The fallout from the UK government’s pandemic-era personal protective equipment (PPE) contracts reached a dramatic new peak this week, as Baroness Michelle Mone publicly accused Chancellor Rachel Reeves of endangering her and her family with what she called "dangerous and inflammatory" language. This latest escalation follows a High Court ruling that ordered PPE Medpro, a company linked to Mone and her husband Doug Barrowman, to pay £122 million for breaching a Covid-19 PPE contract. The controversy has sent shockwaves through Westminster, reigniting fierce debate over political accountability, public safety, and the ethics of government procurement during crisis times.
On October 2, 2025, Mrs Justice Cockerill ruled that PPE Medpro’s 25 million surgical gowns, supplied at the height of the pandemic, failed to meet the government’s sterility standards. The company, established by a consortium led by Barrowman and recommended for the contract by Baroness Mone, was found to have breached its contractual obligation by not demonstrating that the gowns underwent a validated sterilisation process. PPE Medpro, for its part, maintains the gowns were sterile at delivery and denies wrongdoing, having previously offered to remake all the gowns or pay a £23 million settlement—offers the Department of Health and Social Care rejected, according to Business Matters.
The court’s decision was swift and unequivocal: PPE Medpro must repay the government £122 million by 16:00 BST on October 15, 2025. The timing is especially fraught, as the company was placed into administration the day before the judgment, with assets reportedly totaling just £666,000, as reported by Sky News. The financial and reputational stakes for Mone, Barrowman, and their associates could hardly be higher.
Yet it is the political and personal fallout that has seized headlines in recent days. At a Labour Party Conference fringe event, Chancellor Rachel Reeves was asked about the government’s pursuit of Mone over the PPE Medpro contract. Her reported reply—“Too right we do”—in response to whether there was a government “vendetta” against Mone, set off a firestorm. Baroness Mone, in an open letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, described Reeves’ language as “incendiary and has directly increased the risks to my personal safety.”
“Since her remarks, my social media has gone into meltdown with threats and abuse,” Mone wrote, according to BBC News and Business Matters. She argued that the use of the word “vendetta”—which she defined as “vengeance, feud, and blood feud”—had made her and her family feel unsafe. Drawing on the tragic murders of MPs Jo Cox in 2016 and Sir David Amess in 2021, Mone warned, “We need only look at the tragedies of Jo Cox and Sir David Amess to understand the dangers of such reckless language.”
In her letter, Mone demanded not only a formal retraction from Reeves but also an “urgent, independent investigation into whether ministers or officials have improperly influenced the NCA [National Crime Agency], CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] and civil litigation process.” She threatened to pursue all available legal remedies, including defamation, harassment, and misfeasance claims, if action was not taken, stating, “Failure to take urgent action will leave me with no choice but to pursue all available legal remedies... while also taking steps to ensure my personal safety and that of my family.”
The response from across the political spectrum has been swift and, in many quarters, unsympathetic. There have been cross-party calls for Baroness Mone to be stripped of her peerage, with prominent voices on both sides of the aisle—Labour’s Rachel Reeves and Conservative frontbencher Kemi Badenoch—agreeing that Mone should not return to the Lords. As a Treasury source told the BBC, “When both the Labour Chancellor and Conservative leader agree with each other you’ve lost the argument.” However, stripping a peerage is no simple matter; it requires an act of Parliament, a hurdle that remains significant despite the mounting pressure.
Baroness Mone, who was made a Tory peer by David Cameron in 2015, lost the Conservative whip following the revelations about her involvement in the PPE Medpro contract. She remains on a leave of absence from the House of Lords. Despite the controversy, she has firmly refused to step down, telling Sky News that those calling for her resignation “would be well advised to read the open letter sent this morning to the prime minister, which sets out how this has now become a personal attack and vendetta, politically motivated with loss of all balance and objectivity.”
In her open letter, Mone also accused ministers—including Reeves and Health Secretary Wes Streeting—of making false claims in their demands for the £122 million repayment. She insisted she was never a director of PPE Medpro and “never received a penny from it personally,” though she has admitted that £29 million of profit from the contract was passed to a family trust benefiting her and her children. Mone further accused the Prime Minister of lying in Parliament by claiming her children had received £29 million into their bank accounts, a statement she categorically denies.
Beyond the personal and political drama, the case has reignited debate about the government’s use of the so-called “VIP lane” for pandemic procurement, through which PPE Medpro was recommended and awarded its contract. Critics argue the system favored those with political connections, while defenders say it was a necessary response to the urgency of the pandemic. The High Court’s findings have only added fuel to this long-simmering controversy.
The Cabinet Office has declined to comment on the specifics of the case or Mone’s allegations. The Prime Minister, as of this writing, has yet to respond publicly to Baroness Mone’s letter. Meanwhile, public scrutiny of the government’s handling of PPE contracts remains intense, with many questioning not only the procurement process but also the tone and responsibility of political leaders when discussing ongoing legal matters.
As the October 15 deadline for repayment looms, the fate of PPE Medpro, Baroness Mone, and her standing in the House of Lords remains uncertain. The case stands as a stark reminder of the high stakes, both personal and political, when public money, public safety, and public trust collide.
