Found: Q56 Anna Dixon: We had the final report from the infected blood inquiry in May of last year.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of requiring the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme to distinguish between people subjected to deliberate, non-consensual trials and other people.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

The Infected Blood Inquiry Report highlights many ethical failings that happened as part of the Infected Blood Scandal. The impact of these ethical failings on infected people has been recognised in the compensation scheme's core autonomy award.

In his summer 2024 report Sir Robert Francis recommended that an additional autonomy award be made available specifically to infected people subjected to unethical research. The Government accepted this recommendation, which led to the development of the Unethical Research Practices award as part of the Compensation Scheme's supplementary route. The award focuses specifically on research that has failed to meet established ethical standards.

Specifically, the eligibility for the award is determined by the presence of documented unethical research. This includes a lack of informed consent, inadequate oversight, and other breaches of ethical obligations in research settings.

In December last year, the Government engaged with key representatives and organisations in the community on the particular eligibility criteria for the Unethical Research Practices Award. The Government was grateful for the submissions and feedback it received from key stakeholders and considered the evidence provided in each one carefully. The Regulations which became law on 31 March 2025, detailed, specifically the criteria and centres that will be covered as part of this award. The Government is able, through further secondary legislation, to add additional centres or studies to the list if new evidence is presented. The Government wants to ensure that those who were subject to unethical research are provided with the additional autonomy award.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of recognising mono-HCV haemophiliacs as a separate cohort under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

In March, Parliament approved the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme Regulations 2025, which established the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme in full and gave the Infected Blood Compensation Authority the powers it needs to begin making payments to all people eligible for compensation under the Scheme.

In line with the recommendations from the Infected Blood Inquiry’s second interim report and Sir Robert’s compensation framework study, the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme takes a tariff based approach to compensation based on infection severity bands. The Government sought advice on the infection severity bandings and consequent tariffs from the Infected Blood Inquiry Response Expert Group.

In regards to an additional award for haemophiliacs, the scope of the scheme’s supplementary route is in line with the recommendations Sir Robert Francis KC made to the Government in August 2024. The Government accepted Sir Robert’s recommendation that, with the exception of autonomy awards to victims of unethical research, supplementary route awards should only be available for care and financial loss.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many people will be eligible for compensation under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme in (a) Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr constituency, (b) Wales and (c) the UK.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

Due to the nature of the Infected Blood scandal there is uncertainty over the number of people who might be eligible for compensation. The final number of eligible people will ultimately depend on the number of victims who come forward. While there is no way of knowing exactly how many people were infected as a result of this scandal, the findings of the Statistical Expert Group, established by the Infected Blood Inquiry, has provided valuable insight into the numbers of infections from blood and blood products in the UK between 1970 and 1991. The central estimates approximately total 30,000, which includes both living and deceased victims. This information is not available on a constituency basis.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, on what evidential basis the level of compensation for people with (a) Hepatitis C and (b) haemophiliacs infected with HIV under the Infected Blood Compensation scheme was determined.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

As recommended by the Inquiry, the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme has been designed as a tariff-based framework. The proposed tariffs were developed on the advice of the Infected Blood Inquiry Response Expert Group, which included clinical and legal advisors assisted by social care specialists. You can find more information about the work of the Infected Blood Inquiry Response Expert Group on gov.uk here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/infected-blood-inquiry-response-expert-group-summary-report

Found: The Scheme responds directly to and is in line with the recommendations made by the Infected Blood Inquiry

Found: The Infected Blood Inquiry summarised the problem well in their final report saying: ‘Investigations

Found: The Infected Blood Inquiry showed the disastrous consequences that can result from poor record keeping

Found: Victims and Prisoners Bill 4 previously accepted non-Government amendment related to the Infected Blood Inquiry

Found: a victim of the infected blood scandal by reference to the Second Interim Report of the Infected Blood Inquiry