Infected Blood Inquiry: Government Response

Baroness Featherstone Excerpts

Wednesday 21st May 2025 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)]

Noble Lords across your Lordships’ House have extraordinary expertise, and I will more than happily meet with any of them if they have recommendations for how we can more quickly expedite infected blood compensation payments. With regard to the £11.8 billion, though, that money has been ring-fenced in compensation payments for the victims of infected blood. We will do everything we can to make sure they get it. This is taxpayers’ money, so there is a balance here; we need to make sure that the people entitled to it get it, which is more straightforward for the infected; we will discuss in great detail what that means as we progress on to the affected, to make sure that safeguards are in place. But this money is for those people who have been directly affected, and we need to make sure that they are the ones with the money.

[Baroness Featherstone (LD)]

My Lords, I thank the Minister for repeating the Statement. Many noble Lords will have heard me say before that I have to declare an interest, but for those who do not know, it is because one of my sister’s twins died aged 35 of infected blood and hepatitis C, leaving a 10 month-old baby daughter.

I met with the campaigners yesterday and these are among their main issues. Those in the infected blood community told me of their deep concern about the delays in the application process, but also of an arrogance of behaviour on the part of members of the IBCA. They said it appeared that the delays were deliberate and that, as has been stated, up to two victims a week are dying and there is a feeling that the Government might be saving money. I do not think that is the case, but the delays allow such theories to develop.

I ask the Minister the following questions. Why are responses to applicants’ queries taking so long? Is it that the IBCA needs more capacity, staffing or training? What are the Government doing about the difficulties that victims are having navigating the bureaucratic compensation claim system, which many of them think is vastly overcomplicated? There is, as I mentioned, a constant complaint about the attitude of some within the IBCA, who

“come across as gatekeepers rather than efficient, compassionate compensation enablers”.

Many wonder whether Treasury civil servants are seconded to the IBCA, as their treatment is so like the treatment they received from members of the Civil Service and the Government during the 40 or 50 years when they were trying to bring this to a head.

What is happening on the disparities between those with HIV, as opposed to hepatitis C? At the moment, HIV is scheduled for a vastly larger amount of compensation than hep C, yet those with hep C are dying more than those with HIV. Creating divisions among groups of people who are suffering and dying is not a great idea; I should like the Minister to convey that to the IBCA. Lastly, what is happening about the issues within the compensation scheme, such as 25% less for carers and underpayment errors due to wrong tariff calculations? I hope the Minister can answer some of those questions.

[Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)]

I thank the noble Baroness for her questions. Every time we discuss this, I am very aware of the impact that it has on members of the community who have to relive the pain and hurt of the loved ones they have lost or are still caring for.

I want to be very clear and put on record that none of the delays is about saving money. That would be the most heinous of approaches. Although I understand that that is being said by members of the community, it is simply not true. Rather, we adopted the establishment of IBCA with a test-and-learn approach. We thought that the worst thing we could do would be to promise more and not be able to deliver. We are trying to ensure that we can deliver at a level and that the people who are entitled to money are actually getting it, and that we are learning from where we get it wrong and fixing it.

On streamlining the process, I tried to use the calculator to figure out what I would or would not be entitled to if I was a member of the community. There is still some way to go in terms of IBCA’s communications, I think it is fair to say. They are getting better but there is still some way to go. I say to all noble Lords, but especially to the noble Baroness, that if there are specific complaints and people are coming to you because they trust you, but there are cases that you would like me to raise directly to find out what is going on, then please pass them to me. I have already done this on behalf of some noble Lords and I have been more than happy to do so. I am very aware of the added burden this is, both in your inboxes and in the emotional toll that it takes. Give them to me and I will raise them.

On the tariffs, the impact of hepatitis infections can range from very mild to, as the noble Baroness’s nephew experienced, horrendously severe. The expert group provided clinical advice on the distinctions between these impacts. This meant that we could set severity bands. I am really sorry, because bringing it down to bands is emotionally very difficult when we are talking about people’s horrendous experiences, but if we are to expedite the compensation then that is the practical way in which we have to do so. The bands mean that when someone’s experience of hepatitis is more severe, based on clinical markers, they receive more compensation, and if their hepatitis symptoms get more severe they can then progress and reapply for additional funding.

On the lack of an HIV tariff, very, very sadly, most people infected with HIV due to infected blood have already passed away; in most cases their deaths were as a result of their HIV infection. It was the view of the expert group that it would be disproportionately complex to break down the HIV category into different severity bands, given the ultimate severity of death.