:00:00. > :00:00.level have to be approved by the European Union. We now come to the
:00:07. > :00:20.statements on financial and other support. Thank you very much. On the
:00:21. > :00:26.urgent question of the 16th of December,... I am these to be able
:00:27. > :00:32.to announce the launch of a consultation. For some, this will
:00:33. > :00:36.come to late. I cannot take away the pain and distress of 30 years, and
:00:37. > :00:40.no amount of money could make up for the impact that this tragedy has had
:00:41. > :00:44.on the lives of people. I should be clear that in the majority of cases
:00:45. > :00:49.it is not appropriate to talk about compensation cases. But I would like
:00:50. > :00:54.to echo what has been said before in this House and say sorry on behalf
:00:55. > :00:59.of the government to every person affected by this tragedy. Scheme
:01:00. > :01:03.reform is a priority for me and for the government, and for this reason,
:01:04. > :01:06.I can announce today that the Department of Health has identified
:01:07. > :01:10.?100 million from its budget for the proposals set out in the
:01:11. > :01:16.consultation. This is in addition to the current spend and the ?25
:01:17. > :01:22.million already announced in March 20 15. This will more than double
:01:23. > :01:25.our annual spend on the scheme over the next five years. This is
:01:26. > :01:29.significantly more than any previous government has been able to provide
:01:30. > :01:37.for those affected eye this tragedy. I know all too well over the impact
:01:38. > :01:42.on many of those who have been affected by infected blood. They
:01:43. > :01:52.each have their own story to tell. I'm affected carefully on all of
:01:53. > :01:57.this in developing this. Those who were affected that were able to
:01:58. > :02:00.respond to new advances in medicine, that we provide choice for possible
:02:01. > :02:06.and we maintain annual payments to anyone currently deceiving them.
:02:07. > :02:10.This consultation is an opportunity for all of those who have been
:02:11. > :02:14.affected to have their say and it is important that this extends to the
:02:15. > :02:19.acquired or voices who we hear from less often. I will not have the time
:02:20. > :02:21.to go through the whole consultation document today, but I would like to
:02:22. > :02:26.highlight some of the key components. There is a large
:02:27. > :02:30.population within the infected blood community who currently do not
:02:31. > :02:35.receive any regular financial support. These are the people with
:02:36. > :02:38.hepatitis C. I believe it is important that everybody receives
:02:39. > :02:42.support from the new scheme and that this is linked to the impact that
:02:43. > :02:46.infection has on their house. I therefore propose that all of those
:02:47. > :02:51.registered with the schemes with hepatitis C at current stage one
:02:52. > :02:53.would be offered an individual health -based assessment. Completion
:02:54. > :02:59.of this assessment with determined the annual payment received and this
:03:00. > :03:03.would also apply to anyone who knew scheme. The consultation document
:03:04. > :03:07.outlines our proposal that those who are currently receiving annual
:03:08. > :03:13.support would have their payments listed annually. -- listed annually.
:03:14. > :03:21.Those two received double payments would continue to do so. I often get
:03:22. > :03:24.that people are unhappy about having to appeal for charity payments, and
:03:25. > :03:29.it is my hope that the introduction of a new annual payments will remove
:03:30. > :03:33.this requirement. Diane keen that those who respond to the
:03:34. > :03:40.consultation take the opportunity to answer all the questions so that the
:03:41. > :03:47.eye can make informed final decisions. Turning to treatment.
:03:48. > :03:51.During the urgent question in December, I said I was interested in
:03:52. > :03:57.the opportunities offered by a simpler and more effective treatment
:03:58. > :04:00.that is able to tour some people of hepatitis C. The NHS is at the start
:04:01. > :04:06.of its programme to roll out the new hepatitis C treatments that have
:04:07. > :04:12.been previously approved. The NHS must prioritise treatment on
:04:13. > :04:16.clinical need and not on route of infection. This will mean that some
:04:17. > :04:20.in the blood infection, they will be able to receive treatment right away
:04:21. > :04:29.and others will have to wait. -- the blood infection community. An offer
:04:30. > :04:37.of treatment should be made. Over recent months I have received
:04:38. > :04:42.letters from people, and one of them particularly struck me, which asked
:04:43. > :04:49.simply, please make me well. My intention is that, through the new
:04:50. > :04:52.scheme, we can enhance access to treatments, especially for those who
:04:53. > :04:58.fall just short of the criteria of the NHS. I would hope that we could
:04:59. > :05:03.treat more people. That is why the consultation is seeking views and
:05:04. > :05:06.offering treatment to those in the infected blood community who will
:05:07. > :05:15.not be receiving treatment on the NHS. In keeping with our principles,
:05:16. > :05:19.we are offering options for the bereaved. Currently bereaved spouses
:05:20. > :05:24.or partners are able to apply for means tested support from charities.
:05:25. > :05:29.Many people do not like having to apply for charity. With that in
:05:30. > :05:33.mind, the consultation offers continued access to discretionary
:05:34. > :05:38.support or a one-off lump some payment for the bereaved based on a
:05:39. > :05:40.multiple of their current discretionary support. There are
:05:41. > :05:45.questions on this and the consultation document and Diane keen
:05:46. > :05:47.to hear from those affected so I can't understand their preference.
:05:48. > :05:53.Having listened to the concerns about the complex nature of the
:05:54. > :05:56.schemes, there will be one scheme following the reform, run by a
:05:57. > :06:03.single body which will have access to expert advice, so that we can
:06:04. > :06:08.keep pace with any new advances in treatment for hepatitis C and HIV
:06:09. > :06:13.which might emerge. Turning to the next steps, the consultation will be
:06:14. > :06:17.published today and will run until the 15th of April. This is a 12 week
:06:18. > :06:22.consultation to ensure that all of those who wish to respond have time
:06:23. > :06:25.to do so. Those who read the consultation document will see that
:06:26. > :06:29.there are a number of questions on the proposals on which I would
:06:30. > :06:35.welcome views. I recognise there has been disappointment. The outcome of
:06:36. > :06:38.the consultation will be crucial to informing our final decisions about
:06:39. > :06:45.how to receive, and I give the House and those affected that we will
:06:46. > :06:47.proceed as rapidly as possible to implementation thereafter. We need
:06:48. > :06:52.to make progress in rolling out the health assessments as quickly as
:06:53. > :06:57.possible, ensuring that people get access to the support and clinical
:06:58. > :07:03.access they need. However, I should be clear that my intention for
:07:04. > :07:08.annual payments will be backdated to April 2016, regardless of when each
:07:09. > :07:12.individual's assessment takes place. This is the first time that the
:07:13. > :07:16.government is consulting fully and widely with the affected community
:07:17. > :07:21.and all of those who might have an interest on the future of the
:07:22. > :07:25.scheme. In developing proposals, I have taken into account debate I
:07:26. > :07:29.have heard in this House, correspondence sent to me, as well
:07:30. > :07:35.as my discussions with the all party group, and views gathered during
:07:36. > :07:39.pre-consultation engagements. The consultation is now open and it is
:07:40. > :07:42.my hope that all of those affected by this tragedy will respond and
:07:43. > :07:46.that we can move forward from here. I, and the statements to the House.
:07:47. > :07:56.-- I, and the statement. Can I thank the Minister for her
:07:57. > :08:01.statement and the advance notice of her intention to give the statement
:08:02. > :08:06.and the early provision of it. I appreciate this is a difficult
:08:07. > :08:10.issue, but I think the minister's approached today has been the right
:08:11. > :08:14.one and we will welcome what she said. She was right to apologise on
:08:15. > :08:19.behalf of the government and I would like to echo that apology because
:08:20. > :08:23.successive governments of all colours have failed to respond
:08:24. > :08:29.adequately to this scandal. In many ways this failure has only deepened
:08:30. > :08:34.the injustice felt by the victims. Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to pay
:08:35. > :08:38.tribute to all the members in this house who have been a strong voice
:08:39. > :08:43.for the victims of contaminated blood. In particular I would like to
:08:44. > :08:47.mention the honourable members for Hull North, Worthing, Hammersmith
:08:48. > :08:51.and Southdown, the right honourable member for North East Bedfordshire
:08:52. > :08:58.and my right noble friend the member for leave. This do Deputy Speaker,
:08:59. > :09:02.this scandal saw thousands of people die and thousands of families
:09:03. > :09:06.destroyed through the negligence of public bodies. Whilst the minister
:09:07. > :09:10.was absolutely right to say that no amount of money could ever make up
:09:11. > :09:19.for the impact this tragedy has had on people's lives, we all owe it to
:09:20. > :09:23.those still living with the consequences the dignity of a
:09:24. > :09:28.lasting settlement. With that in mind I want to press the Minister on
:09:29. > :09:33.four points. Firstly on funding. It was claimed that one of the reasons
:09:34. > :09:37.for delaying the announcement of this consultation was so there could
:09:38. > :09:41.be clarity on how much funding would be available following the
:09:42. > :09:46.comprehensive spending review. The minister appeared to announce an
:09:47. > :09:50.additional ?100 million for the new scheme, so for clarity can the
:09:51. > :09:54.Minister set out the total amount that would be available over the
:09:55. > :10:01.lifetime of the new scheme as set out how that compares to the
:10:02. > :10:05.previous scheme? Secondly, we welcome that the consultation were
:10:06. > :10:09.offered the choice of a one-off lump sum payment for the bereaved, but
:10:10. > :10:15.can the Minister say a bit more about how that might be implemented?
:10:16. > :10:20.As the Minister knows these payments will enable choice and it is
:10:21. > :10:25.important that we get this right. Thirdly, could I ask the Minister to
:10:26. > :10:29.say a bit more about widows and widowers. She will know that the
:10:30. > :10:34.Scottish review group recommended widows get some form of pension for
:10:35. > :10:39.the first time. Has this option being considered by her? It is
:10:40. > :10:45.important we recognise that widows and widowers are not just suffering
:10:46. > :10:49.an immediate loss of income from their partner, but the inability of
:10:50. > :10:56.their partner to save for a pension or get life insurance over the past
:10:57. > :11:01.few decades. Finally, on the status of hepatitis C sufferers who have
:11:02. > :11:05.not developed liver cirrhosis, we welcome the possibility of ongoing
:11:06. > :11:10.payments, but can the Minister say how the assessments will work? In
:11:11. > :11:15.particular it is important that these assessments take account of
:11:16. > :11:20.the longer term health impacts of living with hepatitis C. Does the
:11:21. > :11:23.Minister have any figures on how many of these individuals will not
:11:24. > :11:32.have access to the new hepatitis C treatment? Given the NHS made these
:11:33. > :11:36.people ill, and the NHS has the drugs available to help these
:11:37. > :11:41.patients, it does seem wrong that we are denying some of these people
:11:42. > :11:46.treatment, the treatment that they both need and frankly deserve. Can
:11:47. > :11:50.the Minister say a bit more about how the government intends to
:11:51. > :11:56.improve access to treatment for these individuals specifically? Mr
:11:57. > :12:01.Deputy Speaker, I hope that everyone affected will be able to take part
:12:02. > :12:07.in this consultation and have their say on the future reform of the
:12:08. > :12:10.scheme. Let me finish by saying to the Minister that she will have our
:12:11. > :12:19.full support in implementing that new scheme and doing what we can to
:12:20. > :12:27.provide relief for the victims of this very terrible injustice. Thank
:12:28. > :12:31.you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and can I thank the Shadow Minister for
:12:32. > :12:35.responding in those terms. It is much appreciated, we all want to
:12:36. > :12:40.move forward with consensus and support of the people who have been
:12:41. > :12:44.affected by this tragedy. I think there is one question I might need
:12:45. > :12:50.to write to him on afterwards as my mouth is not quite good enough. He
:12:51. > :12:54.asked about funding. As I made clear to the House, the money will be
:12:55. > :12:59.coming from the Department of Health budget and we have identified an
:13:00. > :13:04.additional ?100 million which allows us to double the current spend on
:13:05. > :13:10.existing schemes, that is in addition to the ?25 million
:13:11. > :13:16.announced in March in 2015. The spend to date is ?390 million and
:13:17. > :13:25.the projected future spent is ?570 million. That is over ?1 billion
:13:26. > :13:31.across the lifetime of the schemes. That is to give him clarity around
:13:32. > :13:36.that. He asked about lump sums. People will see that we are
:13:37. > :13:39.consulting on options for both those who are already bereaved and those
:13:40. > :13:46.who will be buried in the future and we are asking people how they feel
:13:47. > :13:50.about continuing with the discretionary approach, or taking a
:13:51. > :13:56.one-off approach that will be based on a multiple of the discretionary
:13:57. > :14:02.payment, or a hybrid of the two. We are trying to be as open as possible
:14:03. > :14:06.so people can give us their views. I have seen the Scottish proposals and
:14:07. > :14:11.I had a conversation with my opposite number in Scotland this
:14:12. > :14:18.morning. One of the options we are considering with regard to bereaved
:14:19. > :14:21.people is an ongoing payment, albeit discretionary, so I would not
:14:22. > :14:27.compare it to what I understand the reference group in Scotland have put
:14:28. > :14:31.forward as a pension. We are talking about access to ongoing but
:14:32. > :14:37.discretionary payments. I look forward to hearing abuses during the
:14:38. > :14:44.consultation on that. With regard to hepatitis C, there are 160,000
:14:45. > :14:50.people in England who have hepatitis C, so those affected by this tragedy
:14:51. > :14:54.make up less than 2% of the hepatitis C population in England.
:14:55. > :14:59.The NHS has to treat people on the basis of clinical need and the
:15:00. > :15:04.treatments are in the region of ?40,000 each, so they are quite
:15:05. > :15:08.expensive treatments. We believe there are more treatment in the
:15:09. > :15:17.pipeline. I am keen to have clinical expertise embedded in the new
:15:18. > :15:21.scheme. We are keen to understand that people who are not currently
:15:22. > :15:24.going to reach the current guidelines, and to understand the
:15:25. > :15:30.unique circumstances of people affected by this tragedy, we can do
:15:31. > :15:33.something in the scheme to support those people. But we need to
:15:34. > :15:39.understand how many people will be interested. Not every gene type of
:15:40. > :15:46.hepatitis C is susceptible to the new treatments. For some people none
:15:47. > :15:51.of the new treatments are clinically appropriate. I think those were all
:15:52. > :15:58.the key questions, but I am very happy to continue to work in the
:15:59. > :16:04.spirit in which he responded to my statement and will come back with
:16:05. > :16:08.any further clarity he seeks. I thank the Minister for her statement
:16:09. > :16:13.and the measures she has outlined today as well as her continued
:16:14. > :16:19.commitment for seeking justice to those affected. It reminds me of
:16:20. > :16:29.measures being taken for drugs for the future. I want to ask what your
:16:30. > :16:34.commitment is in molecular diagnostics and going forward in the
:16:35. > :16:40.future? But the government and the NHS have made it very clear we very
:16:41. > :16:46.much welcome what we see as a very rapidly changing landscape. I am
:16:47. > :16:50.joined on the bench by the Minister of life sciences who is doing a
:16:51. > :16:55.great deal to accelerate some of the newest treatments and their adoption
:16:56. > :16:59.in the NHS. I can give that commitment, that we want to stay at
:17:00. > :17:04.the cutting edge of medicine. One of the reasons perhaps to the
:17:05. > :17:07.frustration of some people we have delayed bringing forward this
:17:08. > :17:12.consultation is because we had a fuller picture of the current state
:17:13. > :17:18.of the treatments available. The last three treatments were only
:17:19. > :17:21.approved on the 25th of November. We want to always stay up to date with
:17:22. > :17:35.the treatment landscape as it evolves. Many thanks. We understand
:17:36. > :17:38.the terrible situation of those infected by this blood tragedy. It
:17:39. > :17:43.is imperative to take action to common sake where we can although no
:17:44. > :17:47.amount of money can compensate those individuals whose lives have been
:17:48. > :17:52.affected. What is being proposed is a step in the right direction. We
:17:53. > :17:57.must focus on the needs of those affected, offered choice, medical
:17:58. > :18:03.advancement and evidence -based practice. My understanding is
:18:04. > :18:05.payments come through a UK scheme, but there is involvement from health
:18:06. > :18:11.departments in devolved administrations. Can I reiterate our
:18:12. > :18:16.support for those affected and ask the Minister what discussion she had
:18:17. > :18:20.had with devolved administrations on consultation arrangements, scheme
:18:21. > :18:28.reform, payments recommended for widows or widowers and any other
:18:29. > :18:32.recommendations? To be clear this consultation has been undertaken by
:18:33. > :18:37.the Department of Health in England, however it is open to anyone across
:18:38. > :18:42.the UK to respond. We continue to work with all the UK health
:18:43. > :18:47.departments. My officials have been working very closely with officials
:18:48. > :18:51.in devolved administrations. I offered my ministerial counterparts
:18:52. > :18:56.a phone call this morning and had a very and productive phone call with
:18:57. > :19:03.the deputy Chief Medical Officer and we are in touch with everyone. The
:19:04. > :19:12.CMO for England contacted her opposite numbers as well. As health
:19:13. > :19:17.is a devolved matter, I am aware that Scotland is consulting on
:19:18. > :19:20.scheme reform in its own right, however all devolved administrations
:19:21. > :19:24.will have the option of joining our new scheme going forward with an
:19:25. > :19:29.assessment of the financial contribution necessary. I had a
:19:30. > :19:33.useful conversation with Shona Robison about the transitional
:19:34. > :19:37.arrangements and I indicated we would try to be as helpful as
:19:38. > :19:44.possible and I have every confidence we will go on in that spirit. I
:19:45. > :19:49.welcomed the statement and the consultation and I certainly welcome
:19:50. > :19:53.on behalf of my constituency the extra money that is available. I
:19:54. > :19:57.want to ask about consultation because the Minister wants the
:19:58. > :20:05.widest ranging consultation. Every member in this house to letters we
:20:06. > :20:09.have passed on, like my constituent Matthew Harris who has been
:20:10. > :20:13.campaigning in this area, I was wondering if the department could
:20:14. > :20:21.directly contact those constituents that we have passed onto her to make
:20:22. > :20:26.sure they who are directly affected can take part in the consultation. I
:20:27. > :20:30.can assure my honourable friend that we will make every effort to reach
:20:31. > :20:34.people. My officials have put in place extensive plans to publicise
:20:35. > :20:38.the consultation and have met with the heads of the charities and
:20:39. > :20:45.current schemes and they will be writing to people registered in
:20:46. > :20:50.their schemes. We are going to make it as easy as possible to get
:20:51. > :20:54.involved. One reason for having a 12 week consultation is we recognise
:20:55. > :20:58.some of the people involved might not be online, so we want to make
:20:59. > :21:03.sure everyone has a chance to comment. I will reflect on what he
:21:04. > :21:07.has asked in terms of direct contact. That might have already
:21:08. > :21:13.been picked up, but we have extensive plans to publicise it. I
:21:14. > :21:18.welcome members' contributions to the consultation on behalf of their
:21:19. > :21:30.constituents. Can I thank the Minister for making the statement
:21:31. > :21:35.today. On first glance it appears that the proposals being put forward
:21:36. > :21:37.are not as generous as those being discussed in Scotland, although I
:21:38. > :21:43.accept the Scottish Government has not accepted those proposals, but
:21:44. > :21:50.can I press on one issue? It is around health assessments for those
:21:51. > :21:55.in stage one of hepatitis C. Those people have been living with
:21:56. > :21:59.hepatitis C for many years and even if they are now clear of the viral
:22:00. > :22:04.load, they will not be able to resume their lives as if they had
:22:05. > :22:09.never been affected. I want to make sure that that has been taken
:22:10. > :22:14.account in health assessments and any financial arrangements that will
:22:15. > :22:19.be put in place. Can I thank her for all the work she has done, she has
:22:20. > :22:22.been recognised by others for the campaigning work she has done on
:22:23. > :22:27.this issue, although we have not always agreed. But I have been
:22:28. > :22:31.greatly informed by what she has brought to our discussions and I
:22:32. > :22:32.have taken on board a lot of what the all-party group has reported on
:22:33. > :22:43.over the years. The recommendations for Scotland are
:22:44. > :22:47.recommendations from a reference group, not the Scottish Government,
:22:48. > :22:55.the Scottish Government are yet to respond to those. I have been told
:22:56. > :22:58.they will in due course. In terms of the individual health assessments
:22:59. > :23:04.are recognise what she said, and it is a bit early to specify how these
:23:05. > :23:08.will be carried out, but we intend that an expert advisory group would
:23:09. > :23:15.advise on the criteria and the evidence. Everybody will be brought
:23:16. > :23:20.into the scheme, everybody will be receiving an annual payment, and we
:23:21. > :23:23.reckon those that for some people the are issues of fluctuating health
:23:24. > :23:31.so we are trying to wreck as all of that. We anticipate that
:23:32. > :23:35.individuals' own clinicians will be involved. -- racket lies all of
:23:36. > :23:40.that. I welcome the Minister's own
:23:41. > :23:46.determination to see this through. -- racket lies all of that.
:23:47. > :23:51.The progress -- recognise all of that.
:23:52. > :23:56.I welcome the level of funding that has been secured, I welcome the
:23:57. > :23:59.format of annual payments and particularly the backdating offer.
:24:00. > :24:03.But can I urge her to focus on making happen her promise of
:24:04. > :24:12.treatment for hepatitis C at every level of the NHS. There is a lot of
:24:13. > :24:17.bureaucracy ahead. I'd like to thank the honourable
:24:18. > :24:23.lady for those words, and I'm glad she feels we are making progress.
:24:24. > :24:26.The NHS is at the beginning of a roll out of many of these hepatitis
:24:27. > :24:31.C drugs. Some people have been treated, and many more are going to
:24:32. > :24:36.be treated going forward. I hear what she is saying, in some ways I
:24:37. > :24:40.think one of the benefits of the individual health assessment for
:24:41. > :24:45.everyone in the current stage one of the scheme is that we will be able
:24:46. > :24:48.to understand not just perhaps the clinical need but also perhaps where
:24:49. > :24:52.they are finding problems with just the things she described. We would
:24:53. > :24:57.want to understand just from the consultation whether that sort of
:24:58. > :25:01.help with navigating the health system is one of the things, one of
:25:02. > :25:07.the non-financial aspects of support people might seek, so I'd take her
:25:08. > :25:13.points on board. I thank the Minister for the split
:25:14. > :25:20.-- statement and welcome the consultation. With regard to those
:25:21. > :25:24.people with hepatitis C which other members have raised, clearly it is
:25:25. > :25:27.an important moment, this assessment, because the Minister
:25:28. > :25:32.talks about linking it to payments. Does she envisage an entirely
:25:33. > :25:37.discretionary based payment or does she think there will be bands of
:25:38. > :25:41.payment? Would there be a right of challenge? And what does she mean by
:25:42. > :25:44.enhanced access to treatment? Is there a risk still the there would
:25:45. > :25:53.be some people who would not get access to treatment?
:25:54. > :25:58.With regard to individual health assessments, we will be asking a
:25:59. > :26:04.sort of expert advisory group to have a look at what the criteria
:26:05. > :26:08.should be. We do envisage that people's own clinicians will be
:26:09. > :26:16.involved, in terms of broadly speaking we would envisage probably
:26:17. > :26:19.bands within, but again that is subject to the consultation, in
:26:20. > :26:25.order to be able to manage both speed of fairness so we would --
:26:26. > :26:40.that would be asked for their move on that. -- are thought there.
:26:41. > :26:43.People are getting NHS treatment based on NICE guidelines, but we
:26:44. > :26:47.understand there will be people who fall short of that at any one time.
:26:48. > :26:50.So we envisage being able to hopefully offer treatment to people
:26:51. > :26:58.who fall just short of that within the scheme, but within the overall
:26:59. > :27:02.envelope of funding it is not yet possible before the consultation has
:27:03. > :27:06.taken place to understand quite what the balance is, because I do not
:27:07. > :27:11.know what affected individuals' views are about the balance between
:27:12. > :27:16.treatment and some of the other options of consultation. I wanted
:27:17. > :27:19.see what people think and how attractive the treatment of is to
:27:20. > :27:24.some individuals before we come to final conclusions.
:27:25. > :27:31.May I think the Minister for the work she has been doing on this
:27:32. > :27:33.issue. -- thank the Minister. And the Minister of State for the
:27:34. > :27:39.impressive way this is being handled. We should never forget that
:27:40. > :27:43.this is a simple matter of justice. And it is time, after all the
:27:44. > :27:48.apologies, but those affected should feel but we are doing justice to
:27:49. > :27:53.that in justice. -- that those affected. One of the important needs
:27:54. > :27:57.is that any scheme should be simple, comprehensive, predictable and
:27:58. > :28:02.consistent, and it is absolutely essential that the bewildering
:28:03. > :28:08.variety of provision at the moment is resolved into that single, clear
:28:09. > :28:12.scheme. Will she give me the undertaking that whatever emerges of
:28:13. > :28:19.the outcome of this process, that that will be the abiding priority of
:28:20. > :28:23.the Government? I certainly think I can give my
:28:24. > :28:27.honourable friend some comfort in that regard. It is fair to say the
:28:28. > :28:32.area in which there is the greatest consensus across the infected the
:28:33. > :28:39.community and across this House is on just what he described, the
:28:40. > :28:45.complexity of the schemes and the fact that they are a mixture of
:28:46. > :28:52.regular payments and discretionary means tested payments. We will not
:28:53. > :28:58.waste time, we will begin a scoping exercise on scheme reform while the
:28:59. > :29:01.consultation is underway, in anticipation of them finalising
:29:02. > :29:05.plans at the end of the consultation, and I agree we need
:29:06. > :29:10.based game that is straightforward, simple and sustainable, both giving
:29:11. > :29:15.regular support of those affected but also allowing this Government
:29:16. > :29:21.and future governments to be able to plan and sustain the support. --
:29:22. > :29:26.needs-based scheme. I have met with constituents who
:29:27. > :29:31.have been affected by this, so I welcome very much what has been
:29:32. > :29:34.said. Could the Minister say whether she has met with the Welsh Health
:29:35. > :29:40.Minister and spoken with him to discuss the matter, and how it will
:29:41. > :29:45.operate in regard to Wales specifically in regard to the
:29:46. > :29:50.assessment, will for example Welsh patients have to travel to England
:29:51. > :29:55.to take part in the experiments? Or will that be provisions to take us
:29:56. > :30:01.back for them to take place in Wales?
:30:02. > :30:07.I think it is worth reiterating what I said, in terms of, I haven't been
:30:08. > :30:11.able to spot the Welsh Health Minister, we did offer the
:30:12. > :30:14.opportunity of a call with other ministers which the Scottish
:30:15. > :30:20.minister was on, but he knows he can get in touch. -- and able to talk to
:30:21. > :30:27.the Welsh health Minister. -- been able to. This consultation is for
:30:28. > :30:32.the scheme in England, we have been working as I say with counterparts
:30:33. > :30:35.in the other devolved administrations, whilst everyone in
:30:36. > :30:40.the UK is welcome -- welcome to respond and say what they think,
:30:41. > :30:47.health is now a devolved matter, in contrast to when the first schemes
:30:48. > :30:54.were set up. With regard to treatment within NHS, that is a
:30:55. > :30:58.matter for the NHS in Wales, and I will have a look at some of the
:30:59. > :31:05.other points he made, but I am happy to write to him afterwards.
:31:06. > :31:10.I thank the Minister for the consultation, the additional money,
:31:11. > :31:19.and the work she and her right honourable friends have done. Will
:31:20. > :31:23.she concede that for those of us who work closely with individual victims
:31:24. > :31:27.for a number of years, the resolution has to be as fast as
:31:28. > :31:30.possible, financially, to put them in the position they would have been
:31:31. > :31:37.but for the grievous harm that has been done. That may mean in some
:31:38. > :31:44.cases a space of -- bespoke solution for individual victims.
:31:45. > :31:50.I thank the honourable gentleman for that question. I think if that is a
:31:51. > :31:55.view that he clearly has, I would invite him to submit it couldn't --
:31:56. > :31:59.to the consultation. This is why we are consulting. We put some
:32:00. > :32:03.proposals forward, some of the questions are very open and we will
:32:04. > :32:08.look at what comes back from them. I urge him and other honourable
:32:09. > :32:15.members to take part in the consultation.
:32:16. > :32:19.I welcomed the statement and commend the Shadow Minister's town. Victims
:32:20. > :32:23.in Northern Ireland share the frustration we have heard from other
:32:24. > :32:28.honourable members. But then perhaps feel more pointedly the contrast
:32:29. > :32:34.with the friends in the South who have had a part of justice are
:32:35. > :32:37.available to them. The Minister is absolutely sincere in her commitment
:32:38. > :32:43.to the issue of treatment, but will she give assurance that the effort
:32:44. > :32:48.that she has -- is putting into the fact that people can be made well
:32:49. > :32:52.will not detract or distract from the obligation we still have to make
:32:53. > :32:58.good this travesty that people have suffered?
:32:59. > :33:02.I thank him for his sustained interest over such a long time and
:33:03. > :33:10.speaking on behalf of people from his area. The might be aspects based
:33:11. > :33:17.on our previous conversations that the honourable gentleman doesn't
:33:18. > :33:23.feel with his own aspirations, so again I invite him to respond to the
:33:24. > :33:26.consultation. That -- these are through -- some of these questions
:33:27. > :33:32.are very open and people can give us their views. Something different
:33:33. > :33:35.happened in Ireland, I recognise, and in the Republic, and that is
:33:36. > :33:42.down to another Government to make those decisions. The circumstances
:33:43. > :33:47.were different, but I invite him to respond to the consultation, and I
:33:48. > :33:51.will take note of his and all of the honourable members' views.
:33:52. > :33:55.The Minister will know that some of the cases go back so many years, and
:33:56. > :33:58.the medical records may have been destroyed. Could she say in a bit
:33:59. > :34:03.more detail what evidence is required both at the assessment
:34:04. > :34:09.stage and for those applying to the discretionary fund?
:34:10. > :34:16.It is a little too early as thick to give that level of detail. We want
:34:17. > :34:21.to ask for expert advice -- I think. Don't forget we are looking at the
:34:22. > :34:27.impact on people's health now, and we will -- we don't want this to be
:34:28. > :34:31.an invasive process or an owner must process for the people who have gone
:34:32. > :34:36.through so much already, so we do envisage involving people's own
:34:37. > :34:45.clinicians as well as gathering over evidence. -- other evidence. But we
:34:46. > :34:50.will ask for experts to advise us of this.
:34:51. > :34:57.Can I commend the Minister for her statement today. We know her as a
:34:58. > :35:10.compassionate position -- person who is committed to this. Some 7500
:35:11. > :35:18.people have died through being contaminated with blood. This
:35:19. > :35:21.morning the Minister has given -- I want to say one thing, the European
:35:22. > :35:27.Commission of human rights has recently ruled that Italy must pay
:35:28. > :35:35.immediately compensation to all those who received contaminated
:35:36. > :35:41.blood. When can we see the money actually getting to the victims, is
:35:42. > :35:45.there a timescale for that? Also, there hasn't been any commitment or
:35:46. > :35:49.discussions as I understand with the Northern Ireland Assembly of the
:35:50. > :35:58.Minister, Simon Hamilton, as regards matters devolved.
:35:59. > :36:05.As I said, we offered a phone call this morning with the Minister, but
:36:06. > :36:08.I am more to -- more than happy should my opposite number want to
:36:09. > :36:14.have a conversation. The circumstances as I said before, the
:36:15. > :36:20.circumstances in Italy are different and other governments make -- must
:36:21. > :36:25.make decisions for themselves. In terms of timescale, I have said that
:36:26. > :36:31.our priority is to move forward individual health assessments, and
:36:32. > :36:34.we will do some scoping around the reform of the schemes themselves. I
:36:35. > :36:40.can't yet say how long that will take, but I want to do it as quickly
:36:41. > :36:45.as possible. As I mentioned in my statement, to give cement -- members
:36:46. > :36:50.assurance that whenever we undertake those assessments, people will not
:36:51. > :36:52.miss out because they work towards the end of that process because we
:36:53. > :36:53.will backdate all those