Baroness Michelle Mone has accused Chancellor Rachel Reeves of using “dangerous and inflammatory” language, days after a High Court judge ruled that PPE Medpro — a firm linked to Mone and her husband, Doug Barrowman — must repay £122 million for breaching a Covid-era PPE contract.
In an open letter to Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, seen by Business Matters, Baroness Mone claims that a comment reportedly made by Reeves at a Labour Party Conference fringe event has directly endangered her personal safety. When asked about the government’s approach to the PPE Medpro case, Reeves is reported to have replied: “Too right we do”, in reference to whether the government had a “vendetta” against Mone.
“Your Chancellor’s statement is incendiary and has directly increased the risks to my personal safety,” wrote Baroness Mone. “Since her remarks, my social media has gone into meltdown with threats and abuse.”
The backlash follows Wednesday’s High Court ruling, in which Mrs Justice Cockerill found that PPE Medpro breached its contractual obligation to supply sterile surgical gowns during the pandemic. The judge concluded that the company had failed to demonstrate the gowns underwent a validated sterilisation process, as required by the contract.
The company — set up by a consortium led by Doug Barrowman — was awarded the contract in 2020 after being recommended through a VIP procurement route by Baroness Mone herself.
PPE Medpro denies wrongdoing and maintains the gowns were sterile at the point of delivery. The company had previously offered to remake all 25 million gowns or pay £23 million in settlement — proposals the DHSC rejected .
Mone: “Vendetta” claim puts family at risk
Baroness Mone is now demanding a formal retraction from Rachel Reeves, as well as an independent investigationinto whether ministers or civil servants have improperly influenced the National Crime Agency (NCA), Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), or the ongoing civil litigation process.
“The word ‘vendetta’ refers to vengeance, feud, and blood feud,” she wrote. “It has made me and my family feel unsafe… We need only look at the tragedies of Jo Cox and Sir David Amess to understand the dangers of such reckless language.”
She added that if no action is taken, she will explore legal remedies, including potential claims for defamation, harassment, and misfeasance in public office.
Baroness Mone, who was appointed to the House of Lords by David Cameron in 2015, remains on a leave of absence from the Lords and lost the Conservative whip following media investigations into her links to PPE Medpro.
Following the court ruling, there have been cross-party calls for her to be stripped of her peerage. While such a move would require an Act of Parliament, prominent voices — including Chancellor Reeves and Conservative frontbencher Kemi Badenoch — have now publicly stated that Mone should not return to the Lords.
In response to Mone’s letter, a Treasury source told the press: “When both the Labour Chancellor and Conservative leader agree with each other, you’ve lost the argument.”
With public and political scrutiny intensifying, and £122 million due by 15 October, PPE Medpro and the couple behind it now face mounting legal, financial and reputational pressure.
Meanwhile, Baroness Mone’s allegation of political bias — combined with the claim that Reeves’ remarks have provoked real-world threats — raises questions about how ministers communicate during ongoing legal matters, and the safeguards in place to protect public figures from harm.
The Prime Minister has yet to respond publicly to Baroness Mone’s letter.
Read more:
Baroness Mone accuses Rachel Reeves of ‘inflammatory’ language after £122m PPE Medpro court defeat