavery. As I set out in my opening remarks, the NHS is one of the biggest buying organisations in the UK. We have a golden opportunity to leverage its purchasing power to influence supply chains in the UK, in Europe and right across the world. With this legislation, we can send a clear signal that we will not tolerate human rights abuses. I end by reminding colleagues that these regulations are about what we can do not just here in England but in eliminating modern slavery across the globe, and to say: “If you want to do business with the NHS, you must get your house in order”.
Lord Scriven (LD)
Before the Minister sits down, I asked a very specific question. The department wrote to the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee that it aimed to publish the updated guidance for October 2025. Has that guidance been published? If not, when will it be?