Infected Blood Compensation Scheme (Amendment) Regulations 2026

Baroness Finlay of Llandaff Excerpts

Wednesday 22nd July 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Finlay of Llandaff (CB)]

My Lords, we must thank the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, for her introduction to this amendment. Like others, I have had some desperately sad correspondence from widows whose husbands died relatively early after infection. Infection denied them children, some suffered serious discrimination within their family, some find that their husbands medical records are missing, and probate rules have created barriers. All those affected are so deeply wounded by the lasting emotional, financial and practical consequences of the scandal, retraumatised over decades of seeking accountability. As one widow wrote,

“no amount of money will bring back our loved ones, and there is no way you can put a figure on what we have had to go through”.

There are ongoing problems, and we must follow Sir Brian’s lead. Two years ago, though, not a penny was going out the door in recognition of the wrongs perpetrated. The delays until now are shameful. I thank the Minister and the civil servants for meeting me. The civil servants working on this are being as scrupulous as they can. The compensation coming from the Treasury, in effect from taxpayers, recognises as a nation the extent of the scandal: the NHS purchased contaminated products, and some professionals abused the trust of people in services meant to protect and respect life. We have gone from nowhere to where we are today, thanks only to those wronged speaking out, time and again, to a system that seemed deaf to their plight.

My noble friend Lady Campbell of Surbiton cannot be here today. Through her own experiences, she has taught me and others so much. I am grateful to her for sharing her thoughts on this amendment and on the need for recognising those affected, as well as those infected. Differing eligibility criteria and inconsistencies in estimating financial loss and bereavement have led to inequalities and unintended consequences. Those affected fear claims over their deceased infected relative being increasingly delayed.

The proposed death recognition award should be amended to recognise those who experienced the bereavement, rather than automatically becoming part of an estate, as probate barriers can stop the person most affected being recognised in the compensation. Deceased infected claims progress more slowly than many expected, prolonging uncertainty for bereaved families. Families who provided years of unpaid care feel that their contribution has gone inadequately recognised. Because financial loss awards differ depending on dates and circumstances, many families believe this creates unjust disparities in compensation that they cannot understand.

Thousands of families live with the consequences of the infected blood scandal. While no compensation can replace a loved one, it can acknowledge the profound loss suffered and help restore confidence that the state is committed to delivering justice fairly. There is an ancient saying: “Trust arrives on foot and leaves on horseback”. This compensation scheme and the Hillsborough law might be the foot soldiers of trust in this nation, if, and only if, we have candour and get the subsequent actions right.