Is there a Johnson legacy for medtech?

Ian Bolland considers what’s happened for life sciences during Boris Johnson’s premiership, and what’s next once he departs. 

Well, it’s finally happened. After months of pressure following multiple scandals running through his government, Boris Johnson will be departing Downing Street as the prime minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. 

Though there will be many questions on the running of the UK, it’s also worth reflecting on two major points. What is his legacy? And what does it mean going forward? 

The outgoing prime minister became synonymous with the vote to withdraw the country from the European Union, but also his subsequent general election win three years later – a mandate that he has often referred to in his desperate bid to cling to power – means that there is a lasting legacy he has left on life sciences in the UK.

With the UK’s departure from the bloc – meaning Johnson “got Brexit done” it means there has been several knock-on effects for the medical device industry, a transition to a UK medical device regulation under the UKCA mark is underway as the country steps away from European regulations. 

The consultation that was recently undertaken by the MHRA appears to have been welcomed by industry, as it keeps rules fairly closely aligned but with suggestions there is encouragement for innovation. 

From my standpoint, that’s the only clear thing that I can see has happened of any substance since Johnson’s arrival into number 10 Downing Street. 

Many of his party chums have been at pains to point out he got all of the big calls right during the COVID-19 pandemic, though they are somewhat pre-judging the outcome of the public inquiry into the pandemic that has seen over 181,000 lives claimed thus far – many will feel that judgement is a little exaggerated. 

Preparedness is one of the terms of reference set out for Baroness Hallett’s inquiry will maybe shine a light on government procurement process, and an inadvertent legacy of that might be that more transparency leads to reform that can allow for confidence in the medical devices, diagnostics and PPE that are acquired during a health emergency. 

The vaccine roll-out has also been one of his go-to points whenever he wanted to get himself out of trouble when scrutinised for his political decisions as he wrongly alluded to not being part of the European Medicines Agency as a factor in the UK’s quick initial roll-out – the truth is the UK was still in a transition period following its withdrawal from the EU and there was nothing stopping the MHRA and the NHS undertaking the roll-out. Appointing key people who knew what they were doing to key areas is what anyone competent should do, not look for pats on the back afterwards.

Competence is the very least what a country’s people, workers, and industry deserves. Many of the day-to-day issues that we have read and heard about in the news about inflation impact the supply chain. 

Transporting components, the cost of materials, the energy that is required to manufacture and develop medical devices and indeed the cost of doing business are all things that need to be addressed for businesses to a) survive and b) thrive. In this regard, there are huge challenges that need to be addressed, and drift while the Conservative Party elects a new leader will not be beneficial. 

Whoever is installed as Prime Minister has a lot to grapple with in terms of legislation, NHS backlogs, and inflation. All of this effects our industry in one way or another, and the next leader of the country needs to be one that inspires confidence in life sciences.