24 July 2023: Mordaunt - B

Questions from core participants:

What did compensation look like to Ms Mordaunt when she wrote about “substantial” compensation? She said she did not have a clear picture of the scope of what would be involved.

Citing again the concept of “justice delayed is justice denied”, can things like compensation for infected blood be “fast-tracked”? She said there were examples, such as the Covid emergency legislation, but generally there is a process to go through and that has to be allowed to happen. She felt that during her time they moved as fast as they could.

Counsel pursued the potential for senior Ministers to push things faster. She recognised how this Parliament was the final one and there is pressure on Parliamentary time. She noted that the infected blood compensation is a priority for the Prime Minister.

What is the impact of the turnover in those who hold the post of Paymaster General? She stated that it has not been but currently is a Cabinet role. It tends to go to more experienced people who take their responsibilities very seriously. She felt this role had recently enjoyed quite good continuity compared to other Ministerial roles. (Everything is relative, we suppose, like “pace”.)

Finally, from Counsel, reference was made to there being resistance, particularly from officials, to changing established positions and lines, and what the witness thought about that. She said she did not recognise such a characterisation, rather her officials were highly motivated to deliver.

The Chair had a question about the Terms of Reference for the Compensation Framework Study. He wanted to check the understanding by the witness of who is covered by the word “affected” people. She was then asked about parity and fairness among affected people (what a brilliantly astute strategy to bring the acknowledged parity principle into the issue of how different affected people as being treated). She explained the full range of people she thought ought to be included in compensation eligibility.

The Chair wondered why Ms Mordaunt had been the one to set up the Compensation Study and not one of the other holders of the post of Paymaster General. She felt that the time was right when she was in that role and there was also sufficient growth in the recognition across the relevant parts of Government of the issue. She felt she was an experienced Minister who was able to make it happen.

The witness noted how frequently this matter was being raised in Parliament, even among those who don’t have infected or affected constituents. She noted how many harms were being more generally recognised and learned about. This is despite the case of MPs often only knowing a little about a lot of things. She noted the scepticism among those infected and affected, not least due to the length of time people have waited and suffered. Her view is that the Inquiry is an important step forward, with the work it has done since being set up, including the small part she had played.

The Chair thanked Ms Mordaunt for coming to the Inquiry as a witness, noting how “it may be serendipitous” that the week of evidence has started with her testimony. Once again, this writer cannot help but recognise the serene subtly of this observation.

In confirmation of the relatively higher regard many people have for this particular Government witness, there was a general and popular outbreak of unfettered applause (but not a standing ovation) afforded Ms Mordaunt. However, unless the protocol of making announcements in Parliament first is broken and one of the other witnesses come, like Santa, with a sack of goodies to distribute, then further clapping is unlikely to be heard this week. This writer would love to be proved wrong.

By the way, how many times this week will Covid continue to be the “go-to” excuse for things not being done? And to counter-balance that prediction-disguised-as-a-question, how many of the infected and affected will cite the huge amounts of money which appeared out of nowhere to be thrown at Covid, especially the billions of wasted, ineffective, fraudulently acquired public funds which shifted around like confetti in a wind chamber (… which is not a reference to the Commons, but it could be).