Live Infected Blood Statement House of Commons

level have to be approved by the European Union. We now come to the

statements on financial and other support. Thank you very much. On the

urgent question of the 16th of December,... I am these to be able

to announce the launch of a consultation. For some, this will

come to late. I cannot take away the pain and distress of 30 years, and

no amount of money could make up for the impact that this tragedy has had

on the lives of people. I should be clear that in the majority of cases

it is not appropriate to talk about compensation cases. But I would like

to echo what has been said before in this House and say sorry on behalf

of the government to every person affected by this tragedy. Scheme

reform is a priority for me and for the government, and for this reason,

I can announce today that the Department of Health has identified

?100 million from its budget for the proposals set out in the

consultation. This is in addition to the current spend and the ?25

million already announced in March 20 15. This will more than double

our annual spend on the scheme over the next five years. This is

significantly more than any previous government has been able to provide

for those affected eye this tragedy. I know all too well over the impact

on many of those who have been affected by infected blood. They

each have their own story to tell. I'm affected carefully on all of

this in developing this. Those who were affected that were able to

respond to new advances in medicine, that we provide choice for possible

and we maintain annual payments to anyone currently deceiving them.

This consultation is an opportunity for all of those who have been

affected to have their say and it is important that this extends to the

acquired or voices who we hear from less often. I will not have the time

to go through the whole consultation document today, but I would like to

highlight some of the key components. There is a large

population within the infected blood community who currently do not

receive any regular financial support. These are the people with

hepatitis C. I believe it is important that everybody receives

support from the new scheme and that this is linked to the impact that

infection has on their house. I therefore propose that all of those

registered with the schemes with hepatitis C at current stage one

would be offered an individual health -based assessment. Completion

of this assessment with determined the annual payment received and this

would also apply to anyone who knew scheme. The consultation document

outlines our proposal that those who are currently receiving annual

support would have their payments listed annually. -- listed annually.

Those two received double payments would continue to do so. I often get

that people are unhappy about having to appeal for charity payments, and

it is my hope that the introduction of a new annual payments will remove

this requirement. Diane keen that those who respond to the

consultation take the opportunity to answer all the questions so that the

eye can make informed final decisions. Turning to treatment.

During the urgent question in December, I said I was interested in

the opportunities offered by a simpler and more effective treatment

that is able to tour some people of hepatitis C. The NHS is at the start

of its programme to roll out the new hepatitis C treatments that have

been previously approved. The NHS must prioritise treatment on

clinical need and not on route of infection. This will mean that some

in the blood infection, they will be able to receive treatment right away

and others will have to wait. -- the blood infection community. An offer

of treatment should be made. Over recent months I have received

letters from people, and one of them particularly struck me, which asked

simply, please make me well. My intention is that, through the new

scheme, we can enhance access to treatments, especially for those who

fall just short of the criteria of the NHS. I would hope that we could

treat more people. That is why the consultation is seeking views and

offering treatment to those in the infected blood community who will

not be receiving treatment on the NHS. In keeping with our principles,

we are offering options for the bereaved. Currently bereaved spouses

or partners are able to apply for means tested support from charities.

Many people do not like having to apply for charity. With that in

mind, the consultation offers continued access to discretionary

support or a one-off lump some payment for the bereaved based on a

multiple of their current discretionary support. There are

questions on this and the consultation document and Diane keen

to hear from those affected so I can't understand their preference.

Having listened to the concerns about the complex nature of the

schemes, there will be one scheme following the reform, run by a

single body which will have access to expert advice, so that we can

keep pace with any new advances in treatment for hepatitis C and HIV

which might emerge. Turning to the next steps, the consultation will be

published today and will run until the 15th of April. This is a 12 week

consultation to ensure that all of those who wish to respond have time

to do so. Those who read the consultation document will see that

there are a number of questions on the proposals on which I would

welcome views. I recognise there has been disappointment. The outcome of

the consultation will be crucial to informing our final decisions about

how to receive, and I give the House and those affected that we will

proceed as rapidly as possible to implementation thereafter. We need

to make progress in rolling out the health assessments as quickly as

possible, ensuring that people get access to the support and clinical

access they need. However, I should be clear that my intention for

annual payments will be backdated to April 2016, regardless of when each

individual's assessment takes place. This is the first time that the

government is consulting fully and widely with the affected community

and all of those who might have an interest on the future of the

scheme. In developing proposals, I have taken into account debate I

have heard in this House, correspondence sent to me, as well

as my discussions with the all party group, and views gathered during

pre-consultation engagements. The consultation is now open and it is

my hope that all of those affected by this tragedy will respond and

that we can move forward from here. I, and the statements to the House.

-- I, and the statement. Can I thank the Minister for her

statement and the advance notice of her intention to give the statement

and the early provision of it. I appreciate this is a difficult

issue, but I think the minister's approached today has been the right

one and we will welcome what she said. She was right to apologise on

behalf of the government and I would like to echo that apology because

successive governments of all colours have failed to respond

adequately to this scandal. In many ways this failure has only deepened

the injustice felt by the victims. Mr Deputy Speaker, I want to pay

tribute to all the members in this house who have been a strong voice

for the victims of contaminated blood. In particular I would like to

mention the honourable members for Hull North, Worthing, Hammersmith

and Southdown, the right honourable member for North East Bedfordshire

and my right noble friend the member for leave. This do Deputy Speaker,

this scandal saw thousands of people die and thousands of families

destroyed through the negligence of public bodies. Whilst the minister

was absolutely right to say that no amount of money could ever make up

for the impact this tragedy has had on people's lives, we all owe it to

those still living with the consequences the dignity of a

lasting settlement. With that in mind I want to press the Minister on

four points. Firstly on funding. It was claimed that one of the reasons

for delaying the announcement of this consultation was so there could

be clarity on how much funding would be available following the

comprehensive spending review. The minister appeared to announce an

additional ?100 million for the new scheme, so for clarity can the

Minister set out the total amount that would be available over the

lifetime of the new scheme as set out how that compares to the

previous scheme? Secondly, we welcome that the consultation were

offered the choice of a one-off lump sum payment for the bereaved, but

can the Minister say a bit more about how that might be implemented?

As the Minister knows these payments will enable choice and it is

important that we get this right. Thirdly, could I ask the Minister to

say a bit more about widows and widowers. She will know that the

Scottish review group recommended widows get some form of pension for

the first time. Has this option being considered by her? It is

important we recognise that widows and widowers are not just suffering

an immediate loss of income from their partner, but the inability of

their partner to save for a pension or get life insurance over the past

few decades. Finally, on the status of hepatitis C sufferers who have

not developed liver cirrhosis, we welcome the possibility of ongoing

payments, but can the Minister say how the assessments will work? In

particular it is important that these assessments take account of

the longer term health impacts of living with hepatitis C. Does the

Minister have any figures on how many of these individuals will not

have access to the new hepatitis C treatment? Given the NHS made these

people ill, and the NHS has the drugs available to help these

patients, it does seem wrong that we are denying some of these people

treatment, the treatment that they both need and frankly deserve. Can

the Minister say a bit more about how the government intends to

improve access to treatment for these individuals specifically? Mr

Deputy Speaker, I hope that everyone affected will be able to take part

in this consultation and have their say on the future reform of the

scheme. Let me finish by saying to the Minister that she will have our

full support in implementing that new scheme and doing what we can to

provide relief for the victims of this very terrible injustice. Thank

you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and can I thank the Shadow Minister for

responding in those terms. It is much appreciated, we all want to

move forward with consensus and support of the people who have been

affected by this tragedy. I think there is one question I might need

to write to him on afterwards as my mouth is not quite good enough. He

asked about funding. As I made clear to the House, the money will be

coming from the Department of Health budget and we have identified an

additional ?100 million which allows us to double the current spend on

existing schemes, that is in addition to the ?25 million

announced in March in 2015. The spend to date is ?390 million and

the projected future spent is ?570 million. That is over ?1 billion

across the lifetime of the schemes. That is to give him clarity around

that. He asked about lump sums. People will see that we are

consulting on options for both those who are already bereaved and those

who will be buried in the future and we are asking people how they feel

about continuing with the discretionary approach, or taking a

one-off approach that will be based on a multiple of the discretionary

payment, or a hybrid of the two. We are trying to be as open as possible

so people can give us their views. I have seen the Scottish proposals and

I had a conversation with my opposite number in Scotland this

morning. One of the options we are considering with regard to bereaved

people is an ongoing payment, albeit discretionary, so I would not

compare it to what I understand the reference group in Scotland have put

forward as a pension. We are talking about access to ongoing but

discretionary payments. I look forward to hearing abuses during the

consultation on that. With regard to hepatitis C, there are 160,000

people in England who have hepatitis C, so those affected by this tragedy

make up less than 2% of the hepatitis C population in England.

The NHS has to treat people on the basis of clinical need and the

treatments are in the region of ?40,000 each, so they are quite

expensive treatments. We believe there are more treatment in the

pipeline. I am keen to have clinical expertise embedded in the new

scheme. We are keen to understand that people who are not currently

going to reach the current guidelines, and to understand the

unique circumstances of people affected by this tragedy, we can do

something in the scheme to support those people. But we need to

understand how many people will be interested. Not every gene type of

hepatitis C is susceptible to the new treatments. For some people none

of the new treatments are clinically appropriate. I think those were all

the key questions, but I am very happy to continue to work in the

spirit in which he responded to my statement and will come back with

any further clarity he seeks. I thank the Minister for her statement

and the measures she has outlined today as well as her continued

commitment for seeking justice to those affected. It reminds me of

measures being taken for drugs for the future. I want to ask what your

commitment is in molecular diagnostics and going forward in the

future? But the government and the NHS have made it very clear we very

much welcome what we see as a very rapidly changing landscape. I am

joined on the bench by the Minister of life sciences who is doing a

great deal to accelerate some of the newest treatments and their adoption

in the NHS. I can give that commitment, that we want to stay at

the cutting edge of medicine. One of the reasons perhaps to the

frustration of some people we have delayed bringing forward this

consultation is because we had a fuller picture of the current state

of the treatments available. The last three treatments were only

approved on the 25th of November. We want to always stay up to date with

the treatment landscape as it evolves. Many thanks. We understand

the terrible situation of those infected by this blood tragedy. It

is imperative to take action to common sake where we can although no

amount of money can compensate those individuals whose lives have been

affected. What is being proposed is a step in the right direction. We

must focus on the needs of those affected, offered choice, medical

advancement and evidence -based practice. My understanding is

payments come through a UK scheme, but there is involvement from health

departments in devolved administrations. Can I reiterate our

support for those affected and ask the Minister what discussion she had

had with devolved administrations on consultation arrangements, scheme

reform, payments recommended for widows or widowers and any other

recommendations? To be clear this consultation has been undertaken by

the Department of Health in England, however it is open to anyone across

the UK to respond. We continue to work with all the UK health

departments. My officials have been working very closely with officials

in devolved administrations. I offered my ministerial counterparts

a phone call this morning and had a very and productive phone call with

the deputy Chief Medical Officer and we are in touch with everyone. The

CMO for England contacted her opposite numbers as well. As health

is a devolved matter, I am aware that Scotland is consulting on

scheme reform in its own right, however all devolved administrations

will have the option of joining our new scheme going forward with an

assessment of the financial contribution necessary. I had a

useful conversation with Shona Robison about the transitional

arrangements and I indicated we would try to be as helpful as

possible and I have every confidence we will go on in that spirit. I

welcomed the statement and the consultation and I certainly welcome

on behalf of my constituency the extra money that is available. I

want to ask about consultation because the Minister wants the

widest ranging consultation. Every member in this house to letters we

have passed on, like my constituent Matthew Harris who has been

campaigning in this area, I was wondering if the department could

directly contact those constituents that we have passed onto her to make

sure they who are directly affected can take part in the consultation. I

can assure my honourable friend that we will make every effort to reach

people. My officials have put in place extensive plans to publicise

the consultation and have met with the heads of the charities and

current schemes and they will be writing to people registered in

their schemes. We are going to make it as easy as possible to get

involved. One reason for having a 12 week consultation is we recognise

some of the people involved might not be online, so we want to make

sure everyone has a chance to comment. I will reflect on what he

has asked in terms of direct contact. That might have already

been picked up, but we have extensive plans to publicise it. I

welcome members' contributions to the consultation on behalf of their

constituents. Can I thank the Minister for making the statement

today. On first glance it appears that the proposals being put forward

are not as generous as those being discussed in Scotland, although I

accept the Scottish Government has not accepted those proposals, but

can I press on one issue? It is around health assessments for those

in stage one of hepatitis C. Those people have been living with

hepatitis C for many years and even if they are now clear of the viral

load, they will not be able to resume their lives as if they had

never been affected. I want to make sure that that has been taken

account in health assessments and any financial arrangements that will

be put in place. Can I thank her for all the work she has done, she has

been recognised by others for the campaigning work she has done on

this issue, although we have not always agreed. But I have been

greatly informed by what she has brought to our discussions and I

have taken on board a lot of what the all-party group has reported on

over the years. The recommendations for Scotland are

recommendations from a reference group, not the Scottish Government,

the Scottish Government are yet to respond to those. I have been told

they will in due course. In terms of the individual health assessments

are recognise what she said, and it is a bit early to specify how these

will be carried out, but we intend that an expert advisory group would

advise on the criteria and the evidence. Everybody will be brought

into the scheme, everybody will be receiving an annual payment, and we

reckon those that for some people the are issues of fluctuating health

so we are trying to wreck as all of that. We anticipate that

individuals' own clinicians will be involved. -- racket lies all of

that. I welcome the Minister's own

determination to see this through. -- racket lies all of that.

The progress -- recognise all of that.

I welcome the level of funding that has been secured, I welcome the

format of annual payments and particularly the backdating offer.

But can I urge her to focus on making happen her promise of

treatment for hepatitis C at every level of the NHS. There is a lot of

bureaucracy ahead. I'd like to thank the honourable

lady for those words, and I'm glad she feels we are making progress.

The NHS is at the beginning of a roll out of many of these hepatitis

C drugs. Some people have been treated, and many more are going to

be treated going forward. I hear what she is saying, in some ways I

think one of the benefits of the individual health assessment for

everyone in the current stage one of the scheme is that we will be able

to understand not just perhaps the clinical need but also perhaps where

they are finding problems with just the things she described. We would

want to understand just from the consultation whether that sort of

help with navigating the health system is one of the things, one of

the non-financial aspects of support people might seek, so I'd take her

points on board. I thank the Minister for the split

-- statement and welcome the consultation. With regard to those

people with hepatitis C which other members have raised, clearly it is

an important moment, this assessment, because the Minister

talks about linking it to payments. Does she envisage an entirely

discretionary based payment or does she think there will be bands of

payment? Would there be a right of challenge? And what does she mean by

enhanced access to treatment? Is there a risk still the there would

be some people who would not get access to treatment?

With regard to individual health assessments, we will be asking a

sort of expert advisory group to have a look at what the criteria

should be. We do envisage that people's own clinicians will be

involved, in terms of broadly speaking we would envisage probably

bands within, but again that is subject to the consultation, in

order to be able to manage both speed of fairness so we would --

that would be asked for their move on that. -- are thought there.

People are getting NHS treatment based on NICE guidelines, but we

understand there will be people who fall short of that at any one time.

So we envisage being able to hopefully offer treatment to people

who fall just short of that within the scheme, but within the overall

envelope of funding it is not yet possible before the consultation has

taken place to understand quite what the balance is, because I do not

know what affected individuals' views are about the balance between

treatment and some of the other options of consultation. I wanted

see what people think and how attractive the treatment of is to

some individuals before we come to final conclusions.

May I think the Minister for the work she has been doing on this

issue. -- thank the Minister. And the Minister of State for the

impressive way this is being handled. We should never forget that

this is a simple matter of justice. And it is time, after all the

apologies, but those affected should feel but we are doing justice to

that in justice. -- that those affected. One of the important needs

is that any scheme should be simple, comprehensive, predictable and

consistent, and it is absolutely essential that the bewildering

variety of provision at the moment is resolved into that single, clear

scheme. Will she give me the undertaking that whatever emerges of

the outcome of this process, that that will be the abiding priority of

the Government? I certainly think I can give my

honourable friend some comfort in that regard. It is fair to say the

area in which there is the greatest consensus across the infected the

community and across this House is on just what he described, the

complexity of the schemes and the fact that they are a mixture of

regular payments and discretionary means tested payments. We will not

waste time, we will begin a scoping exercise on scheme reform while the

consultation is underway, in anticipation of them finalising

plans at the end of the consultation, and I agree we need

based game that is straightforward, simple and sustainable, both giving

regular support of those affected but also allowing this Government

and future governments to be able to plan and sustain the support. --

needs-based scheme. I have met with constituents who

have been affected by this, so I welcome very much what has been

said. Could the Minister say whether she has met with the Welsh Health

Minister and spoken with him to discuss the matter, and how it will

operate in regard to Wales specifically in regard to the

assessment, will for example Welsh patients have to travel to England

to take part in the experiments? Or will that be provisions to take us

back for them to take place in Wales?

I think it is worth reiterating what I said, in terms of, I haven't been

able to spot the Welsh Health Minister, we did offer the

opportunity of a call with other ministers which the Scottish

minister was on, but he knows he can get in touch. -- and able to talk to

the Welsh health Minister. -- been able to. This consultation is for

the scheme in England, we have been working as I say with counterparts

in the other devolved administrations, whilst everyone in

the UK is welcome -- welcome to respond and say what they think,

health is now a devolved matter, in contrast to when the first schemes

were set up. With regard to treatment within NHS, that is a

matter for the NHS in Wales, and I will have a look at some of the

other points he made, but I am happy to write to him afterwards.

I thank the Minister for the consultation, the additional money,

and the work she and her right honourable friends have done. Will

she concede that for those of us who work closely with individual victims

for a number of years, the resolution has to be as fast as

possible, financially, to put them in the position they would have been

but for the grievous harm that has been done. That may mean in some

cases a space of -- bespoke solution for individual victims.

I thank the honourable gentleman for that question. I think if that is a

view that he clearly has, I would invite him to submit it couldn't --

to the consultation. This is why we are consulting. We put some

proposals forward, some of the questions are very open and we will

look at what comes back from them. I urge him and other honourable

members to take part in the consultation.

I welcomed the statement and commend the Shadow Minister's town. Victims

in Northern Ireland share the frustration we have heard from other

honourable members. But then perhaps feel more pointedly the contrast

with the friends in the South who have had a part of justice are

available to them. The Minister is absolutely sincere in her commitment

to the issue of treatment, but will she give assurance that the effort

that she has -- is putting into the fact that people can be made well

will not detract or distract from the obligation we still have to make

good this travesty that people have suffered?

I thank him for his sustained interest over such a long time and

speaking on behalf of people from his area. The might be aspects based

on our previous conversations that the honourable gentleman doesn't

feel with his own aspirations, so again I invite him to respond to the

consultation. That -- these are through -- some of these questions

are very open and people can give us their views. Something different

happened in Ireland, I recognise, and in the Republic, and that is

down to another Government to make those decisions. The circumstances

were different, but I invite him to respond to the consultation, and I

will take note of his and all of the honourable members' views.

The Minister will know that some of the cases go back so many years, and

the medical records may have been destroyed. Could she say in a bit

more detail what evidence is required both at the assessment

stage and for those applying to the discretionary fund?

It is a little too early as thick to give that level of detail. We want

to ask for expert advice -- I think. Don't forget we are looking at the

impact on people's health now, and we will -- we don't want this to be

an invasive process or an owner must process for the people who have gone

through so much already, so we do envisage involving people's own

clinicians as well as gathering over evidence. -- other evidence. But we

will ask for experts to advise us of this.

Can I commend the Minister for her statement today. We know her as a

compassionate position -- person who is committed to this. Some 7500

people have died through being contaminated with blood. This

morning the Minister has given -- I want to say one thing, the European

Commission of human rights has recently ruled that Italy must pay

immediately compensation to all those who received contaminated

blood. When can we see the money actually getting to the victims, is

there a timescale for that? Also, there hasn't been any commitment or

discussions as I understand with the Northern Ireland Assembly of the

Minister, Simon Hamilton, as regards matters devolved.

As I said, we offered a phone call this morning with the Minister, but

I am more to -- more than happy should my opposite number want to

have a conversation. The circumstances as I said before, the

circumstances in Italy are different and other governments make -- must

make decisions for themselves. In terms of timescale, I have said that

our priority is to move forward individual health assessments, and

we will do some scoping around the reform of the schemes themselves. I

can't yet say how long that will take, but I want to do it as quickly

as possible. As I mentioned in my statement, to give cement -- members

assurance that whenever we undertake those assessments, people will not

miss out because they work towards the end of that process because we

will backdate all those