Conservative MP for Porton Down makes major speech on UKHSA’s possible move to Harlow
News / Thu 22nd May 2025 at 08:23am
THE MP for Salisbury has made an impassioned plea for a decision to be made over the possible move of the UK Health and Security Agency (UKHSA) from Porton Down to Harlow.
John Glen made a detailed speech in what is called an adjournment debate in the House of Commons on Wednesday night.
But the experienced MP, in a subtle way, took the opportunity to put case for the UKHSA to remain at Porton Down in Wiltshire.
He spoke for over 20 minutes on the subject, making point after point.
Harlow MP Chris Vince was in attendance. He made two short intervention to simply state he was keen for a decision and that the site in Harlow was “shovel ready”.
Mr Glen detailed how he had followed and been part of matters since becoming an MP in 2010.
At the heart of his concerns was “a lack of clarity in the plans”. He made an appeal for the government to to say “where we are now”.
Mr Glen refers to the six fold increase in the costs of the whole plan to move to the former GSK building in The Pinnacles.
“How can a project with estimated costs of £530 million in 2015 now become an estimate of £3.2 billion?”
He also detailed that the project, should it move to Harlow, would not be fully operational until 2036.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care) Ashley Dalton responded and said that it is expected that a decision is to be made next month (June).
David Forman
2025-05-22 08:44:26
I bet the Editor £20 that the UKHSA stays at Portion Down because they can't get enough scientists to move to Harlow.
Guy flegman
2025-05-22 10:28:26
They won’t be cleared for any potentially dangerous work in Harlow. It’s why GLAXO did not stay as the work they were allowed to do in Harlow was limited due to the fact it is on a hill and containment of any accidents would be difficult. Parton Down was originally chosen due to the fact it is in a valley meaning containment in the event of an accident would be better. I really do not understand why so much money is being wasted on this
David Forman
2025-05-22 10:35:38
I now back up my claim. From Hansard's daily record for Wednesday 21 May at column 1143 Salisbury MP John Glen says: "What about the wishes of some 900 world-class scientists working in south Wiltshire, over 90% of whom, when asked previously by their trade union, did not want to move?" See page 72 of https://hansard.parliament.uk/pdf/commons/2025-05-21
David Forman
2025-05-22 10:50:35
Interestingly, former Tory minister Steve Barclay said: "I was so concerned by this proposal as Secretary of State for Health and Social Care that I visited Porton Down and gave a very clear steer—not least when I found, to my huge surprise, that the nursery was being closed, which I thought was the wrong decision. He, like me, was Chief Secretary to the Treasury. As Chief Secretary to the Treasury, I gave a very clear steer that I was concerned that this move did not represent value for money, that times had changed and that the proposal was in error. I wonder whether the case study that is being presented to officials and the information that comes to Ministers properly reflects known concerns raised by Ministers, which appear to have been routinely ignored." Taken from column 1141 on page 71 of Hansard's daily record.
David Forman
2025-05-22 11:00:28
So we can hold ministers to account, Labour's Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health and Social Care Ashley Dalton said: "Although there is still the outstanding question of how we can best preserve the facilities for the country, whatever decision we take will be made in full consultation with the staff at Porton Down, whose critical skills are highly valued by us all." See column 1146 on page 73 of Hansard.
Nicholas Taylor
2025-05-22 14:17:16
This is what happens when the civil service and polititians get involved, years of delay with experts and staff being ignored. Ministers are moved around like deckchairs at the seaside and as I think is the case here, the Minister has little if any experience of this whole subject. The case for moving to Harlow has always been a tenuous one, let alone taking account of staff uprooting their families. This whole project needs to be abandoned asap and PAH given the opportunity to relocate to the site.
Tiredoffailedpoliticalnorms
2025-05-22 16:41:25
The MP for Salisbury makes a compelling and persuasive argument for his constituents and the HSA remaining in Wiltshire. As noted in other comments here, there would no doubt be strong resistance from employees to move to Essex… though ultimately in science you go where the work is. That said, the case to move is unquestionably weak, costly and will now take an inordinate amount of time of time. The ineffectual interventions from our current MP during the debate were only marginally better than the ridiculous and scandalous web of deception Mr Halfon created and perpetuated for the last 15 years and which put Harlow in this sorry situation! For this, Mr Halfon and the conservative governments, should take full responsibility and publicly apologise to the town they have failed. However, I do note the MP for Salisbury paints a vivid picture of Porton Down being under some terrible strain due to the indecision this farce has created. I would point out that during the last 15 years they, and the local economy, have received ongoing well paid employment, continued investment and now what is now likely further funding. Harlow has received None of this !!! , just an empty site and as mentioned previously the opportunity cost of the site not being used for some other purpose. Assuming the decision is not to move to Harlow, can I suggest Mr Vince that you seek some form of meaningful and significant compensation for the town due this shameful deceit perpetrated by you predecessor, and instead act as an MP prioritising the town’s best interests.
Adam
2025-05-22 16:43:49
We do not want them in this town. We need productive jobs not government jobs.
Resident
2025-05-22 18:00:57
If there is no money and the most vulnerable in society are being driven into poverty by draconian welfare cuts how can this even be considered? And why would they want to move to a site that's deteriorating every year that passed in a rundown neglected town
Adrienne
2025-05-22 21:29:34
What about a new hospital in the site . The building is there.For safety reasons it can't be used for anything slightly dangerous to the public.Remember what happened when COVID escaped in China. Be a little charitable Labour Make a new hospital and perhaps nursing uni there. You could use the garden to support the hospital catering. Come on now labour if you want to make a real difference to Harlow.This makes sense. Or give Pah a new hospital.But it has to be immediately,immediately.. Thankyou David for taking the time to visit Porton down.Got your facts now Even though we already knew.Its good to get it from the horses mouth Or you could sell the building to a British business.To generate a good income for Harlow.Tben you would have enough money to support the building of a new hospital.x
Stephen Archer
2025-05-24 17:38:13
So this is another Conservative screw up. From 2006 it was apparent the high containment labs at Porton were nearing the end of their operational life and refurbishment or relocation was necessary. Then in 2015 with minimal consultation, the Government announced the relocation of Public Health England (as it was then) to the old GSK site in Harlow. Chancellor George Osborne visited along with MP Robert Halfon, whose excitement was barely containable. So the deed was done, £100s millions of investment in Harlow which would be transformative for the town. Thousands of jobs etc etc. etc. A world centre of excellence right here in Harlow! Except Govt. didn't seem to understand that the Porton staff didn't want to swap leafy Wiltshire for a new town in Essex; and moreover, they weren't going to. The type of work done at Porton is leading edge microbiological research. The people working there are at the top of their profession, some no doubt of world renown. But here they were, suddenly ordered to move to Harlow as if they were just mere technical staff and civil servants at that. Again showing an arrogance all too typical of the Conservatives, government failed to understand that PHE/UKHSA isn't just a collection of impressive glass fronted buildings and some expensive equipment, it is actually the people who work for it. So somehow the specifications for the labs at Harlow changed, new facilities were actually built at Porton, organisational changes, names changes, the pandemic, and all sorts of other things appeared which took everyone completely by surprise, and no one knows how or why until the National Audit Office highlighted estimates of costs up by five times (!) the original and delays of fifteen years and .....fundamentally the move is not in the best national interest. Champagne corks pop in Wiltshire. Mission accomplished.
Nostradamus
2025-05-25 09:04:35
"Yes Minster" or "In the thick of it?" Minister "Harlow desperately needs a new hospital, a greenfield / green belt site that's entirely inappropriate outside of town in Epping district has been identified but not secured. Harlow has an non greenfield site at the old empty GSK site within walking distance of the town centre where building could start tomorrow. Porton Down worforce don't wish to move to Harlow. Moving Porton Down to Harlow would cost billions and Harlow is an entirely wrong site to use for the kind of work PD does. Moving Porton Down to Harlow and kicking a new Hospital down the road is entirely inappropriate and upset voters in both places " Sir Humphrey "Ha, but Minster the promises of ?such a large investment in Harlow by our Labour government of both moving Porton Down and building a new hospital will continue to persuade Harlow voters to vote for Labour "Change" whilst keeping all of the tory voting workforce in Porton Down."
Josef K
2025-05-31 00:12:52
The fiasco started in 2009, and John Glen spoke about it in parliament in 2010:— “In 2008, the previous Government announced a major funding initiative—Project Chrysalis, a rebuilding programme to update the facilities at Porton, which was, I acknowledge, much required. Then, in October 2009, out of the blue, a proposal for Terlings Park in Harlow emerged as a option. Then, in January 2010, a new preferred option emerged—the GlaxoSmithKline New Frontiers site in Harlow. Now, the outline business case is being pushed through. “Project Chrysalis has already spent about £10 million on the plans for the rebuild at Porton Down on an site adjacent to the current one. It has been ongoing, assessed and developed over two years.” What he didn't mention in the above speech is that the Terlings Park site is much too small. The Terlings Park choice seemed explicable at the time as a way of eliminating pointless expenditure on pandemic preparedness and similar frivolities, by downsizing. The subsequent switch from Terlings Park to New Frontiers was completely at odds with such a downsizing ambition (it's a much larger site than the one at Porton), so what was going on? Was the government just making public health policy up on the hoof, or was the Terlings Park announcement a softener that was intentionally chosen to be followed up with “Oh look, a better site has been found not far away at New Frontiers — we'll go there instead”? The real reason for moving from Salisbury to Harlowe is obvious: it's all about financial gerrymandering. Salisbury is a tribal Conservative seat where no amount of change in government expenditure can swing a general election. But Harlow is a Conservative/Labour marginal, which makes it worthy of central government spending whenever its MP is a member of the governing party. Before the last election, it made electoral sense for the Conservatives to shift central government spending from Salisbury to Harlow (good for Robert Halfon & inconsequential for John Glen); and now it makes electoral sense for Labour do the same (good for Chris Vince & inconsequential again for John Glen). The public interest plays no part in the decision.
Josef K
2025-05-31 00:47:40
Addendum to the above comment: The above Labour/Conservative financial gerrymandering explanation has been valid since January 2010. Harlow was then represented by Bill Rammell, and his party — Labour— were in poweruntil May 2010.
Leave a Comment Below:
14 Comments for Conservative MP for Porton Down makes major speech on UKHSA’s possible move to Harlow: