The PPE Scandal And Accountability

Disclaimer: This article is written for informational and editorial purposes only. It reflects opinion on matters of public interest relating to government accountability, contractual law, and the use of public funds. It should not be taken as legal advice. Readers are encouraged to seek professional guidance for specific legal or political concerns. References to individuals and government officials are based on publicly available information and reporting at the time of writing. Any images of banknotes or coins used in this article are for illustrative and editorial purposes only. They do not represent real, legal tender and are not intended for use as currency. Where currency appears defaced, altered, or destroyed, it is used solely as a symbolic representation in commentary and does not imply endorsement by the Bank of England or any financial institution.

When Leadership Fails and Accountability Disappears

The COVID-19 pandemic was a crisis that required urgent action, but urgency should never excuse negligence, incompetence, or deliberate misuse of public funds. The staggering £10 billion loss on PPE procurement is one of the most shameful examples of government failure in recent history. This waste was not an accident; it was the direct result of poor judgment, lack of accountability, and decision-making by individuals who should never have been entrusted with such responsibility. Keir Starmer ‘on verge of sacking Cabinet Secretary Chris Wormald as Downing Street meltdown continues with attack on ‘parody civil servant’ | Daily Mail Online

The Case of Sir Chris Wormald

Image Description: Money & PPE In Flames: Image Credit: Image Description: A Pile Of PPE Up In Flames. Image Credit: AI-generated illustration created with assistance from ChatGPT (© DisabledEntrepreneur.UK, 2025).

Sir Chris Wormald, as Permanent Secretary at the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), authorised the purchase of five years’ worth of PPE, despite the fact that only four months’ supply was realistically required. Worse still, much of the stock came with a two-year shelf life, leading to billions of pounds’ worth of PPE expiring, being stored at huge ongoing cost, and ultimately destroyed.

Instead of facing consequences for this mismanagement, Wormald was promoted to Head of the Cabinet Office, proving once again that within politics, failure is too often rewarded.

During the COVID inquiry, his shortcomings became undeniable. Yet, rather than taking accountability, the blame was conveniently shifted elsewhere. Baroness Michelle Mone and her husband became scapegoats, branded as the “poster couple” for PPE corruption, while systemic government failings were ignored.

Contractual Law: What Went Wrong

Just last week, we explored the principles of contractual law in the context of “try before you buy” or “sale or return” agreements. Under those arrangements, risk is mitigated because payment is tied to the goods being fit for purpose, delivered on time, and approved by the buyer.

The PPE scandal has raised serious concerns about accountability and due diligence in public procurement. All personal protective equipment should have been accompanied by valid certification and evidence of sterilisation before shipment, ensuring safety and compliance with medical standards. If such documentation was absent, responsibility lies not only with the suppliers who failed to provide it but also with the government bodies and intermediaries who authorised and accepted the contracts without demanding proof. The absence of these checks highlights a breakdown in oversight, leaving the question open: who is ultimately to blame, the providers who cut corners, or the officials who failed to enforce basic safeguards?

If the government had adopted basic contractual safeguards during PPE procurement, much of this disaster could have been avoided:

Stock could have been returned if deemed unnecessary or unsterilised.
Payments could have been staged or conditional upon use and quality.
Suppliers would have borne more of the risk, not the taxpayer.

But instead of applying basic business sense, the government signed inflated, one-sided contracts in a panic-driven gold rush, leaving the public to foot the bill for unusable, expired goods.

The Real Cost: Financial, Environmental, and Social

This isn’t just about wasted money. It’s about:

Environmental destruction: millions of garments are dumped or incinerated.
Storage costs: billions more wasted keeping surplus PPE in warehouses.
Public betrayal: while the government squandered billions, disabled people, carers, and low-income families were targeted with welfare cuts and benefit sanctions.

It raises a fundamental moral question: how can leaders justify penalising society’s most vulnerable while simultaneously destroying resources on this scale?

A Broken System of Governance

The PPE scandal highlights a much deeper issue: the calibre of those in power.

At present, an aspiring MP only needs a political party membership, a following, and £500 to stand for election. Unlike CEOs or professionals in the private sector, there is no requirement for qualifications in law, business, economics, or leadership. As a result, half of those elected may not be fit for the complex responsibilities of governance.

If CEOs or seasoned business leaders had been tasked with managing PPE contracts, the outcome would have been drastically different. In the private sector, £10 billion wasted would mean immediate dismissal, asset recovery, and criminal investigation.

Yet in politics, incompetence is often protected, excused, and even rewarded with promotions, titles, and honours.

Time for Change

The public has every right to demand better. We should be asking:

Why are unqualified individuals permitted to hold such powerful offices?
Why are politicians rewarded for failure while the public pays the price?
Why is accountability always shifted, rather than enforced?

Perhaps the system itself is broken beyond repair. The question then becomes: should the government be overthrown and rebuilt on competence and meritocracy? At the very least, we need a parliament of professionals, leaders with genuine expertise, integrity, and the ability to protect the public purse.

Conclusion

£10 billion has been squandered, not just in money, but in trust, lives, and opportunities. Sir Chris Wormald should be held to account, stripped of his titles, and made to repay through asset sanctions and forfeiture. This would set an example to every politician that abuse of power has consequences.

It is time for the government to stop punishing the poor and disabled while rewarding incompetence at the top. Real reform means electing individuals who are qualified to govern, bound by business sense and legal safeguards, not just party loyalty and public spin. Until then, the cycle of waste, corruption, and betrayal will continue.

What has been largely overlooked in the PPE scandal is the environmental damage caused at every stage, from the sourcing of raw materials and global logistics, through to the mass incineration of unused stock. Little has been said about why surplus PPE was not offered to charities, frontline community organisations, or even to people living with conditions such as OCD, who could have benefited from the supplies. Reports noted that pallets of PPE were auctioned for as little as £250, and when these remained unsold, they were ultimately incinerated, a shocking waste of public money, resources, and an environmental catastrophe that could have been avoided with better foresight and planning. Moving forward, sustainability and accountability must be at the core of all procurement processes to ensure that public resources are not squandered and the environment is not left to pay the price.