11/07/2017 House of Commons

Download Subtitles




Live coverage of proceedings in the House of Commons, including a statement on the Taylor Report on working practices and an emergency debate on contaminated blood products.

Similar Content

Browse content similar to 11/07/2017. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Hello and welcome to BBC Parliament's live coverage of the


House of Commons. In now, deep is the Minister will make a statement


on the Taylor review into modern working practices and the economy.


After that, MPs will hold an emergency debate on contaminated


blood products. Labour's Dina Johnson says new evidence means


there should be held Christel public enquiry into the affair.


More than 2000 deaths have been linked to these candle in which


others were infected with hepatitis C and HIV from imported blood


products in the 1970s and 80s. After that, MPs will debate the remaining


stages of the air travel organisers like the bill which of these


predictions for holiday-makers. Around four o'clock, we cross lies


to the committee rooms where the Brexit secretary will give evidence


to the Lords European Union committee. At that point, you can


continue watching the House of Commons live on our website.


Do join me for a round-up of the day in both Houses of Parliament at 11


o'clock tonight. But first we have questions to the Foreign Secretary


Boris Johnson and his ministerial team.


Hors d'oeuvre. City of London open spaces bell, the chairman of ways


and means to revival mission. The question is on the order paper. I


think the ayes have it. Middle level Bill, the chairman of weather means


to move the revival mission. I beg to move. Objection. Objection taken.


Motion to be taken what Dave. Tuesday the 18th of July. Thank you.


Cemetery Bill, Lords. Move the revival mission. He is keen, very


keen today. I beg to move. The question is on the order paper. I


think the ayes have it. Chairman of ways and Means, to move, the motion


for an returns. Thank you. Not so much a nod as a magnificent bowel.


-- bow. Mr Nigel Huddleston. Number one, Mr Speaker. I should like to


begin by congratulating a rock's security forces for liberating Mosul


from the grass of Daesh, the flag of Iraq flies once more in the


country's 's second city and I pay tribute to the pilots who played a


vital role in supporting this operation, delivering more air


strikes than anyone else apart from the United States, I think the House


can take pride in what they have done. An illegal wildlife trade, I


think we can be pleased with the agreement be Prime Minister helped


to secure IBG 20 summit in Hamburg and I say to all honourable members,


this is not about cracking down on the trade in charismatic mega- fauna


but of course in cracking down on those who engaged not just in


illegal wildlife trafficking but in gun-running and people trafficking


and much other human misery. We can be proud of what we are doing. Nigel


Huddleston. I applaud the efforts of the Government is making in this


area and I am pleased that the UK will be hosting the illegal wildlife


trade conference in 2018. Can the Foreign Secretary confirm how much


the money the department has committed to tackling illegal


wildlife trade and how the money is being spent effectively? I can


confirm that we are increasing our contribution to ?26 million, another


?30 million to tackle illegal wildlife trade and I have myself


seen what UK finance projects are doing in ten year to crack down on


this while trade. Mr Speaker, thank you, I say to the


Foreign Secretary we have to give there is a much greater priority


than we do. Not only our Government but across the world. Every single


week it seems all mud it seems we see programmes on television, 55


African elephants are poached every single day. It is simply not good


enough and the Foreign Secretary has to make this a priority. It is not


good enough for us to look at our TV screens until sorry about it, we


have to have a far greater commitment to do something about it.


I completely share the Passion of the right honourable member. I would


point out that the UK has been on the lead on all this for several


years now and we will be continuing to push this agenda, not just at the


T20 as the Prime Minister did, but of course Attar IW teed summit that


we are hosting next October in London. With my right honourable


friend tell us a little bit of the strategy he is taken to approach


this? The link between illegal what I've trade, smuggling, people


traffic like lawlessness and pilots in many countries is extremely real


and so addressing wildlife trade may seem hysterical but it is not at


all, it's about the stability of many nations that farm partners of


the United Kingdom. It is not only touches the heart of millions of


people in our country, it helps to cause increased human misery because


the same people are involved in trading drugs, in arms, in human


trafficking, worth up to ?30 billion a year and we are playing a major


part in frustrating that trade. Thank you, Mr Speaker. There is


increasing evidence that the UK's legal ivory market has been used as


described for an illegal trade. What about them all-out ban on the ivory


trade? The honourable gentleman we know we have a commitment in this


Government to all-out ban on the sale of ivory in this country and


that is what we intend to pursue. Rachel McLean. Question number two,


Mr Speaker. With your permission, I will answer questions to answer for


together. The Foreign Office continues to support that... 14. The


give and -- forgive me. My department, my apologies. My


department indeed used to support EU exit negotiations and the Government


works to strengthen our relations with partners worldwide. As a


champion of free trade, we will continue to seize the opportunities


afforded by Brexit I guarantee our long-term global prosperity. Rachel


McLean. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank my right honourable friend for


this answer. Businesses in my constituency are looking to make the


most of the opportunities of Brexit provides for them. But can my right


honourable friend ensure me that he will work closely with the


Department of trade, the Department for exiting the EU to ensure


businesses that are already trading with the single market are given


support to help build new export markets for their goods and services


around the world to ensure their continued prosperity?


Absolutely. I congratulate my honourable friend on what I believe


is her first question in this chamber and I think it is a very


good one and she can reassure her constituents that, of course, not


only will the excellent companies in her constituency be able to continue


to enjoy free trade with the rest of the European Union, with the EU 27,


but of course they will have the additional opportunity afforded by


the new free trade deals that we will be able to strike with


countries around the world. I am pleased to say that they were


queueing up to make that point to the Prime Minister IBG 20 in


Hamburg. Today is the feast Day of Saint Benedict, the agency of


Europe. He famously warned against against the others. Will my right


honourable friend please proclaim that we do not want any murmuring


from anybody against our vision of an open, free trade in Europe, the


best possible free-trade deal, leading the world towards free trade


and on tour prosperity? I think my right honourable friend makes an


excellent point. Members on both sides of this House know very well,


85% of us were elected on a very clear manifesto to come out of the


European Union, to come out of the single market and as the leader of


the Labour Party has said to come out of the customs union as well.


Nothing could be clearer than that and I think what the people of this


country want us to do is to get on and deliver a great Brexit and with


the support of members opposite, I have no doubt that we can achieve


it. Ben Bradshaw. A transition period of three years during which


we will remain under the jury system at the ECJ. Neither the Secretary of


State has said any such thing. Cue him being called second, I am not


sure he minds. Hilary Benn. In March, the Foreign Secretary said


leaving the EU with no deal would be perfectly OK. However, last month


the Chancellor of the Exchequer said that would be a very, very bad


outcome for Britain. Since the two positions are clearly completely


contradictory, who should the British public believe? I think what


the British public can take from both the Chancellor and myself and


indeed from the vast majority of Labour members opposite, as I


understand, their position, that we all want to get on and do the deal


and do the best deal possible and to leave the EU. Mr John Barron. The


Australian Government which negotiated free-trade deals with


China, Japan and South Korea in very short order by focusing on trade


itself, rather getting bogged down in disputes rather to standings and


legalities and regulations. I agree very much with what my right


honourable friend has said and I think with a bit of gumption and a


bit of positive energy, there is no limit to what we can achieve and we


should get on and do it and of course we cannot ink in the


free-trade deals now but we can certainly pencil in the outline.


Yesterday, the Prime Minister 's spokesman was reported as saying the


transition rules could involve the European Court of Justice for a


limited time, that is a matter for negotiation. That was the quake that


was reported. Can the Foreign Secretary confirmed this change in


Government policy and set out the rationale behind it? We are in the


negotiation whose objective is to out from under the penumbra of the


European Court of Justice outside the EU legal order and that is what


we will achieve. Since we joined the Common Market


until the date we leave, we will have given the EU a total of ?209


billion. Will the Foreign Secretary make it clear that if they want a


penny more, they can go and whistle? I am sure my honourable friend the's


words will have broke like a thunderclap over Brussels and they


will pay attention to what he has said, and he makes a very valid


point. I think these sermons I have seen that they proposed to demand


from this country seem to me at extortionate, and I think to go


whistle is an appropriate expression. Will the Secretary of


State ensure in the spirit of cooperation the final Brexit deal is


endorsed by the devolved parliaments before it assigned? About as the


honourable gentleman knows very well, we work closely with the


ministerial committee to bring in the devolved administrations and to


make sure the great deal we are going to get has their endorsement


and their approval. Further to the question from the right honourable


gentleman for Leeds Central, did my right honourable friend he had a


report on the today programme this morning that other European leaders


were making it clear that they would not accept a deal on any terms, does


he share my view that what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the


gander? May I congratulate my honourable friend on his sixth


child? Many congratulations on that. He makes a good point about the


negotiation stance of our friends and partners across the Channel.


They do sound at the moment they are pretty hard over, as we see in the


Foreign Office, but I have no doubt in the fullness of time, a


suddenness will descend and a willingness to compromise, because a


great Brexit deal, a grapefruit trade deal, a deep and special


partnership is in our interest -- great deal. Given the given the


prime Mr's appeal to these benches to help her out, where does the


Foreign Secretary field there are areas for compromise? As I said, I


think the striking thing about this debate is how much unanimity there


is between the two sides of the chamber on the fundamental


questions. I've been very struck by the right honourable gentleman, the


leader of the Labour Party, he seems to be very much on all fours with


the objectives of the Brexit... I don't wish... He very much agrees


with the position we are taken, they hope to see him in the lobbies with


us. I hate to disagree with the Foreign Secretary. While he is right


to say the Leader of the Opposition is fully behind the government, and


these benches are fully behind the Prime Minister, Foreign Secretary,


it is the opposition that is hopelessly split on this issue. Is


that not hindering the government's negotiating position? It is not for


me to comments on the ability of the Labour leader to control his party,


I take it they are all following Labour policy, which is to come out


of the EU, come out of the single market. If they aren't, they can


stand up now and buy their questions portray their position. They are


supporting the will of the British people as expressed last year. If


they wish to dissent from that, now is the time. Can I start by


welcoming the new Foreign Office front bench in their positions? Back


in July last year, I wrongly accused them of being an all-male team. If


only I'd waited a year. I would have been correct. Mr Speaker, talking of


female Tory MPs, the member of the Newton Abbot use a disgusting racist


phrase in her Commons at the East India club. I hope the Foreign


Secretary will join me in condemning them. I hope you will agree


offensive language deriving from the era of American slavery has no place


in modern society. The member of Dean Abed was trying to ask a valid


question. A question about what would happen if Britain fails to


reach a deal -- Newton Abbot. Can I asked the Foreign Secretary to


answer that question today? Can he explain what that no deal option


would mean to the people and businesses of Great Britain? As I've


said before, I think the chances of such an outcome of vanishingly


unlikely, since it is manifestly in the interests of both sides of the


Channel to get a great free trade deal and new special partnership


between us and the European Union, and that is what we will achieve.


Unfortunately, it leaves us in on the wiser, it is baffling, it is the


Prime Minister, at least for now, he decided to put the deal of the no


deal option on the table. She couldn't stop using the phrase


Junior election campaign, and now are me ask what it means in


practice, they refuse to tell us. The Foreign Office, the Foreign


Affairs Committee said in December, I quote, the government should


produce a new deal plan identifying the likely consequences, and making


proposals to mitigate potential risks. Anything else would be a


dereliction of duty. We cannot have a repeat... Order. I apologise the


interesting here, but he needs to bring herself a single sentence,


because there are lots of colleagues who want to take place. Is normally


succinct. Return to form. Given a plan to no deal would be worse than


that dereliction of duty, can I asked the Foreign Secretary to spell


out what no deal would mean, can you reassure as it is not, at a very


least he has a private plan to manage the risk? There is no plan


because we will get a great deal. Just for the sake of example and


alliteration, I would remind the honourable lady that there was a


time, I old enough to remember it, when Britain was not in what we call


the Common Market. Foreign officials are working closely with colleagues


to prepare for the 400th anniversary, nine please Oliver


Colville, the former member for Plymouth, Sutton and Devonport, has


been appointed chair by the Prime Minister, and they will make the


most of the opportunity to commemorate the legacy of the


pilgrims and the special relationship. Well, Mrs Biggar, I


thought the Prime Minister wanted help from the opposition bench -- Mr


Speaker. I'm here available. The re-elected co-chair of the pilgrims


group. I was prepared to offer my services to take on this role rather


than on parliamentarians. Nevertheless, can the good people


expect support from this government as promised by George Osborne to


properly celebrate the fact that the pilgrims and their legacy, including


the modern United States, originates in battered hall? At least eating


claim that it has strong coastal links, but we do welcome already his


contribution to the House by the comments he made on the 9th of


March, reminding us of the anniversary, it will be an historic


opportunity for us to celebrate. Across the sows, we will think of


every possible way in which we can do so to best effect. The importance


of the anniversary can hardly be overstated. Would it not be a more


suitable dates for a state visit from the president of the United


States to have it in 2020 to mark this, rather than in the months to


come? I note the suggestion, but that matter is already in train, and


the visit offered to the president stands. I thank my right honourable


friend because the UK is in the lead on this issue helping Ukraine to


make the vital reforms that need to do and to continue on a cracking


down on corruption, which is so important if we are to encourage a


long-term and continued investment in a successful Ukraine. Can I


congratulate my right honourable friend on the organisation last week


of the Ukraine reform conference in London? It demonstrates that Britain


will continue to play a leading role on the world stage. But can he


confirm that whilst Ukraine still faces major challenges, progress is


being made in areas like tackling corruption, and canny see what more


we can do to assist them? May I get the ball back over the net by


congratulating my right honourable friend on the coming chair on the


Ukraine all-party group? We all in this House have a clear interest in


a strong and successful Ukraine, not why we've invested another 33


million in helping Ukrainians to tackle the problems of governance.


The House should be in no doubt about what is going on in Ukraine.


This is an arm wrestle, if you like, between two value systems come our


way of looking at the world and the Russian way, and it is vital for our


continent and vital for this country that Alloway prevails, and we're


British help, I believe it is prevailing and will prevail. So far


there has in a single sign of all the efforts Britain has rightly made


in relation to Ukraine, paying dividends in terms of Russia


stopping its corrupt meddling in that country. He is right the fault


lies with Russia, they annexed Crimea, they drive the problem in


the Donbas region. What you are seeing from the UK, and by the way,


we are contributing the efforts to stave off that Russian military


meddling with a non-lethal equipment that we've agreed to send to


Ukraine. But more importantly, we are engaging, held the Ukrainians to


sort out their domestic, political scene, to crack down on Russia. To


be fair to Ukrainians, they aren't only seeing 4% growth, depending on


the figures you believe, but they have made more progress in cracking


down on corruption in the last three years than in the last 25 years. A


very different country is being born. Our bilateral relationship is


strong because it is a deep bond of friendship rooted in our shared


histories and common values. We look forward to strengthening those ties


over the coming years and have agreed to hold regular strategic


talks to maximise the full potential of this important bilateral


relationship. I thank the Minister that response. Canadian investment


is important and my consistency and across the UK. As we move forward in


leaving the EU, seeking a free-trade deal with Canada, however


relationship will be more important, as is specifically our relationship


with the provincial governments. Do we have the network in place across


Canada to make sure we are making the best of those relationships? On


behalf the House, I express our sympathy to all those in British


Columbia who been affected by the damaging wildfires in that province.


Our Consulate general in Calgary, Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver do


work for a provincial governments to increase bilateral trade,


particularly in the infrastructure sector. We are working across all


levels of the Canadian government to ensure British companies can take


full advantage of the opportunities offered by the Canada EU, rent of


economic and trade agreement. Is he not aware, I have strong family


relationships and Canada, is he not aware that senior diplomats in


Canada are absolutely aghast at the way in which this government is


handling our withdrawal from Europe and its impact on world trade? They


believe the swashbuckling sector ministers are not the right people.


I have to say, positive energy and gumption won't give us a good deal


in Europe. We need people who have a eye for detail, this Foreign


Secretary has no idea about detail! I simply don't recognise the


analysis right honourable gentleman has offered the House on any matter


he's just mention. May I say, I think I were opportunities for


future trade with Canada will be enormous once we've left the


European Union. I thank the Minister, 2017 marks the 150th


anniversary of the Canadian Confederation, and our two nations


face together some of the most difficult challenges in our history


in that period. Will he agree that actually with those relationships,


provides a great relationship to build on and reject the nonsense we


just heard? Yes, I agree emphatically. We also offer our


congratulations to Canada on the anniversary of Canadian


Confederation. We are please the Prince of Wales and the Duchess of


Cornwall were able to join celebrations in Ottawa to mark the


celebration. On a practical basis, the Foreign Secretary met Foreign


Minister last week and agreed to hold talks to ensure we can maximise


the full potential of this important and close by that relationship way


beyond the expectations of the right honourable gentleman opposite.


Thank you, Mr Speaker. We have a strong and wide-ranging relationship


with the Philippines on prosperity, education and security issue.


Ministerial visits to the Philippines and annual high-level


talks between officials help a graph that corporation. Most recently, my


right honourable friend was there as recently as last December and this


enables us to discuss concerns about human rights was pursuing closer


diplomatic and trade links. Mr Speaker, my skin constituency has


been held in Philippines since 2008. Sentence on to produce foreign


employment defence. They have failed to acknowledge a clemency request


despite his poor health. Concerns about the safety of the institution


and his parents worried they will not see him again. Well my


honourable friend set out what is being done to support his family's


efforts to bring him home? May I thank for his work over the


many years on behalf of Mr Taylor's parents in North Swindon. We have


been providing ongoing well for support to Kevin Taylor since his


arrest almost ten years ago. Most recently a visit in prison and we


have liaised with his parents only yesterday. Our consulates are bought


as extended to delivering funds and vitamins, medical points after Mr


Taylor brought his health concerns to our attention. A clemency request


was made as recently as 2015 that I reassure my honourable friend we


will do our level best to continue this work and I will be in touch


without apartment to ask to redouble his efforts in the days ahead. Thank


you, Mr Speaker. In the year since the president of Philippines took


ASBOs, 13,000 people have been killed. He has threatened to extend


martial law across the entire country and last week, he said he


would eat the livers of terrorists with salt and vinegar. But the


Secretary of State for International Development claims that Britain has


shared values with the president. Could the Minister tell the House


which values we share with the President? The honourable lady will


recognise the shared values in relation to international trade and


we need to recognise that. Indeed with all dedication, it is not an


issue of ditching anything else, I, like the honourable lady, concerned


about the high death toll in the war on illegal drugs has come to a head


in his role. We have been urging much more thorough independent


instigation at all violent deaths that have taken place I would say


that from our perspective, we have repeatedly and will continue to


raise human rights concerns with the administration and I will be doing


so with Manila and I have at some to be visiting to make light of the


Kaci made. -- the case she has made. Pay tribute to the campaigns on the


subject, our policy in relationship to Zimbabwe kiddies used to be to


balance out the best days of the horrifying record of Bieber Gabi


regime -- Mugabe and the people have suffered terribly over the last 40


years. Can I welcome the honourable member to his position and wish him


every success in it? $53 million was spent by Mugabe on private travel


overseas last year, the same time the United Kingdom paying


proportionally more in UK aid to that country than any other country


in Africa. Does he think that perhaps with the election is coming


next year and Mugabe refusing to permit the 20 13th Constitution, now


is the time to put some of that money into helping voter education


in those rural areas can show? Thank you, Mr Speaker. The answer is that


I agree. We are trying to balance a very difficult thing which is the


terrible performance of the Mugabe regime with a country where people


have been dying of cholera, suffering extreme him a humour tarry


in need. Focusing on free and fair elections is one of the first things


we can do in a country like Zimbabwe. The policy of incremental


engagement with Zimbabwe is the be best, sometimes an unpalatable best


policy. But with the Minister consider in the near term actually


visiting Zimbabwe, which would be a great step forward and prospered the


UK in a better position for relationships longer term? The


honourable member has huge expertise is African Minister. The decision on


whether or not I as a minister were to visit Zimbabwe depends a great


deal on the genuine commitment to the Zimbabwe Government towards


reform and I will be guided by the ambassador of the country as to when


such a visit would be necessary and possible.


Number eight. We are in costs contact with our


international counterparts, including most recently at the


organisation of American States summit last month. I issued a very


strong statement on the 6th of July, utterly condemning the 5th of July


attack on Venezuela's national assembly and its elected members and


calling for the Venezuelan Government to uphold the


Constitution and show respect for democratic institutions and the


statement was echoed by many political colleagues across the


world mark. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Leader of


the Opposition described the regime in Venezuela is offering an


alternative agenda from which we could learn. The alternative agenda


has seen the economy collapse, poverty increase, dozens of people,


scores of people killed in civil unrest and now an attempt to


undermine both the elected Congress and the independent Attorney


General. Will my right honourable friend confirm that Her Majesty's


Government strongly condemns the attempt by the regime to rewrite the


constitution and rock out democracy? The Leader of the Opposition does


seem to be a great fan of the Venezuelan Government. A passable


impression himself as Fidel Castro won sometimes things. What is


happening to the Venezuelan economy gives us a very clear indication of


what would happen to the UK economy if ever the right honourable


gentleman were Prime Minister. Mr Speaker, what practical steps


have been taken to deal with famine on the border between Venezuela and


Colombia by the British Government? There are no easy such attempts. We


do not have a bilateral programme that are in touch with the United


Nations. But the very question of the honourable lady does illustrate


the extent to which the Venezuelan Government has driven their own


people to poverty, running very short of some of the most basic


goods on which they have to live. Number nine, Mr Speaker.


Mr Speaker. We readily raise these issues with Israel, calling for a


reversal of the policy of settlement expansion. I reiterated that in the


House of Commons last week but also recently both the Foreign Secretary


and myself have made statements strongly condemning proposals the


new settlement expansion in both the West Bank and East Jerusalem.


Mr Speaker, only last week the right-wing Israeli Government


announced a further expansion of the illegal settlement programme so it


is clear that whatever action the British Government is taking, it is


not working. It is not time Her Majesty's Government to more


response to this problem? Ensuring the proper labelling of all


importing goods so that they are designated as coming from an


illegally occupied Palestinian territory.


This is a long and difficult process, as the honourable gentleman


rightly dies. We have a policy in relation to labelling and continued


conversations will go on with the state of Israel in relation to, as


last week, the suggestion that the edge of the new housing units being


built and East Jerusalem. But it is a complex process, the United


Kingdom does not believe in boycotts of sanctions, but clear labelling


has been that the sometimes consumers can take their choice.


We have contributed to a number of structures, EU structures that have


been demolished. Will he asked the Government of Israel for our money


back? Mr Speaker, I think my right honourable friend is referring to


some work done by the EU. The EU has not sought compensation from the


state of Israel in relation to this and no decision has been taken on


any further action. Settlements are a barrier but they


are far from the only barrier to peace. The building blocks for the


peace process is our trade and economic development in the West


Bank and supports the coexistent projects to get them working


together. Funding for which, I'm afraid, this Government has stopped.


Can I asked the minister whether he will reinstate funding to the


coexistent projects to build the priest projects? The honourable


gentleman understands this issue extremely well and a extreme


bill-mac -- I agree there are building blocks and settlements are


by far from the only barrier in relations to that. Trade and


investment remains very important. We will be looking further out what


prospects are for any new initiatives. I'm aware of the


coexistent projects that he mentions and certainly I will be having a


look about wearing my joint responsibilities.


Mr Speaker, we are glad to see the Mr back working on this issue. But


this is the second time in the space of a week when the Foreign Secretary


has declined to speak about middle east and evolve the job to him


instead. And that follows his failure even to mention Israel or


Palestine in the Tory election manifesto. So I simply ask the


Minister, when are we going to hear the Foreign Secretary stand up and


condemn these new illegal settlements? The other day, this


week. I did it this week. Can I find the honourable lady for her warm


welcome and enjoy being back in this role, no matter what is broken at me


in response to it. Can I say the Foreign Secretary strongly condemned


the proposals that were announced at the West Bank quite recently. But I


like to feel he has confidence in his Minister for the Middle East. As


he has confidence in his soul missed a team to answer appropriate


questions but I have never known him to be shy of answering a question


when necessary. Question Time, Mr Speaker. Thank you, Mr Speaker.


United Kingdom was instrumental, Mr Speaker, in securing the Paris


agreement on climate change. We are helping other countries to meet


their targets and we are confident that we will be able to meet our own


ground-breaking target of reducing emissions by 18% by 2050. I thank


the Foreign Secretary for his answer. Last week, Downing Street


said the primers are intended to challenge President Trump on climate


change at the G20 meeting. With this and how have been better done before


he announced he was pulling out of the Paris agreement than after? As I


have told the House before, we made our views very clear to the US


administration, repeatedly we have expressed dismay that they have


withdrawn. But on the other hand, I think all members on both sides of


the House should acknowledge in all fairness that the United States has


made and continues to make, even under this initiation, continues to


make substantial progress in reducing greenhouse gases. This


country has reduced CO2 by 42% since 1990, despite a 67% increase in GDP.


The United States has achieved, report progress and we intend to


encourage them on that path. Following the isolation of Donald


Trump at last week G20 Summit, on the issue of the Paris agreement,


further postponement of the trip to the UK, can I ask the sexual simple


question. Does the Government regard President John is the leader of the


free world, is so, how would they rate the job he is doing... As a


mark out of ten? -- president Trump. We certainly regard the achievement


of the Prime Minister as considerable as getting the US


president to sign up actually to the G20 agreement on climate change, as


she did. She is instrumental in getting the Americans to endorse.


Getting the Americans to sign up to the communique and I think members


on all sides of the House will appreciate that whatever


disagreements they have with the current incumbent of the White


House, the president of the United States is the leader of our most


important ally and he deserves that and respect for the consideration of


this country. Question 11, Mr Speaker. With the Foreign


Secretary's permission, ensuring the promotion of human rights and


engaging with this next essential part of the global policy of


Britain, ministers meet their cultivars readily and raise issues,


gender equality, modern slavery, freedom of belief and religion, the


death penalty and torture. It is an essential part is who we are the


United Kingdom and the Foreign Commonwealth Office. Back in March,


the UN human rights Council to commit atrocities. Women being raped


by the security forces. Does the Minister agree that the perpetrators


of such crime be brought to justice as a matter of urgency? And can he


tell us what I was recently in Burma and was able


to reaffirm the United Kingdom's sport for the Independent United


Nations commission. This is a difficult issue being wrestled with


by those in Burma. And the UK remains very close to the


humanitarian needs of the people there. The World Trade Organisation


estimates three out only for trade deals include provisions to improve


human rights, is what discussions has my honourable friend been having


with his colleagues in the Department of trade to make sure our


new trade deals include obligations to improve human rights where it is


appropriate? My right honourable friend is right, ensuring human


rights are an essential part of the future policy of the UK in terms of


trade deals. As these issues are raised now, it's an important part


of future and will continue to be a key part of our prosperity drive.


Following the arrest of amnesty International Turkey director, they


are examples of the worrying shift away from respected human rights in


Turkey. What steps has the Foreign Secretary himself taken to ensure


the immediate and unconditional release of these two people? The


right honourable lady knows these issues extremely well. My right


honourable friend the Foreign Secretary has raised this with his


counterpart on the Prime Minister raise this as the T20 were the


president of Turkey -- G20. This remains an important issue. On his


recent visit to Burma, did he encourage the Burmese government to


allow full access and cooperate fully with the fact-finding machine


looking into human rights issues in that country. Yes, indeed. It is a


difficult issue but we've made it very clear that the UN independent


report need full consideration. We'd urge the government to do all they


can to facilitate what the UN needs to complete its work. There is an


internal investigation already been carried out by the Burmese


government. We have been able to gain access


through our console. What efforts are being made to ensure the human


rights and the medical needs of the two people in prison are being


protected? Mr Speaker, I met with the family last week. I've raised


this issue directly with my counterpart, the Deputy Foreign


Minister of around, and the Iranian ambassador. We remain concerned


about this and other consulate cases involving around. I can assure the


lady we will continue to raise these at the highest issue. Briefly from


the front bench. As a government celebrated his victory in the High


Court over arms sales to Saudi Arabia, number of people affected by


the cholera epidemic in Yemen past 300,000. Humanitarian workers face a


choice of using it twinkling food supplies to be those children


suffering from malnutrition or those infected with cholera. In that


context, can the Minister told the House wired the Saudi led Coalition


continues to use British bombs to attack farms, food factories and


water plants? The judgment by the gorgeous today was unequivocal in


saying the United Kingdom had fully fulfilled its obligations under the


control of the arms trade. And also the work that was being toured with


the kingdom of Saudi Arabia in relation to its response to


international humanitarian law was fundamental to that judgment. The


situation in Yemen remains a humanitarian disaster, the actor


Kingdom is involved in seeking to do all it can, the cholera outbreak has


taken some 6500 cases each day. I am pleased we are fully engaged and


tried to do all we can to mitigate these actions -- United Kingdom.


He is new, I thought I was new, too. I am concerned the democratic


freedoms continue to face fundamental restrictions in the


Maldives. Pressure, including arrests has grown. Human rights


activists, the media art under threat. The government raise these


issues frequently with the Maldives government and we led the recent UN


statement in the gene human rights Council. My right honourable friend


will know that a Coalition of opposition parties in the Maldives,


led by the former president, committed to democracy and proving


relations with this country, has secured a majority in that country's


parliament. Does he share my concern is that the regime may resort to


legal means to prevent Parliament from properly functioning in that


country? I am very concerned is at that prospect. I have to say, no


one's hands in recent years in any part of the political environment in


the Maldives have been entirely clean. It has not been a happy


situation across the board. The biggest regret we have on this site


is the Maldives unilaterally left the Commonwealth in 2016, and I hope


a new regime will bring them back into the international regime in


this way. Firstly we should pay tribute to what United States has


done with its peacekeeping budget. It provides well over a quarter of


the global peacekeeping budget. Over $2 billion a year, which has not


eligible, so we need to pay tribute and encourage them to play the role,


that essential part. And then sticking to the Congressional limit


of 25% is vital for the UN peacekeeping operations. Does the


Minister agree the loss of financial support from the US will be


devastating, such as the world food programme Will they get them to


reconsider their planned cuts? It is right, in the current global


situation, UN peacekeeping operations are vital. But reforms


can be introduced. The move to close on the peacekeeping operation in


Ivory Coast, we can reduce costs and peacekeeping. It is vital the States


and others continue play a strong role, and support from United States


has been vital for the last 50 years and we hope it will continue to be.


Topical questions. Can I just remind colleagues in this Parliament,


topical questions are sure to be as -- supposed to be shorter. My


priority is to help resolve tensions in the Gulf where Britain has all


friendships and vital interests, that's why I've just returned from


visits to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and cut. I reinforce the need for


dialogue. I will the summit in Trieste tomorrow, whether UK is


playing a vital role in guaranteeing stability and resisting Russian


ambitions. Yesterday in Kashmir, seven Hindu pilgrims were brutally


murdered by terrorists, including five women whilst undergoing it.


What action has my right honourable friend taken to condemn this


outrage? Waterboard will he give to recovering and bringing to justice


the terrorists who we believe are in Pakistan -- what will he give? The


whole issue is something we are in close contact with. I give the


issuer and we will bring this up in the course of the next 24 hours and


as for a plan of action in the wake he has asked. Does the Foreign


Secretary agree that if there's to be an extension of military action


in Syria, there should be a full debate and vote in this House? That


is for the Leader of the House to consider, I can tell him that no


such request has been made. I must say I think the difference in the


current American administration's attitude, many people on the other


side of the House, is to be welcomed. As America appears to be


volunteering we surrendering power, and from the main platform of our


interest in the several decades, it is not vital the Foreign Office


address is substantially to beef up our dramatic effort so we may retain


our prosperity, security and our influence abroad? I'm delighted to


welcome him to a cause I think is gathering strength across both sides


of the House of Commons, everybody understands, global Britain must be


properly supported. We have a world-class network of embassies,


278, the best foreign service in the world, but they do need proper


financing and proper support. The Foreign Secretary has spoken in the


past about his ardent opposition to female genital meat elation. We'll


he therefore have a word with the Home Secretary who is yet to respond


to be -- mutilation. She is threatened with deportation. I raise


it with the Prime Minister and have yet to receive an answer. I heard


her raised this before. I'm sure the case of her constituent is indeed


very troubling. I'm sure the Home Secretary will have picked up what


she's had to say today. I welcome the part played by purchase forces


in stabilising the threat posed by Daesh. What does he and British


forces for ensuring that such an insurgency does not recur? I thank


him for an excellent question. It is one thing but others to drive Daesh


out of Ozil, but we must make sure the reasons they sprouted in those


cities do not recur and that this study -- the Sunni minority have the


confidence in their country. Not since the Suez crisis has a UK


Government been so combines of the defeated at the United Nations, as


it was last week. In this week's spirit of bipartisan cooperation,


should the Foreign Secretary would not grant the right of return? I


must respectfully disagree with the gentleman opposite. We secured


rather more positive votes than we had expected. As it happens, the


other side of the case got fewer than half the members of the UN in


support of their cause. I think that most impartial observers of the


matter would agree their case has been substantially weakened as a


result, not that it was a strong case to begin with. Last week


Palestinian president said he would continue paying prisoner salaries to


people who are murdered innocent civilians. Does the Foreign


Secretary agree with me that there is nowhere we will have peace in the


Middle East unless there are projects and support for coexistence


on the Palestinian side? My honourable friend is right, there


are a number of barriers on the Palestinian side to be able to make


progress. Support for incitement and terror is one of those, we are


looking carefully to make sure no payments go in the wrong direction.


It is true the Palestinian authority need to look very hard to make sure


it is not giving the wrong signals as we try to make progress on the


middle East peace process. Will the Minister pick up the phone


to the opposite numbers in India, do a deal to get the men deported so we


can have a pint in Chester before the summer is out? I do appreciate


the persistent with which he campaigns from his constituents, and


his raise it with me. I have in turn raises myself personally with my


Indian counterparts. What they say to me is they cannot interfere in


their own court system anymore than we can interfere in our own


quarters. That is where the massacre of your stance, but I want to assure


him we continue to raise him on that issue.


Does my right arm friend agree we have, as we leave the EU, a great


opportunity to boost our mutual trade and security interests by


enhancing our diplomatic relations with Ghana and other Commonwealth


countries? I want to pay tribute to the right honourable member, Ghana


is one of the most impressive recent of ultimate in Africa, three recent


transitions of democratic power, a rapidly growing economy and huge


example of how we moved to the Commonwealth, the Commonwealth can


become one of the great success stories of Britain's next five


years. The Paralympic games in Rio were a great success, showing


inspirational talent and importance of sports included worldwide. What


discussions has a foreign of us had with Japanese counterparts to lend


our full support to the Tokyo Paralympic games going forward?


I thank you right honourable lady for her question. A huge amount of


work is going on. But also very importantly, she rightly says, the


Shia organisation and we are working very closely to make sure there is a


seamless progress between 2012. I think it is going to be a great


success, the Paralympic games in Tokyo. In the next few weeks, the HR


Government from Libya are coming over here to visit the UK. I am


wondering if my right honourable friend or any of the friend bench


would like to meet them when they come over here because they play a


pivotal role in keeping peace in Libya. Mr Speaker, an expansion of


the Libyan political agreement we believe is necessary to move matters


along. There is a lot happening on the political and business side and


Libya as it gets back on its feet. Her be happy to meet those whom I


honourable friend wants to bring forward. Given the collapse of the


talks in Cyprus and that the Government remains a guarantor of


the process, what is the Government going to do now? Mr Speaker, very


sadly, the cyber stalks on which people have done so much work for


over two years collapse in the early hours of Friday morning. -- these I


press talks. This was a once in a generation trustee reunify the


island. Sadly it has been missed and rejected so we go back to the status


quo and it is enormous pity indeed, a tragedy for future generations


that agreement was not reached. In view of the continuing concerns


about human rights in Hong Kong, does my right honourable friend the


Foreign Secretary intend to make any further representation on the joint


declaration? I hope my honourable friend will be assured that the UK


has been very active in emphasising the significance of this joint


British decoration which is a legally binding treated richly with


the UN and continues to be reinforced today. Join my own


meeting with the Chinese ambassador I stress the UK's strong commitment


to the joint declaration. We urge the Chinese and the Hong Kong and


mistress and governors and all politicians in Hong Kong to retain


from any actions that Bill Clinton or undermine confidence in the one


country two systems principle. The Foreign Secretary has rightly


underlined the UK US relations in this new role. The relationship is


collect the light by cultural programmes which are now in peril by


President Trump's proposal to cut 47% from the budget. Will he make


representations to underline how we think the programme should be


expanded and pushed to the point of extinction? I stand here as a


Kennedy scholar which is a very similar sort of structure and we


have a fantastic programme of scholars sponsored by the front


office. My right honourable friend has confirmed that he will raise the


issue of scholarships with secretary to listen when he next season.


With a quart of a million people now refugees as a result of the


repression in human rights abuses in that country, what is the Foreign


Secretary doing to stimulate dialogue to resolve the political


impasse that? The situation in Bindi is very disturbing, we call upon all


on the brilliant president to -- upon the President and leading the


peace talks in Burundi as in so many countries in the war, the only


long-term solution is a political salutes you -- solution to a crisis.


Friends of Syria to discuss the desperate need to get more aid to


the hundreds of thousands being starved to death in Syria. I thank


the honourable gentleman for his persistence in pursuing this cause


and he is absolutely right, we have spoken across the chamber many times


about the humanitarian crisis in Syria. I will have great pleasure in


meeting the Syria group to discuss what the UK is doing by the House


will know that this country is the single, the second-biggest


contributor of humanity relief aid to Syria in the wild. Whilst I


welcome the fact that the Prime Minister raise the issue of the at


the G20, can he focuses efforts on the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu and


seek a meeting with her urgently, it is almost four years have our bodies


have been languishing in jail there. I visited them myself. It is time


they were brought home. My right honourable friend is absolutely


right. He suggests an interesting avenue for further work. I will look


at the possibility of talking to the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu.


Whether we will be more successful in her in making our points, I wore


ascertained. We will leave no stone unturned. Mr Speaker, last week at


the same time as represented ?57 were meeting in the next, they were


convicting a human rights activist the charges on which defence


witnesses were not allowed to testify. The defendant was taken to


hospital during the trial and it was convicted in his absence. What


action the Government is taking to make sure the authorities in


Belarus... The most important thing we can do is enhance our bilateral


relations by visitor. No minister has visited Belarus for many years


and I intend to do so at the earliest opportunity.


As well as the physical rebuilding of Mosul, the Iraqi constitution


allows for them to regain power, looking at devolving power to the


people of Mosul. I am grateful to my honourable friend. He is right that


Iraq is an ethnically divided country, religiously divided


country, we must make sure that everybody feels properly represented


in the new constitution and evolution to Mosul is certainly an


option that we will be exploring. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Before he


meets the friends of Syria group, will he discussed a comrade is a


strategy to protect civilians with the Department for International


Development and a Ministry of Defence and we can have a proper


joint strategy at last? I can tell the honourable lady that is already


happening. Extremely grateful to the Foreign Secretary. I recognise there


is so unsatisfied demand but not as much as they might have been if I


had not overrun which I was pleased to do and I'm sure the Foreign


Secretary was equally enthusiastic. We will now proceed to the statement


by the parliament under section of state for business, energy and


industrial strategy. Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State Margot


James. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Wealth


permission, I would like to make a statement about the independent


review of model working practices which was led by Matthew Taylor and


published earlier today. Mr Speaker, the review said that that British


business a success for creating jobs, enhancing earning power and


improving life chances across the UK. Employment rates are the highest


since records began stop unemployment and economic inactivity


record lows. More people are in work than ever before and minimum wage


rates have never been higher. This is a story of success and one which


this Government will seek to sustain. The UK's economy continued


success is built on the flexibility of our labour market, which benefits


both workers and business. Businesses can create jobs and


individuals can find work because our labour market regulation


balances the demands both. Minimum standards set a baseline, beyond


which is the air is flexibility to set arrangements to suit all


parties. Our dynamic approach responds well to fluctuations in the


economic cycle, without the structural weakness is present in


some other countries. It is important that we preserve the


success, but also enhance it further. While the majority of


people employed in the UK are in full-time, permanent employment,


globalisation, demographics and especially technology are changing


the way in which we work. We need to make sure that the British labour


market stays strong and everyone in the UK can benefit from it. And that


is why last year, the Prime Minister asked Matthew Taylor, chief


executive of the Royal Society of arts, to lead an independent review


into employment practices in the modern economy. That review has now


been published and I am delighted to lay a copy in the House library


today. It is a thorough and detailed piece of work for which I am very


grateful. Not only to Matthew and his panel members, but also to the


numerous businesses, trade unions, organisations and individuals who


have provided their views on this very important topic. The review has


a strong overarching ambition, but all work in the UK should be fair


and decent with realistic scope for fulfilment and progression. Matthew


has outlined seven principles to meeting this ambition and I would


urge honourable member is to examine these principles and the rest of the


report in detail senses is an important contribution to a crucial


subject, but to summarise these principles, they are that our


national strategy for work should be explicitly directed towards the goal


of good works rural. That platform based working welcomes opportunities


for genuine flexibility but there should be greater distinction


between workers or, as the review suggests renaming them, depending


contractors and those who are fully self-employed. That there should be


additional protections for this group and stronger incentives for


firms to treat them early. The best way to achieve better wickets to


good management and strong employment relations. That is vital


that individuals have realistically attainable ways to strengthen their


future work prospects. That there should be a more proactive approach


to workplace health and the National Living Wage is a powerful tool to


raise the financial a sign of low-paid workers but it needs to be


accompanied by sexual strategies -- sectoral strategies.


While we might not accept every recommendation in full, I am


determined that we consider the report very carefully and we will


respond fairly by the end of the year. Matthew Taylor has been clear.


The UK labour market is a success, the British way works. But he has


also said that there are instances where it is not working fairly for


everyone. For example, he highlights where our legislation needs updating


or where flexibility seems only to work one way, to the benefit of the


employer. We recognise the points made. We accept that as a country we


now need to focus as much on the quality of the working experience,


especially for those in lower paid roles as on the number of jobs we


create, vital though that is. This Government has made a commitment to


upholding workers' rights, the Prime Minister has said repeatedly in this


House and elsewhere that as we leave the EU, there will be no rollback of


employment protections. The Queen's speech also says that by this


Government will go further than that and will seek to enhance rights and


protections in the modern workplace. Today's publication of the good work


review and the public consideration of Matthew's recommendations that


will follow will help to inform the development of our industrial


strategy this autumn and I commend the statement to the House. Thank


you, Mr Speaker. When the Prime Minister set took office last year,


she stood on the steps of Downing Street, stating that she was on the


side of working people. Now, despite this rhetoric, the Conservatives


have been in Government now for seven years and in that time, they


have done very little for working people. They have presided over a


lost decade as product and productivity group, they have


implemented the pernicious trade union act, an ideological attack on


the train union movement, curbing their ability to fight for Anne


Robinson workers interests. They have inflicted hardship on public


sector workers with pay cap which has been confirmed yesterday by the


Department for Education for yet another year. They promise workers


on boards that road back scared when powerful interests that they were


not keen on the idea. They have introduced employment tribunal fees


which has made it much harder for workers to enforce their rights. So,


today, with the publication of the Taylor review, there was a real


opportunity to overhaul the existing employment system in a way that


would protect workers in a rapidly changing world of work. But in the


words of the general secretary of Unite, the biggest union in the UK,


instead of this serious programme the country urgently needs to ensure


that once again work pays in this country, we got a depressing sense


that insecurity is the inedible new norm. Indeed the minister confirm


that she might not even accept all of the proposals in the Taylor


report in any event. Now, the report was positive in sentiment across


many hours and Mrs many offshoots to plant an exploitation in the


workplace. I do not have time to cover the more today but I do have


specific concerns that the report may allow the Government to


interpreted references to the so-called depending contract in


order to row back on recent court victories for workers such as Uber


drivers and polymers. Recent case law suggested that work on a


platform with the entitled to the minimum wage as long as the aptly


reached which Diana and the willing to accept trips. In may insist on


payment by piece rate, that an average driver working averagely


hard will earn 1.2 times the minimum wage.


Will the Minister confirmed the government will not undermine


workers' rights and the minimum wage in this way? Indeed, Pimlico


plumbers's founder has said the report uses them as an example of


the best practice. Accompanied which our judicial system found to be an


example of worst practice. The report also does very little to


strengthen the ability of workers to enforce the rights they already


have. Whilst agreeing with Labour's position on shifting the burden of


proof to employers in determining self-employed sectors, there is


little else and this needs much more work. There's no movement at all in


relation to employment tribunal fees, which act as a barrier to


justice for many workers. If the Prime Minister wanted ideas on


strengthening workers' rights, she could have come to us. Just four of


our manifesto commitment alone will go long way to end the sky which of


exploitation in the Gega economy. Giving all workers equal rights from


day one, for example. Strengthening the enforcement of those rights by


giving up a better resourcing HMRC, not imposing pernicious cuts.


Allowing trade union access to every workplace, abolishing tribunal fees


and finally finding employers who breach labour market rights and


regulations. So, Mr Speaker, I asked the Minister in the spirit of the


so-called collaboration had Prime Minister is so desperately seeking,


will she commit to date to implement these forcible measures as a start?


Or if not, did she accept the Conservative Party is not and never


will be on the side of working people? -- for simple measures. I am


glad the honourable lady found some positive aspects to the report. To


complement Matthew Taylor run. I do appreciate you won't have had time


to read it all yet, but I do urge her to do so because there really


are many, many recommendations in that report that will be of benefit


to workers. And are worthy of the greater consideration that this


government will give the recommendations. I won't comment on


each of them, because they are Matthew Taylor's suggestions and


they will be given due consideration. She does criticise


this government's record, and so I would like to remind it is this


government that has introduced national living wage, that has


decided over the minimum wage being at its highest rate in real terms


since it was introduced. And the facts remain that the wage increases


we have seen in the last year have been at their highest among the


lowest paid banks of the national living wage. We have nearly doubled


the budget for enforcement of a national living wage, we have


doubled to find the companies who underpay their employers, we have


banned the use of exclusivity clause in zero hours contracts. And


employment, all the time, the backdrop is at a situation where we


have protected the growth in employment. At almost 75%,


unemployment is at its highest record level since records began. It


is a record of achievement. She criticises us for passing a trade


union act, but most reasonable people would not criticise the fact


that workers who are members of trade unions should have a proper


say when their union decides to take strike action. And that is the


purpose primarily of that legislation. It is not all a garden


of roses, otherwise the Prime Minister would not have requested


Matty Taylor to undertake the report. Flexibility and innovation


are vital. The PM said when she announced Matthew Taylor's


investigation, she said that as part of what makes our economy strong,


but it is essential these virtues are combined with the right support


and protections for the worker. But the Matthew Taylor review came to


understand that flexibility does work for many people, and it is


clear that an agile labour market is good for protecting employment.


Would my honourable friend agree that at the heart of boosting wages


for lower paid workers is productivity? There are actually


some good examples of employers working with the living wage


foundation who've managed to reduce the pay of low skilled workers and


focusing on productivity, that should be at the heart of this


issue. I heartily agree, indeed productivity is essential to our


international strategy. We've established a 23 billion fund to


promote quality jobs, better skills and the higher paid that he mentions


is so important. Can I refer to mow bid disturbing trust my trade union


activity over 20 years prior to my election -- refer to my trade union


activity. It was interesting neither the Minister or the Prime Minister


mentioned or commended the role of the trade unions in securing their


rights at work. Does the Minister agree the right to request is


different from a fundamental right enshrined in law? If a right to


request is refused, what enforcement action will the government take to


force employers to do better? Does she accept is no distinction in the


report between a flexible workforce and exploiting that workforce? Does


the Minister also agree that whilst the Taylor report tries to reside


new rides, some of these rights have been secured by trade unions taken


employers to court as the Shadow minister agree? Can she tell us what


action will be taken to enforce minimum wage payments with turn a


thousand workers not being paid that minimum wage? Will they advertise


rights of work services? And does the Minister agree it is time for a


fair rights of work act which guarantees fundamental rights at


work? I thank the honourable gentleman for his critique. The


right to request has been useful and valuable when it comes to requesting


flexible employment. In any case, it is a recommendation that Matthew is


making, but I do feel it is certainly warrant careful


consideration. He talked about enforcement, and we are absolutely


committed to making sure that workers who are on zero hours


contracts or the minimum wage absolutely get paid what they are


legally entitled to, that is why we have doubled the resources available


to the HMRC in the last two years, to ensure enforcement with those


important laws. I welcome the Matt Taylor report today and commend the


Minister for her statement. Particularly with regards to


tackling nativity and pregnancy discrimination, wish to report says


needs more action and has doubled in the last decade. Will the Minister


perhaps outline for the House what provisions within this report,


particularly address the issues raised by the select committee about


workers lack of rights to accessing antenatal care June the working day,


which the Minister, in her response, said would be addressed in this


report? I commend the honourable lady for the work her select


committee, which he chairs, has done to tackle this outrageous issue of


discrimination against women who are pregnant. That has no plays in the


modern workplace. There are provisions within the Matthew Taylor


report, but there is also ongoing work across government to improve


the opportunities for women who are pregnant in the workplace to ensure


we make history of that discrimination. As somebody who


lobbied the Prime Minister Webb reports on the EU economy, might I


thank the Minister for her statement today? Could I please from her a


little more, whether government's position will be in the trade-off


between strapping minimum standards at the vulnerable end of the labour


market and trading that for flexibility, that the news reports


are right, Matthew Taylor goes for flexibility, rather than always


implementing the national minimum wage? Can we have an undertaking


from the government they will always abide by the national minimum wage,


even if there is a loss for flexibility? I congratulate the


honourable gentleman for all the work he did chairing the work and


pensions select committee on these matters in the last Parliament. And


I can assure him that minimum wage rates are absolutely sacrosanct,


there will be no trade-off with regard to ensuring everybody is


played at least the minimum wage. And I think if the honourable


gentleman reads the report, he will be more encouraged. And I can't


quote many of the people who attended the review is evident


session told the Taylor review they like the flexibility of working a


typical, atypically, and we shouldn't lose theirs. Flexibility


must not be a one-way street with individuals absorbing all the risk,


and although we are going to consider the recommendations


further, I can assure him very much agree with the sentiments behind


that remark. Does the Minister welcome the fact the review


established that the majority of employers followed good practice and


our focus should be on those who do not, to make sure we level the


playing field for all employers, all employees and businesses in this


country? I agree strongly with my honourable friend. Employers who


choose to break the rules, and they are a small minority but excess,


they must exist there to be consequences for their actions.


There should be a level playing field so that visitors who do the


vast majority of which do behave properly, do not find themselves the


wrong end of an uneven playing. I declare an interest having done some


work during my time out of this House. I welcome the Prime Minister


saying there will be no rollback of workers' rights, though let's just


say those words are a departure from what I experience as a consider


position when I was Liberal Democrat minister in the Coalition. I know


the Minister is genuine, it's an important issue. Can just as, as she


prepares a government response to this report, will she commit to


consulting widely across this House, through debate, free speaking the


select committee, to get the right response when the government comes


forward? I thank the honourable lady and commend her for her role in that


Coalition government. I'm glad to hear that she acknowledges this


government has move forward in its appreciation of the difficulties


faced by certain workers in the sort of areas Matthew Taylor has been


focused upon. I can give her every assurance we will indeed consult


widely, not just across industry and where trade unions and members of


the public, but very much so across this House. I welcome this report


very much, and I wonder if Earth at this any stage, can she give any


indication what enhance opportunities may be created to


those people who have disabilities, in the world of work or trying to


enter the world of work? I thank the honourable gentleman for this


important note. The Department for Work and Pensions are undertaking


various measures to improve the chances are people with disabilities


accessing the workplace, and my department is giving all the


supporter can to that enquiry. Matthew Taylor said today he wants


employers to pay national insurance for people they have a controlling


and supervisory relationship with. Does the government plan to


implement that aspect of the Taylor review, and can minister reassure


workers that government doesn't plan to U-turn on its U-turn and increase


national insurance for the generally self-employed? I can assure that


honourable lady that as the first Secretary of State commented


Parliament has spoken on the issue of national insurance in respect,


and that matter is settled and will not be revisited. I think I share


her concern that we look very closely to make sure that people who


are generally contracted to provide an ongoing service are given the


protections that workers and not falsely labelled self-employed.


On a similar point, which he confirmed that actually there is a


real risk that having a depending contractors risk fudging the issue


of where someone is really employed and self-employed, we should be


focusing on getting that line drawn in the right place and making sure


that those who engage in depending contractors are paying national


insurance so I'm tax rating is not distorting the market? We are going


to consult heavily on those points and we will absolutely make sure


that hates NTS satisfied on the tax issues but that we are satisfied


that employees are getting their rights, if they are employees or


workers. With Matthew Taylor is replacing to rename them, depending


contractors. The Minister has welcomed this report. Assume the


position to accept any of the recommendations in it today and


Kenji tells when they will be legislation to implement a least


something from their stories are all going to be put into the long grass?


As I said in the responses earlier, we will be consulting, looking at


every single recommendation and it is not release me to say I'm


personally inclined to recommend, excepting which I am not at this


very early stage. So I hope you will bear with us if, over the next six


months, we will be consented, by the year and, maybe a little bit longer


than six months, consulting widely across this House and he will have


every opportunity to make his views known. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I have


spent 45 years in the gig economy and what I liked about the gig


economy is it was very flexible and in order to build a career, I found


myself delivering bacon across north London from Smithfield market. They


became a removal man. Does my right honourable friend agree with me that


it is very welcome but this report supports a flexible labour market


and is not in favour of restricting that flexibility where individuals


want it. Well, I think that my honourable friend has made a very


careful reading of the summary of Matthew Taylor's report because he


does understand that balance. He does not want first to land the kind


of tax abilities that have helped him in his career and close for


people starting out on their careers now. But as I've said, we do to make


sure their predictions are in place. -- protections. It is just not my


constituent in the gig economy that have insecurity, they are pleased to


be working but when they went full-time employment, they see more


people in the same organisations getting part-time hours. When will


the Government get to grips with this element of the economy and make


sure that all those workers get a fair deal and a chance to work full


time hours they so need? The whole basis of this report is good work


and the aspiration of good work for all and I would include those


constituents to which she is referring. But just to reassure her,


the survey of two years ago did find that almost 70% of people on zero


hour contracts were content with the hours that they were working. That


does mean a third do want more hours and that is what we have got to


embrace in terms of some of the changes that Matthew Taylor might be


recommending in order to help achieve the good work and the hours


her constituents want to work. I welcome the publication of this


report. Does my honourable friend agree that flexibility in the legal


market does benefit both workers and employers equally? -- labour market.


My honourable friend has asked me a difficult question in that I do


believe that Matthew Taylor's report does bear this out, flexibility does


benefit both employers and employees but I'm afraid that the evidence to


his inquiry did point out that in too many cases, that flexibility is


a one-way street, as I said earlier, and we do need to address the issue


as people who are really at risk and far too insecure in employment


situation. Thank you. I welcome the Minister's commitment to the


Government upholding workers' rights and I wonder whether as part of the


Government's response to this report, you look at enabling workers


to uphold their own rights and look again at these for employment


tribunals which have meant a reduction of 70% in cases by single


claimants, such as those working in the gig economy against their


employer? I thank the honourable lady for her question. She makes a


very important point. It is a matter for the Ministry of Justice. Matthew


Taylor has not recommended that we get rid of these for employment


tribunals. I think we have to recognise the positive aspect, which


has been an upsurge in the amount of employment disputes that have been


settled through mediation. But I will continue to like the she


raises. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The report does praise and support


flexibility within the labour market, where individuals wanted.


But does my honourable friend agree with me that this is perhaps


especially, but not exclusively, beneficial to students and young


people? I do agree with my honourable friend. I think the


figures suggest that almost 20% of people on zero hour contracts


students and the flexibility does benefit many people who perhaps have


parenting or caring responsibilities and do not want to work full-time.


So we certainly do not want enough flexibility, but we do want to


improve protection, as I have said before. Thank you, Mr Speaker. The


gig economy brings an insecure work. The rights will be worth I think is


the Government increases the amount it is prepared to put into


regulation, so will the Minister tell us this afternoon will she


commit alongside implement in the Taylor of to bidding those


additional resources in? I very much agree with the gentlemen.


Enforcement is crucial. We have double the resources available,


minimum wage enforcement, they will continue to go up through this


Parliament. In addition, we have strengthened the powers of the gang


masters labour abuse of authority and we have recently appointed a new


director of the labour market enforcement who is tasked with


bringing the work of the three major enforcement bodies together to


understand the extent of the abuse and to recommend ways of those


enforcement agencies being properly resourced to ingest it. I hope the


honourable gentleman will be pleased with the outcome of that in due


course. I would like to welcome the publication of Matthew Taylor's


report on my honourable friend's statement today. Does she agree with


me that it is not absolutely right to ensure workers are treated fairly


but it is good for business too as they have more engaged and more


productive workforce? I heartily agree with my honourable friend.


That is what it is all about. It is about improving work so that we have


good work, so that people have the ability to grow in their careers, so


that people who are low-paid to start with do not have to be


low-paid forever, that they can aspire to a better future that will


benefit British productivity and it will, as my honourable friend


suggest, improve the competitiveness of British companies. Vital


protection for workers is trade union membership and also trade


union recognition. Since my time at the TUC over 40 years ago, the


mention of trade unions in Britain has halved and we have seen workers'


rights and undermined by Tory legislation. When is the legislation


going to be reversed? The Government cannot name the people to join trade


unions. Trade unions are still a very important force for protecting


workers' rights, among those sectors of the economy where they are still


dominant and I commend them for their work. If one talks to drivers


on YouTube or cleaners using platforms as hassle, they will


acknowledge the benefits of flexibility to them. To coin a


phrase, would it not be morally acceptable to misread the


21st-century labour market and construct a set of rules that force


is out of work, rather than allows them to stay in its? My right


honourable friend, my honourable friend will be no doubt pleased that


Matthew Taylor very much agrees with his thesis. Thank you very much, Mr


Speaker. Over 1 million workers are being exploited by companies and


bogus self-employment. Since its changes to tax policy that are


needed to tackle both and the Government prohibited making any


firm regularly chosen to change in tax policy, houses the can we take


the Minister's comments to date and when they are going to address the


tax anomalies? I can assure the honourable lady that no bar


whispered in front of Matthew Taylor. He able to investigate as


free and fair as he saw fit. It is really up to the Treasury to assess


the tax situation and any potential loss of revenues which of course


comes from bogus self-employment. In contrast to the previous question,


with my honourable friend join me in recognising one of the key findings


of the review, that, thanks to the Government's tax policies, once you


take into account tax levels and tax credits, actually average take-home


pay for families where you lose one member is in full-time employment is


higher in the UK than in any other G-7 country? -- where at least one


member. I commend my honourable friend for bringing that to the


attention of the House. I am pleased to hear the Minister so promoting


this Marxist revolution that we are now living through as the means of


production are increasingly in the hands of the workers. But further to


what does she not agree with me that the answer to some of the challenges


we are hearing is not just better regulations but also to help people


organise and if so, will she meet with myself, Kimi to trade union,


the Co-op movement to discuss our work helping the self-employed to


organise and unionise? I am aware of the independent union of


self-employed workers and they have been a force and may have


contributed to this enquiry. -- they have contributed. I would be all too


pleased to meet with the honourable lady and her community organisers as


part of my consultation. Thank you. There's a marked difference between


someone who says that the business, take some risks and wrist


self-employment compared to refute as good as employees who force


workers to go self-employed. In responding to this excellent report,


what will my honourable friend do to make sure that the people who are


genuinely self-employed continue to receive those benefits, but the


unscrupulous employers do not? My honourable friend makes a very good


point. We do not want to stand in the way of the incentives that


promote people who are genuinely taking a risk and starting a


business, they are the majority and we do not want to do that thing that


upsets that balance. But at the same time, as my honourable friend will


realise, we do need to end the scourge of fake self-employment. The


report disappointed does not go far enough on the issue of zero hour


contracts. The Labour Welsh government and devolved areas on


seven occasions. Is not the case that workers in are being left out


by the Tory and Labour Party? Individual, many individuals, as


I've said, want to work in a flexible way that is by the zero


hour contracts and almost 70% of them are happy with our allies and,


as I said, the third who are not, we must take steps to promote the value


of good work as an opportunity for them, whether they are in Wales or


in the rest of the United Kingdom. She has told us that 20% of students


-- 20% of students, 70% are satisfied, can you complete the


hat-trick I telling us what the mean weekly incomes actually is on the


zero hour 's contract? I will have to write a number of friends with


the answer to that one. -- I will have to write to my honourable


friend. Matthew Taylor has written we must equip our children and young


people to enter the labour market successfully but Government


employees and individuals have to make sure that everyone is in the


best place to provide what might be working life spanning 60 years or


more. How will the Government square this with the decision made under


the previous Prime Minister to stop compulsory work experience in


schools, which in the first year led to a drop in 60,000 work express


placements in schools across the country and would she look again


this? That is a matter for the Department for Education. I think


that I do agree that work experience is very important to young people


and I'm sure that the Secretary of State will look favourably on that.


As far as we are concerned in my department, we are looking to boost


the opportunities for lifelong learning, to engender a culture


where people can progress in their careers.


Before I became a member of Parliament, I was self-employed. I


was a self-employed ambassador to the Prime Minister, and I also


worked with Matthew Taylor on this report. I found him extremely


nonpartisan, a gentleman. What I would like to urge my honourable


friend to do, living at the measures for the self-employed, especially


with their maternity and paternity benefits in the offering, please


accept them. I will certainly take on boards my view based on so many


years, and I thank him by his conclusion to this report.


Flexibility in the labour market on one side of the coin, but for people


in employment on the other side. If we are to see a situation, at the


criticism of the Unite union, the insecurities to be the new normal,


can the Minister reverse a decision that the Coalition took to extend


from one year to two year the threshold? I don't accept the


premise in security is the new norm. I think one of the purposes of this


report was to look closely at the extent of insecurity and produce


some measures, or some recommendations, that might mitigate


that where it is not desired by the workers. I will look at the matter


he raise, but that is a question that was not actually addressed in


this report. Speaking at the launch this morning,


Mr Taylor suggested traditional workers like window cleaners can use


an application to collect money and apply to HMRC. Why is it that Buber,


the most cutting app do not collect the national insurance number of


drivers --. I thought the app was one of the most interesting ideas,


there are limitations to the current apps available, but in no way was


Matthew Taylor advocating they were mandatory, but they should be


available in a more sophisticated form than they are now. As a


government looks towards the economy, Matthew Taylor's remarks


that the welfare system is a mess, and no one outside a government


makes it fairer. Kurdish and presenters, we wards for work,


increased freedom -- cadets represent rewards for work. It has


not been addressed by this report, and I urge him to address his


questions to the DWP ministerial team. Matthew Taylor urges the


government to look at reducing these, can it urge the Minister to


go further, in relation to discrimination, get on with


abolishing them and extend the period during which a case can be


brought before tribunal is, because a period of pregnancy is a busy


time, when you are unlikely to be thinking about a court case. I do


agree with her remarks, and I hope she will input her views during the


consultation process. Twice the Minister has referred to the fact


flexibility seems to work only one way to benefit the employer. Does


that flexibility include her government 's failure to prosecute a


single employer in Wales last year for flouting the minimum wage rules?


I was not saying flexibility was always a one-way street in favour of


the employer, I said that was in exceptional cases a real problem


that needs addressing. But it is not necessarily the norm. In response to


the other matters that she has raised, I urge her to contribute her


views as we go over the consultation. When the Minister is


considering how to respond to the review, will she talked to her


colleagues about the useful time social action review, which is


considering the question of long-time volunteering? I realise


they are different, but there's quite a considerable overlap, and


the question about safeguards and protections is the same in some


cases, it seems sensible to wrap the two together. He has some good


points to make about volunteering and about the framework that govern


said, and I hope he will make these during our consultation. -- that


governs it. On workforce protection be extended, or that include


secondary contract does, so when one person in a team of three or four as


a main contractor, will the depending contractor extended to


other people in the team? This might provide a minor blip of people who


are self-employed to be independent contractors, but there will be some


who see this as an opportunity to downgrade people with employment


protection to dependent contractors against their will. The honourable


gentleman raises a number of issues, there's no attention to downgrade


anybody's rights. We want to be in a position to see copyable's right,


certainly not downgrade them. I am sure he will be putting his details,


observations in our consultation. This government continues to justify


the existence of zero hours contracts on the basis of


flexibility, but this could be largely addressed in flexible


working can be properly expanded and given a framework for what it means.


Will the government use this opportunity to properly expand


flexible working and explain what it actually means? I can't accept the


premise behind the honourable gentleman's question. We are not


seeking to end zero hours contracts because too many people want them.


They want the flexibility associated with them, but we are seeking to


root out abuse where it exists. The Taylor review recommends the


government makes it easier for people in flexible arrangements to


take holiday entitlement. Now, the Minister has struggled to explain


the government's powers in this area before. Can she tell us what powers


to enforce holiday pay currently exist, and with some are fast


approaching, will she act on the tenor recommendation swiftly? I


reassure her Matthew Taylor has recommended we take the issue of


holiday pay seriously and make sure it applies to all workers who are


entitled to it. And the Treasury will be taking forward those


suggestions. The Minister is writes, the transfer of risk that heart of


this problem. Drivers in my constituency are classified as


self-employed be treated as employees were about right. Is there


anything in the Taylor report which would end the practice of finding


the drivers every time there's an accident? If the honourable lady


would like to write to me with details of this, it's the first I


have heard of this particular, well, practice, yes. It certainly sounds


wrong, but I would be delighted to consider it further within the


powers that currently exist. On page 11 of the report, Mr Taylor says, we


have to examine why with employment levels at record highs, a number of


people living in poverty are in work. The government's practice has


been that when asked about poverty, the government have responded with


statistics about employment and unemployment. Will the government


finally accept such a thing as in work poverty only exist, it is a


brutal fact of life for millions of people on these islands? We have


always been absolutely committed to reducing poverty where ever it is


exists, and the national living wage has gone a long way to provide


workers with a framework beneath which they need not seek, sink into


poverty. I would urge the honourable gentleman to consider that further.


As someone who's done a view gigs in his time, can I urge the Minister


you to reject this think tank jargon of the phrase depending contractor?


Workers were, workers are workers. Depending contractor is the world


unite, you have nothing to lose but your change, it's not going to


change anything. For those new members not aware of the musical


distinction of the honourable gentleman he was pose a question, I


can inform him, he's a very member of the Parliamentary rock bands, and


colleagues haven't heard of the band, they haven't fully lived, and


I hope they will hear the band in due course, preferably in Speaker 's


house where it is played before, and will be played again. He mentions


that the two independent contractor. This was a recommendation designed


to improve clarity and to improve the chances of workers getting the


rights to which they are entitled. It is just that, just a


recommendation and he is free to lobby against our acceptance of it


during the course of our consultation. I welcome the


acknowledgements in the report that employment Tribunal fees are a


barrier to justice, so whilst it so positive that the report recommends


them to establish employment stasis, what is there to make sure quality


representation in the tribunal? It'd also the case once that status has


been that the will still have to beat paid? One of the recommendation


is up before an employee takes a case before a tribunal, there is


firm advice as to what the employee's statuses in reality. That


word, I think, and a huge amount of uncertainty and unnecessary expense.


We will consider that as well as all the other recommendations in this


excellent report, which I do commend to the House, I did find much of it


inspiring and I do hope we can all work together to improve the quality


of work in this country, as well as the number of jobs. A point of


order. Mr Speaker, would it be in order for a minister to attend the


House and give a statement as to why it is there is no one authority with


responsibility for the safety of rivers and canals? Last night, my


12-year-old constituent, Elwyn Jenkins, died come he drowns at


Beeston Weir. It appears he went into the River Trent to assist


another youngster who got into difficulty in the water. Mr Speaker,


it looks like this was an act of great courage and great bravery from


a remarkable young man, and I'm sure the whole house will join me in


sending our heartfelt condolences to his family, his friends and all the


other pupils at Chilwell school. Summer is here, the schools are now


breaking of the summer holidays. And yet rivers, canals, quarries, ponds,


lakes all dangerous places potentially, especially for children


and youngsters. But there's no one authority that has responsibility


for safety. I think the Minister should come along and explain how we


can make sure that all those places are safe for all of us, especially


young people. I'm grateful to the right honourable lady for her point


of order and for her courtesy in giving me advance notice of


intention to rated. She has paid warm and eloquent tribute to young


Elwyn Jenkins, to whom she rightly says, and I'm sure she speaks for


all of us, we wish to send to all his friends and family our deepest


condolences, and we want to remember the very remarkable courage that he


showed. I am not aware of any intention on the part of the


Minister to come to the House to make a statement on the matter, but


the right honourable lady asked whether it would be in order for a


minister to do so. It certainly would. We still have several sitting


days. And I think of a minister were to come to the House to make a


statement on that matter, to explain the delineation of functions or


allocation of responsibility and to answer questions on the matter, that


would be well received by the House. And, if they say, it would be well


received by the family of young Owen Jenkins. I understand the Prime


Minister has announced that is to be a judge led public enquiry into the


contaminated blood scandal. Wouldn't it have been better if that


announcement had been made just once in this House to honourable members?


The short answer is, it is better if the key announcements of policy all


other government intends are communicated first of the House,


when the houses in session. I am not aware because I been attending to my


duties in the chair of that announcement. If that is so, it may


very well be it will be warmly welcomed, but the honourable


gentleman and asked me a specific question to which I have given him a


specific answer. Yesterday, when the honourable lady, the member of the


Kingston upon Hull North, sought leave to secure an emergency debate


on a specific and important matter, namely her sense of the need for a


full public enquiry into the contaminated blood scandal, there


have been no such announcement. I judge that it was indeed a proper


matter, to be debated under the terms of standing order 24, and


notwithstanding any announcement outside of the House, an indication


of Parliamentary opinion on the subject remains in feel extremely


germane and arguably just as urgent. I agreed yesterday but the health


gave its approval to the honourable lady to pursue this matter and I


felt and I still feel that it warranted and it warrants up to


three hours of debate today. So I'm grateful to the honourable gentleman


but it certainly does not persuade us from a proper and conferences


focus on this matter now. We proceed to the emergency debate and I call


first Diana Johnson. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I beg to move that this


House is considered the need for an independent public enquiry into the


contaminated blood scandal. Can I first start by thanking you, Mr


Speaker, to allow this emergency debate? This is the first time that


has been emergency debate on economic contaminated blood scandal


and it arises after criminal actions produced by the Right Honourable


Andy Burnham and a joint letter calling for a Hillsborough style


inquiry? After the announcement from Downing Street this lunchtime, it


may become an even more popular route to get the Government to


listen and act in the future. Like the Government announcement that


there is to be a full enquiry into this scandal, I want to start by


acknowledging all of those people who've been involved in getting us


to this point. I want to start with my own constituent Glenn Wilkinson.


For his persistence and determination, when he came to see


me in 2010 to tell me his story, I think he has really been the person


who I have always kept at the centre of whatever I have attempted to do


on this issue. I also want to thank the many, many individuals and


campaign groups who have fought for years to get to this point. Manor


house, tainted blood, contaminated blood campaign. I want to thank the


chief executive Liz Carroll and Jefferson Courtney the public


affairs officer. There are over 2400 individuals who tragically lost


their lives. They are not here to see this announcement but their


voices than through their family members who have never given up


fighting for them. They also want to say something about journalists


because I think this campaign that has run so many years has, at times,


without the great benefit of brilliant investigative journalist


including Caroline Wheeler of the Sunday Times he was formally a


correspondent on the holed Daily Mail. We have been many researchers


and journalists who did into disaster a few months ago. And the


Daily Mail, not a favourite of yours, Mr Speaker, they ran a very


good story on the front of their paper last week. I will give way in


one moment. I want to continue with this point around thanking people. I


want to particularly thank the average 11 parliamentarians who are


members of the eight BGG tried haemophiliac contaminated blood. I


want to thank my co-chair, the previous chair Jason McCartney who


is no longer a member of this House, Margaret Ritchie and Mark Durkan who


are no longer members of this House that were very vocal in the campaign


said theirs. And, of course, I have to say a really big thank you to the


Right Honourable Andy Burnham who in the battery speech made up clearly


why this is unfinished business and we need to have a public enquiry. I


want to thank the late Right Honourable Paul Goggins who was a


huge inspiration in this cause. Thank you. My honourable friend is


completely right to thank all of these people but there is one person


missing from that list and that is herself. I think the whole house


should thank the honourable lady for the tireless work she has done over


the last seven years on this. An utterly brilliant campaign. This


shows how Parliament really should work. Her constituent has raised an


issue with her, she has campaigned on it nonstop, she has not been


fobbed off, she has proceeded and she has brought as, I think she has


played a huge role in bringing us to this point today. Last night, I had


a load of e-mails from constituents who have been affected by this


scandal and I want to tell her how grateful they are to her for the


work she has done. I am very grateful to my honourable friend for


those comments, but I think it was a combined effort of so many people


over so many years. I will give way to my honourable friend. I would


like to pay my own tribute to my honourable friend, she has been


absolutely hugged in her determination of not giving up and I


have two in my own mind who came to see me in a similar circumstance, if


he had not come to see me as I know many other constituents have on both


sides of the House, I would not been aware of this scandal, let alone


strained the need to deal with it. Will she drove me in paying tribute


to national and regional groups have done so much to stand for those


affected in particular locations like Wales and is up some of the


difficulties in that this was a legacy issue from UK Department of


Health and the competition is now a devolved health services across the


catering at some of its questions that we will need to address in


terms of this enquiry. I think my honourable friend make that point


very well. I want to use the shoe today to make a few comments about


the way we handle disasters and to say something about how I think the


best way forward in terms of a Hillsborough style inquiry should be


established by the Government. Yes, I will give way. I am very grateful


and I add my congratulations to the honourable lady for her brilliant


leadership on this. Does she agree with me that was this incredibly


welcome these, there is an urgency because those people who continue to


suffer need help now and there's a danger that this process could go on


for years and leave them still waiting for support? I think the


writer aboard gentleman makes it an important point and I think the


timetabling of any inquiry Berenice Abbott needs to be set up clearly


and I hope the e-mail server will be able to help us Visser contribution.


I thank my honourable friend forgiving way on that point. I want


to add my congratulations to her and Andy Burnham. This has been going on


for a long time. Has she had any indication from number ten Downing


St what form this enquiry is going to take? Because some of my


constituents have got similar problems to her constituents. Can


she give us any clarification on that? I have only seen, like every


other member of the House, what is out in the media which is there's


going to be a consultation, I understand, what form the inquiry


will take. But I'm sure the Minister will be able to help us in his


contribution later on. I will give way and then I will move on. I am


grateful to the honourable lady then moving on and I would like to join


into triggers to hand the all-party group of which I've been a member. I


think it is an example of how Parliament can work well. There is a


family who've said as a family we have suffered years of misery


because of this scandal and does she not agree with me that is right to


consult the victims and their families about the form the inquiry?


Absolutely. The honourable gentlemen makes a good point there as well and


I will come onto that is or what I want to say. I want to make some


general comments. I do not need to remind the House of the damage that


public disasters close all those affected. We know from the health


but tragedy in 1989 and more recently the appalling fire Grenfell


Tower. Every public disasters this kind is different. The courses are


different, the victim suffer in different ways and the measures


necessary to support them differs also. Then there is one thing that I


think every victim has an every right to and that is the right to


answers. They deserve to be told what went wrong, why it went wrong


and who is responsible for what happened. The story of the injustice


they have suffered also needs to be set up and told to the wider public.


Their voices need to be heard. Apologies, compensation and other


forms of support are essential. But if their right to answers is not


also satisfied, I feel they will be denied true and meaningful justice.


I will give way. A powerful case thank her for all the work she has


done. She said at the beginning, many victims have died. It is now


their families that are still here but they are still grieving and they


need answers as much as the victims. My honourable friend is absolutely


right on that. I just want to go back to the fact that this tragedy,


as my honourable friend has said, has taken the lives of over 2400


people with haemophiliac. Infected mainly from blood factor


concentrates. Many others, without bleeding disorders, who've been


affected through bludgeon and Susan is another means have also lost


their lives. -- blood transfusions and other means. They are left to


live a combination of HIV, hepatitis B and a range of other viruses. Mike


constituent, Glenn Wilkinson, is one such individual. He has haemophiliac


and he was infected with hepatitis C during a routine tooth operation.


Glenn is one of thousands of people who have fallen victim to the worst


treatment disaster in the history of our NHS on one of the worst


peacetime disasters that has ever taken place in this country. Indeed


when I was looking through the 15 also non-terrorist related public


disasters ranging from the brat from split the stadium fire to the


Clapham junction crash, and of course Hillsborough, each of these


were tragic events and they do not wish to detract from the magnitude


of those events, but the House should note that an orderly once I


looking at, all of those devices led to a public enquiry. An Arab members


and their effective constituents are entitled to ask why has the same not


happened with contaminated blood. Had more than 2400 people died over


the course of one day, or one year, it would have been inconceivable for


any Government to refuse calls for a public enquiry. Yet the devastation


caused by the contaminated blood scandal has been spread not over


days or years but over several decades. We must also bear in mind


the provided a fact that the scandal has had on one community, those with


bleeding disorders. Many of whom who were provided with contaminated mud


factor concentrates sourced from profit-making American firms.


Virtually everyone who has haemophiliac the time he has been


infected. Honourable member 's will appreciate that when friends and


close the communities I hit by collective tragedy, its impact can


be devastating. Consider, for example, the school for disabled


children, special school with a large number of pupils with


haemophiliac, 72 of its peoples have died because of this scandal. Many


were forced to be silent to suffering, I prefer the of the


stigma of having HIV or hepatitis C or other viruses or because they


were not even aware that they had these conditions. It is important as


this distinction is, it does not excuse the fact that successive


governments of all colours have sidestepped this issue for too long.


Internationally, we know in France, investigations will be imprisonment


as the former head of their blood transfusion service and his deputy


and a former health minister was found guilty of manslaughter. In


Japan, three executives at companies were imprisoned and official was


convicted on negligence charges and in the United States, the private


companies involved in this tragedy paid out millions in out-of-court


settlements across the world. But nothing of this kind of happened in


the UK. I will finish this point. In 1991, in response to the threat of


court cases, the Government set up an excretion payments scheme, no


implication of liability, the word compensation and waivers had to be


signed before they could obtain small sums of money. I thank the


honourable lady for giving way. Mike constituent who does not wish to be


name was to include the remit of the Skipton fund because she feels and


many others do the remit was wrongly drawn up and she and others have


been denied the dust as they should have had. Yes, the honourable lady


makes an important point and I'm going to mention that. I will give


way. Congratulate her on the work she has done on this issue, and I


welcome the factors there is good to be a public inquiry eventually and


at last. Does my honourable friend agree with me that this public


inquiry should address the issues of why the UK was the last country in


the Western world to introduce a test for hepatitis C? Wife vital


documents were destroyed by the Department of Health and why the UK


took 13 years to get self-sufficiency in blood products


when it took Ireland over five years? Again, very important


questions for the inquiry to deal with. I want turnout today's


announcement and the joint Westminster leader's letter of the


7th of July. Which I think provided a blueprint for how such an enquiry


should be conducted. First of all, as with Hillsborough, commitment,


there should be a commitment to secure full public disclosure of


details relating to this tragedy through a process managed by the


effective community. There should be a mechanism to ensure all public


bodies involved in the scandal are compelled to give oral and written


evidence to it, you should see to be given that it will cover the role of


American firms in providing blood factor concentrated people with


haemophiliac, an investigation or so, not just about the run-up to the


scandal, but its actual aftermath. And finally, it has to like these


allegations of criminal conduct and I hope, as I said a little early on,


the Minister will be able to help us with the timetable for this inquiry


as those affected have I do pay tribute to the


Parliamentary group, and NMI concert to rent is grateful to her and other


MPs -- and I know my constituent is grateful. On health records, my


constituent, who has access to a husband's health records. Does she


agree with me that those affected through the scandal showed get their


family health records? The honourable gentleman makes an


important point, they with it. I pay tribute to the Member for the


outstanding leadership here shown on this important issue. My constituent


has been affected by this. There's a great deal been said about the


responsible government, the cover-up, but also the moral way the


victim has been treated. We get many living in destitution and poverty as


a result of the government penny-pinching, when actually that


should be part of the review. He is correct, we need to look carefully


at the support being provided in the past and what should be provided in


the future. I will give way, two more times. I'd like to add my


thanks, Hayden who died, and other members of the family. Would she


agree that we should learn from the lessons of the thalidomide enquiry


and compensation fund in this enquiry to make sure we don't repeat


the mistakes made with thalidomide? That is an excellent point that


needs to be considered. I will give away one last time. I'd like to pay


tribute on behalf of my constituents, James Jones. In the


Welsh Assembly, there was confirmation that the payments


continue to be made, that no liability is accepted. And again, it


confirms the payment of 10,000 to a partner, that continues again. That


goes to the heart of it, there's never been any finding of liability.


That has resulted in very low payments being made and it kind of


support bases, rather than a compensatory basis. I just want to


Ritter eight -- reiterates, that I strongly believe, and I think the


majority believe, that a Hillsborough style enquiry is the


best way forward in this case. Putting those affected at the heart


of whatever is created and set up. So, for instance, giving people the


opportunity to have an input into the terms of reference, being able


to look at people who might be considered to be a chairperson of


the inquiry, or any panel members. This has to have the support and


confidence of all those affected, that's why looking at what happened


with a Hillsborough style enquiry, the Hillsborough enquiry, that


worked effectively. In Hillsborough, it was known as families first. And


I hope that might be able to carry on with this enquiry as to set up.


So, I also think all those affected need to be treated with the utmost


respect and reverence and fully consulted. And any information that


becomes available should first of all go to those people affected. I


want to just talk about the Fall questions I have around, but I think


the enquiring need to look at -- Fall. In Andy Burnham's speech, when


he set out the case for why they needed to be an inquiry, and he was


one of two former Health Secretary 's comedy of being Lord Irwin, who


had raised serious concerns, and we know there was the panorama


programme and the Daily Mail article. From what Andy Burnham said


and from all the developments in the last few months, there are serious


questions which I still believe need to be addressed by public enquiry.


First of all, why did the government not act soon to protect the blood


supplies once the risks became known? Why were we so reliant on


American commercial products the haemophilia patient? Because UK was


not self-sufficient in blood supplies, profit-making American


companies played a considerable role in supplying factor concentrates the


haemophilia patients. This blood was sourced from much riskier patients,


including prison inmates, who were much more likely to have infections


and had a financial incentive to be less than honest about their risks


of infection. The dangers American products were being discussed, not


from the 1990s, nor the 1980s, but from 1970. As the Daily Mail


reported last week, files now suggested at least as early as 1980,


officials had even put an estimate on about haemophilia patients being


infected from these products, with what we now know to be hepatitis C.


They put the figure at 50 a year, yet it was not until night they took


any action to address it. If the whole of the UK had been


self-sufficient in blood supplies, fewer haemophilia patients would


have been affected. We know this because Scotland had higher levels


of self-sufficiency than England. As the Panorama programme outline,


haemophilia patients were twice as likely to be infected in HIV than in


Scotland. Even in the mid-1980s, when the danger of hepatitis C and a


Chevy became known, it appears we could have acted sooner to remove


products, and when United States started screening their products


from March 1983, we carried on using non-screened American supplies that


we had purchased before March. How can that possibly be justified? So


my second question for the inquiry, why were patients kept in the dark


and not told of the risks once they became known? There are many aspects


of this controversy which I know other honourable members may wish to


touch on. But I want to draw the attention to the development 1983 at


the midst of the AIDS epidemic where there were still uncertainty about


whether it was a blood-borne disease. In November 1983, the


health minister and still the right honourable member Rushcliffe told


Parliament that there was no conclusive evidence AIDS is


transmitted by blood products. Yet earlier that same year his


department was repairing internal documents which said the opposite.


In August 1983 the same departments was telling practising homosexuals


and drug users not to give blood because of the risk of transmitting


AIDS. In the summer of 83, the department was preparing a blood


donor leaflet which said AIDS was almost certainly transmitted by


blood and blood products. In July in Italy to free the UK haemophilia


centre doctors organisation said young children with haemophilia


should receive a less risky form blood products because of the


dangers of AIDS. And between March and May 1983, the Scottish National


Party transfusion service prepared a leaflet for blood donors. It


included haemophiliacs and recipients are blood transfusions on


this are people who get AIDS and asked the same individuals not to


give blood. The Penrose enquiry, the Scottish Penrose enquiry,


acknowledged in adopting its position in November 1983, the then


government relied heavily on a highly nuanced use of language. My


third point is, why were some people tested for viruses without their


knowledge, and only told of the results of many years later? There


are many cases of this happening and I will make reference to one,


Jonathan Evans, he was first tested positive HIV in 1984, yet he wasn't


all that this until seven months later in the mid-1985 period. This


poses a huge health risk to his wide family and the history of this


scandal is full of cases of spouses infecting each other. Tragically,


the virus took his life and his son Jason was just Fall years old when


his father died, he is still campaigning for justice -- four


years old. He's been instrumental in generating coverage in the Daily


Mail article. Fourthly, there are allegations of a criminal cover-up


on an industrial scale from the highest ranks of government


downwards. At every stage of the scandal, there are concerns


officials knew more than they were letting on, almost everyone affected


by the scandal has encountered issues with most medical records.


Others have recovered files only to find any mention of a connection


with contaminated blood being removed. Some individuals today are


unable to access financial support via the Skipton fund because of what


has happened to their medical records. These cases of lost records


also extend to the highest level of government. Jeremy Archer enquiry,


Lord Owen requested his departmental papers from the time he was health


minister 1970s. He told they'd been destroyed under the ten-year rule.


Even though there is no evidence of such a rule existing. Finally, when


people were forced to sign waivers in 1991, as I mentioned earlier,


they were asked to commit to no further legal action for hepatitis C


litigation as well as HIV. These individuals did not yet know they


had hepatitis C, as the disease had a long incubation period. The


inescapable conclusion seems to be departmental officials knew more


than they were willing to disclose. In conclusion, earlier this week,


the Prime Minister indicated her intention to work more with other


party leaders, to act in the best interests of the country. And she


has shown a laudable commitment to this with respect for other public


disasters, including the child abuse enquiry and the Hillsborough


disaster. Alongside the many thousands of people who have for


justice for so long, I want to personally thank the showing the


same commitment with respect to the contaminated blood tragedy. There


are still questions to answered on the detail of that enquiry, in


Rockingham this announcement we must be mindful of those who will never


see its result -- in a welcoming. The people who are tragically lost


their lives, many never knew the true scale of the scandal happening


to them. Those affected and their families will be waiting anxiously


to go the Prime Minister's announcement will give them the


justice they have so long be denied. But today, the Prime Minister has


earned a place in history as someone who has listened to an issue which


predecessors had ignored and put party politics aside in the name of


giving the people the basic right to answers, and for that she has my


gratitude. The question is, this House has considered the need for an


independent public enquiry into the contaminated blood scandal. Just


before I call the first speaker from the backbench, I should say that at


this stage, I've not impose any formal time-limit, but a number of


people wish to contribute and therefore I know the honourable


gentleman the Stratford-upon-Avon will exercise a magnificent


self-denying Ordinance in the length of his oration. Do we really have to


have it? I know what I'm doing, I'm capable of handling it. If it is


about the order of speeches. No, no, I did see to be advised by the right


honourable gentleman. Let me just say, insofar as this was unclear, it


was as a result of a failure of communication between the two


frontbenchers. These matters should be sorted out between the government


on the opposition, not for people yapping at each other across the


floor of the House, or very close to the Speaker's chair. The Speaker is


happy to give effect to what the two sides of the House and want within


reason, that was not made easy on this occasion. I'm to address the


matter by consensus, I know the right honourable member means well


and is offer is appreciated, but I don't need to take him up on it. Go


girl can I join colleagues to pay tribute to the member of Kingston


upon Hull North and the work she has done reading the all-party group, as


well as the Member for Worthing West, who has been a joint chairman


of the all-party group? I have been working with the victims in my


constituency since 2011. Super the last six years. I consider myself a


new Boye when it comes to this particular tragedy and scandal. The


Member for North East Bedfordshire has spent many, many hours


tirelessly working on behalf of his consistency, and may I pay tribute


to him? I know he'd want to be in this debate but he couldn't because


of government business. I really want to just thank the


Prime Minister for listening to the victims of this extraordinary


tragedy. And colleagues in this house, and actually really calling


this enquiry. I want to acknowledge the Minister's response to


colleagues that the government is in listening mode in terms of the terms


of reference for this enquiry and that they will put the victims at


the heart of this enquiry. I think that that is what the victims will


expect, and will be grateful for. Many victims, certainly my


constituents, initially did not want an enquiry, they wanted a settlement


actually take place rather than an enquiry but as new evidence was


uncovered and again I pay tribute to Andy Burnham in some of the work


that he has done on this. And the journalist for the


Kingston-upon-Hull cited. My constituent certainly changed her


view and is very much supporting and looking forward to engaging with


this enquiry. I just want to raise an important issue that the enquiry


looks at. Subsequent treatment of victims, and holds the bodies to


account. Now, I have on behalf of Claire Walton been attempting to,


attempting to communicate with the McFarlane trust, one of the five


charities set up to help, and I say help the victims because in my


experience I have to say to the Minister the McFarlane trust has


been anything but help my constituent. They have behaved in an


utterly despicable way. They refused to take meetings with my


constituent, or with me, I have requested meetings for the past six


years, and they always come back with a reason why they cannot have a


meeting. They have bullied by constituent, the trustees of the


McFarlane trust have bullied her, and they have fed her scraps, those


are her words. Whilst at the same time having had charged over her


property for all of this time and making a profit on that charge they


refused to discuss the future of the charge on her property. She wants to


know because the scheme administrator will soon be changed


to the NHS business advisory service, by constituent wants to


know what will happen when that change takes place and I hope the


government can take some of this away and respond to it more fully at


the appropriate time. The MacFarlane trust say they cannot give any more


information until they have clarity from the Department of Health about


transition arrangements, and she really does want that clarity. But I


hope that the Minister will as his predecessor had intimated, that the


McFarlane trust is not for this world for much longer. And I have as


I said struggled to even be able to speak to them on the phone. My other


constituent, Adrian Milton feels particularly concerned about the


discretionary papers. Many victims actually rely on the discretionary


payments, and I again hope that as the minister begins to look at the


evidence, before him, he will look very closely at making sure that


where discretionary payments have actually become something much more


permanent, that they are recognised as that and not treated as


discretionary because the promise we made to our constituents under the


previous Prime Minister, and I had to commend him in wanting to resolve


this is that no victim will financially suffer under any


compensation. Any structure we put in place. I will take Mr Speaker's


very eloquent words on board and end there. Only just to say that this is


not a party political issue, many successive governments have failed


the victims and I hope now we can actually come together and have this


with a deadline, a clear timeline... I will give way. I congratulate my


honourable friend for the leadership she has given on this issue. On the


coming together I think this is important it is a UK level, previous


to devolution. I think it was important that the Minister works


with the devolved administration so that any compensation is at a UK


level, so there are no second-class citizens in the UK. And I think that


point is taken on board by the victim certainly who looked at the


Scottish settlement certainly in my case, with Adrian Melson. I am sure


the government is listening to the honourable friend's view on this.


But let us come together, and put a very clear timeline on when the


victims can adversely get justice but also compensation. I am grateful


to him. For more opposition members are minded to grumble about without


the Minister hasn't come in and that he is necessarily next I will just


point out that I was in receipt of her presentations from the


opposition front bench on this matter. Some communication between


the front and back bench would be advantageous to the conduct of


proceedings. Before I call the Shadow Minister for the public


health, can I did the -- gently implore her to speak for no more


than ten minutes and preferably for fewer. There are plenty who wish to


contribute after the honourable lady will stop the honourable gentleman


for Ludlow will helpfully set at the government position and we will then


open up to a wider debate and I would promise complete distraction


because I think that is without precedent in the house, but I will


try and ensure that there are as many happy members as possible. As


Sharon Hodgson. Thank you for your guidance, Mr Speaker, on this


matter. First and foremost first thanks go to the outstanding member


of my friend for a whole north who has soaked valiantly campaigned on


this issue for years now and without her and be delegated resolved by her


and all those that she cited to have been involved in this campaign, we


would not be where we are now. Thanks must also go to the former


member for league Andy Burnham and, at the end of last parliament I had


the honour of being present at going to the police with the evidence he


has if the government cannot seek justice for those neglected. For too


long the contaminated blood community has been simply failed by


the government. Ignored by those who have led the demands of the affected


fall under four years which has lacked this community without


justice. It is very welcome with the news in the last hour and a half or


so that this may have finally some resolution soon, I am very grateful


for him to allow me to speak first so that answer questions and what


this is an unusual format and that I have no prior knowledge that that


format was going to be changed and I hope other honourable members who


are also going to questions in the debates to label also get a chance


for some response from the ministers over and I don't know where fear he


will get to bite at the cherry or whether it will have the BB convened


to get other answers. I would also add that this emergency debate is


very timely and allows us the house to have its voice heard bully which


is white, after the decades of neglect this community has space. At


any point prior to 1230 when it was announced in the News the Minister


could have come forward and made a statement which would have saved my


honourable friend calling for the emergency debate yesterday. It does


tend to feel that the order of thing has been forced, and it is sad that


it has to be forced in this way. We are where we are. They on our


benches, Labour are resolutely in favour of a Hillsborough style


enquiry. It was in our manifesto and we pushed for it, and it is this


style of enquiry which will get to the heart of the problems that began


in the 1980s and hold those blamed for the scandal to account before


too late. It is not just our backbenchers but all those of the


other parties represented in this, especially on this side of the


house, who have made a commitment to stand up for those people seeking


justice. As was so clearly documented in the joint letter from


the leaders of every single opposition party here in this house,


and also the DUP, I am pleased to say, published on Sunday. In the


debate on this issue last November secured by my honourable friend Bob


Ivanov, we debated a whole host of issues, including compensation for


the terrible events that have occurred but today we are here to


debate the fights for justice, we should have happened a lot sooner.


In my contribution I want to impress two key points, firstly that


categorically the previous two enquiries have been insufficient in


seeking justice. And this is the reason why a Hillsborough style


enquiry Busby actioned. Secondly, the evidence presented so far is


clear that if we are to have true reconciliation of the murky covering


up on this scandal then the strongest of daylight must be shown


on all of this, leaving no stone unturned. The two previous enquiry


the archer enquiry and the Penrose enquiry 2015 in Scotland did not go


far enough in the eyes of the affected community in getting the


truth and justice they deserve. Firstly the arch enquiry was not a


government backed one, and failed to seek Department of Health witnesses


give evidence. The Penrose enquiry dude again but go far enough in


seeking truth, and was unable to compel witnesses from outside of


Scotland when at the time of the scandal most if not all of the


positions were made in Whitehall. So this failure to compel witnesses


from outside of Scotland failed to seek the justice and answers that


people from right across the UK deserved. On my second point, there


are many allegations around this scandal. Ranging from Department of


Health officials destroying evidence as part of a cover-up to victims


medical details being tamper with to hide the cause of their infections.


I will give way. There are two particular issues that the


constituents of mine have said that the enquiry but consider. One told


me that he was infected with Hepatitis C and exposed to the HIV


virus and was not informed until years afterwards by the NHS, and


wants to be ensure that the enquiry will reveal why the truth was


hidden. The second wants to know about this issue of doctors and


scientists being paid by the drug companies and the precise nature of


those deals and he thinks that those had to be really properly and


rigorously exposed by this enquiry. So that we can get to the bottom of


whatever vested interest existed during the scandal. I thank my noble


friend for the intervention and the evidence is happy well documented


about which he speaks, especially by the former member for lead, and the


honourable member for whole north. Those brave enough to come forward


who have lived with these conditions at the sharp end of this heinous


negligence reported in the Daily Mail last week drove just important


how it is to set up the Hillsborough style enquiry. Would she agree that


the self-sufficiency and blood products is an unauthorised report


perpetuating inaccuracies and outright lies as per my constituent


letter to me? This is all what will have to be looked into, all of this


evidence needs to be looked into, and recent days my office has


received contact from individuals from my constituency affected by


this scandal with intricate details that must be addressed, and it is


important that those questions no matter how small they may seem are


entered, as these are issues which have inextricably affected that


person's whole life. It is issues like these that must be addressed,


most importantly so that those who have lived with the ramifications of


this serious negligence can finally have the justice they deserve. Now,


these are two of the reasons do get to the bottom of the allegations of


evidence presented. And having a full and frank enquiry, that brings


justice to the many people affected. This is why we must have this


enquiry. It is a joint letter by the opposition leader said over the


weekend, if the panel was to be convened then it must disclose any


and all documents related to the scandal which involve the victims at


every stage. It must compel all parties involved to participate with


the disclose a process, and not hinder justice and a further. Along


with investigating the events leading up to the individual's


infections, but also the aftermath, including allegations of medical


details being tampered with, whether people were unknowingly tested for


viruses without their knowledge, and if enough was done to identify those


at risk of the infections. There must also be an investigation part


of this enquiry into the role of profit-making American firms


supplying the blood factor concentrates that people -- to


people with haemophilia. Whilst none of this will bring back loved ones


who have died who have been part of this Campbell Gunn or change the


circumstances of those living with the conditions inflicted upon them


today, there is still something we can do, and that is to hold the


enquiry, it is the very least we can do. The thousands of people affected


must be supported, and we must stand beside them in seeking justice as is


our duty as an elected representatives of the public. I


want to conclude with this final remarks, Mr Speaker. None here have


a magic wand. I know our constituents all think we do, and we


can't turn back time and stop this scandal from happening. Sadly, this


power does not exist. But the power that does exist and at the behest of


the minister before us to day is that a facilitating the justice for


those who live with the aftermath of this scandal. Here today we can send


a message, allowed an strong message to those who campaign on this issue


day and day out. That Parliament has listened to and is on their side. We


in this house have heard them, we in this house are there with them and


we in this house will do all we can for them in their quest for justice.


We cannot let them down. We can help facilitate the truth once and for


all. Parliament is this thing to these individuals who have spent


decades fighting, is against the system, to get the truth they seek


and the government must listen to Parliament. Parliament is saying


fixed this, provide those thousands of people who never asked for this


to happen to them with the justice they use so rightly deserve. We


cannot fail them any longer. Thank you, Mr Speaker. And thank you


for making it clear in the sequence in which we are speaking today in


this very important debate. I would like to start my contribution by


offering my personal apology to all those affected by the tragedy of


infected NHS blood products. This has had the terrible impact on so


many individuals and families. It has, quite rightly, been the subject


of many debates in this chamber. It has been prompted by the proper


concern of members on both sides of the house over many years. There


have been two previous enquiries on this issue. The Archer report in


2009 and the Scottish Government funded Penrose enquiry in 2015.


There have been several calls for a fool, independent enquiry over the


years. In addition to these reports, we have attempted to bring greater


transparency to the events of the team. Many documents regarding to


like 60 from 19721995 have been published and are available on the


National Archives website. These documents provide a comprehensive


look at the events in the decisions made. Many of these were covered in


the Penrose enquiry. But I recognise that for those affected, these steps


do not go far enough to provide the answers they want to get to the


truth of what happened. In light of these concerns, and of reports of


new evidence and allegations of potential criminality, we think it


is important to understand the extent of what is cleaned and the


wider issues which arise. I will make some prick progress to get it


to the nub of this statement. -- quick. The government will look to


hold an enquiry into how many people will affected by infected blood


products. I am very grateful for the news he has just confirmed. Will he


ensure the process is followed and that it facilitates the ability to


bring charges so that the full effect of the law could be brought


against anyone who could face charges? I will carry on and detail


the full extent of how the enquiry would proceed. There have been calls


for an enquiry similar to the enquiry looked at into the


Hillsborough disaster. This will work with families and close


personal engagement with an independent advisers. There have


also been told that only statutory enquiry led by a senior judge by the


enquiries act 2005 will provide the answers that people want. It would


have the power to compel witnesses and written evidence, one of the


apparent shortcomings of the previous reports. The government can


see minutes in both approaches to ensure that whatever is established


in the interests of those affected, we will engage with the affected


groups aren't affected parties, including the all Parliamentary


group before taking a final decision on the tape of enquiry. I am


grateful to my honourable friend. Could he tell the house whether the


terms of the enquiry will allow recommendations to be made with


regard to compensation for those affected? I will make a little bit


of progress and endeavour to cancel that during my remarks. They right


honourable friend the Secretary of State and ministers at the


Department of Health will be meeting with those affected than the


families to discuss the issues and for us to understand their


preferences directly with regard to the stale, scope and duration of the


enquiry. I just wonder what can he give some time estimate for all


these meetings taking place? My experience of the Department of


Health on this issue is that deadlines are not met and things


have to be dragged onto the floor of the house to get ministers to


respond. As they face a timetable as to when you decision will be made? I


am sure the honourable ladle who has taken such an active lead and


encouraging enquiries will want to make sure we get this rate. We will


take the time necessary to consult with colleagues with interested


groups and our intent would be to be able to come back to this house as


soon as practicable and I would anticipate in the autumn. He has


mentioned the Department of Health. In Wales, under the devolved


administration, for consultation as he undertaken with regard to


contacting the Welsh Assembly? There is a legitimate interest from all


constituent nations within the United Kingdom and as many of these


incidents happened prior to devil tuition, we do intend to consult


with devolved governments. Would he agree the enquiry would have to


yield answers to the victims of the scandal and their families? There


will be a great interest to the conclusion of this to ensure that


the circumstances which led to the scandal can never be repeated again.


I completely agree. I will make a little more progress. Regardless of


the stale of the enquiry, it is our intention that it will cover the


whole of the United Kingdom and we will therefore be in direct contact


with counterparts in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland to seek the


views before determining those aspects of the enquiry. I apologise


to the hose. The Minister has indicated that the consultation will


be around the United Kingdom. There is no corresponding Minister of


health in Northern Ireland. That is disgraceful. How will the Minister


is with Northern Ireland in the absence of the Assembly? We will be


looking to the Northern Ireland Office to facilitate discussions


with officials and representatives in Northern Ireland. On this point


may Honourable friend made, is this a United Kingdom weight enquiry and


that the consultation will be across the United Kingdom but that the


enquiry itself will be niche in May, so the constituents like my own will


have the quality to this? The scope of the enquiry will be determined as


part of the discussions which as I indicated we will have in the coming


weeks and months. Our intent is that the devolved administrations and


residence within that will have free access to participate in the enquiry


regardless of where they live or really one affected. The government


intends to update the house once these discussions are completed. I


would encourage colleagues with the specific interest to engage


themselves in discussions through the all-party group that may exist.


In the meantime, if anyone in this house side has any evidence of


criminality they should take their evidence to the police as soon as


possible. If anyone has any other evidence that they want the enquiry


to consider, I would ask that the submitted to the enquiry once it has


been established. The government will be writing to all those in


receipt of payments from the current schemes to make sure that the all


know about today's announcement. And to inform them of the next step. I


thank the Minister for giving way. I welcome the comments so far. Woody


confirmed that it would not do anything to endanger clinical trials


and see that Inman with information must make sure it is made available


to the police? I honourable friend will reckon it from the recent


Hillsborough enquiry that it gave RISE to a certain information made


available to the police which led to certain charges being made. We would


envisage that any enquiry is established with have the ability to


do the same thing if that is appropriate. I must make a little


bit of progress. Mr Speaker has encouraged me to make ten minutes so


that others can make their contribution and I have already


exceeded that. I would inform the house that implementing the forms to


be affected blood support schemes remains a priority for the


government. That is why within the spending review period until 2021,


up to ?125 million of additional funding has been added to the budget


for the support scheme. It is more than doubles the annual spend. The


second consultation on the scheme for which closed on April 17


received 250 responses. The consultation contained the portals


for a special category make mechanism which would allow those


with stage one hepatitis C for the larger annual payment and that with


greatly increased the number of people eligible for that payment.


The results and consultation of that will be published in June course. --


due. . I want to press this point about the liability of financial


liabilities arising from the enquiry and the impact of revolution. Can he


sure is that people, regardless of whether you'll have no will will


receive equal treatment, with regard to financial liability? I have just


talked about the financial scheme with in England. It will be work for


the enquiry to decide whether they want to make recommendations with


regard to financial recommendations. I could not give a confirmation for


that at the moment. That would have to come from the enquiry. I


constituent was infected with hepatitis C in 1970. This was


discovered only about three years ago. Will any consideration be given


to those many years of suffering when the compensation scheme is put


into effect? I can offer my sympathy to your constituent for the


challenges she finds herself with. We have dizzy at this point that it


will be going to individuals to make their applications. We will be


responding to the consultation and I would strongly encourage my


honourable friend to make representations on her behalf to the


enquiry when it is established. I thank the Minister for giving way.


He has been extremely generous. Could I just press him on the


listing of health records. Any families also strength to salvage


what happened last the scope of discussion is the enquiry. Can we


write to the Minister on the representation records? I think it


would be appropriate to write when that city was established. The point


was made earlier about medical records, if there is evidence of


tampering that I should be made available to the enquiry. I'm afraid


we're going to have to bring my remarks to a conclusion. I thank


those on both sides of the house who worked tirelessly on this issue over


the years and particularly my voice to others who have already spoken to


commend the honourable member for Kingston upon Hull North, who I know


has spread not only powerfully today but on many occasions in the house


and for many years on the subject. I would also like to commend her


colleague, my colleague, the Right Honourable member for Worthing West


who chairs the all parliamentary group, and thanks as she did members


past and present of that group, notably the former chair Jason


McCartney, late of this parish. And finally I would like to add thanks


to ministerial colleagues handling this delicate issue for previous


administrations. In particular my friend the member for North East


Bedfordshire who has worked so hard not just for his constituents but


for all of those affected by this tragedy. If I could appeal to the


SNP spokesperson not to leak speeds ten minutes, ever be less, the


Minister took longer a little, but took interventions. There is no


requirement or need for the honourable lady to take quite as


long. Thank you very much Mr Speaker. As the honourable laid for


Kingston-upon-Hull said, 2400 people have died from this the worst


disaster in HS history. This was due to of blood that led to the NHS


sourcing products from America. The problem is that people with


haemophilia, in men, or in women, who get factor nine, these


concentrates are made from thousands of samples, and the moment you have


one or two people within that collection you are starting to have


the virus. And that is why they are affected at a much higher rate than


those people who had a single blood transfusion, and the problem is we


are talking about decades that this goes back, and has not been properly


dealt with. As has been mentioned in the chamber already. In the two


years I have been in the house we have had multiple debates,


statements and urgent questions on this issue and I to pay tribute to


the honourable lady or keeping at it with the all-party group. But most


of that has been a round support, and it was only last July that


finally the government came forward a strength and support 's package


for this group of people. It is important to realise this is not


compensation but X Gracia support payments, that do not recognise the


loss and suffering of the victims of rated blood. -- contaminated blood.


That was only seemed to come about as the Scottish Government came up


with a larger lump sum and ongoing pavement, a 75% penchant to the


spells of the brew two at the moment still don't get sufficient support


here in England and that is not right, the idea that someone who


loses a partner to this scandal is not compensated. Now, what we heard


in March of this year, a mere seven months after that was that the


government was consulting on perhaps restricting who would qualify for


the highest payments and that these payments would not be subject to


index linking. The youngest victim remaining is approximately 35. They


have a whole lifetime to go through. Maybe a shortened lifetime in


comparison to us but we cannot have that people are suddenly left and


bottom feed -- in poverty further down the line. I welcome the


suggestion CPI thinking goes ahead. I am grateful for her remarks,


support extends to Wales as well, not just to England because it is a


?10,000 payment as far understand for people in Wales as well. Is it


her understanding that in terms of the reference of the enquiry will


include the actions of governments in Wales and Scotland and possibly


Northern Ireland as well as in England? I had intended to ask but


couldn't get it in. Obviously the Scottish Government had an enquiry,


the Penrose enquiry, but as the Minister has committed to this I


would assume any enquiry going forward will look at the whole of


the UK. They must be remembered the decisions that led to this were


taken here in Whitehall, before devolution, and governments like the


Scottish Government have tried to step up and support their


constituents who have been affected by this but actually getting the


answers to what caused this is in this place. I thank her for giving


way and would she agree that the sense of a lack of trust has been


enhanced by documents such as the self-sufficiency and blood product


which was a DoH document but which many people felt was inaccurate and


indeed outright lies. I think obviously all of these things will


have to be looked at by the enquiry itself and I think documents,


patients records, things that were altered things that were hidden, and


things that were hiding behind public interest barriers now all


need to as in the case of Hillsborough be opened up so that


light is shone onto that. Now, the Penrose enquiry was Scotland only.


The Department of Health was devoted to take bright at the time --


invited to take part and make it a UK enquiry, but declined. Penrose


did not have the ability to summon documents or people and that was one


of its key weaknesses. I remember at the time, in the 80s, when this


scandal started to unfold, and as a surgeon who of course uses blood on


their patients, I remember how shocked I was at the mere thought


that an action I might have taken could have harmed a patient that I


was looking after. And I certainly set about in my elective surgery to


chase every single blood cell to avoid spilling blood, using


electrocautery, all sorts of modern techniques, and if you will out my


staff from I feared the they will moan about how long I spent in


theatre doing that. In doing that was an has been hit by a bus you


have no choice. A criticism responding to Penrose in 2015 was


surprised clinicians so showed much trust. -- showed so much trust in


the quality of blood, but when a coalition League clinician is using


so many increments we must be able to trust them, we know we have no


personal mechanism to check everything. That is why there is


licensing and inspections and government's role, and why there is


a suspicion of harm, then action must be taken. That failure to act,


that hiding, that is not dealing with out at the time happened


pre-devolution, and this enquiry must take account of that. In


particular we know that a conference in 1980 in Glasgow, clinicians were


already raising concerns about seeing change in liver function in


patients who were receiving but concentrate for haemophilia. It has


appeared in a meeting we have already met recently in the 1981 UK


blood transfusion research service which recognises about 50 patients a


year developed some form of liver damage and yet the decision of that


meeting appears to have been to let that continue and simply study it


and use these patients as a way of developing a test for what was known


at a time as non-a non-be hepatitis. It is important in this enquiry that


we ensure we are looking at all of this. The official from the


Department of Health and Social Security at that meeting would not


attend Penrose. These people need to be called by the enquiry. So going


forward, of course, it must include the families, the victims, so that


we are sensitive to what it is they want to know. It isn't just


government but producers, and not just producers in America, I think


we tried to make ourselves feel better because we blame it on the


States, where people bought blood. Where people with addictions and


poverty and prisoners were used will stop in the mid-70s, prisoners in


this country are also used. And it is claimed that that was encouraged


by the Home Office as part of prisoner rehabilitation. We need


those documents, we need to understand if that decision was


made. UK producers have often been found wanting in the quality of


product that they come up with. We mustn't pat ourselves on the back


and imagine that the UK product was somehow safe and this was all due to


the UA -- US. We need to follow the salmon get answers. I think people


have been failed so many times over and over, it is crucial that this


does not happen again. We need to keep the government on their toes,


have reports back from the enquiry at is it set up so we know what it


is investigating cos if we fail to get answers this time and in


particular failed to actually deliver compensation for lives lost,


for suffering, failure to get a mortgage or insurance, the costs of


care, then we will have failed them all over again. Thank you Mr


Speaker, thank you. Firstly, I would like to congratulate the honourable


member for Kingston upon will for securing this important debate


today. I was also in this chamber when the former member for Lee


raised a very concerning issue, that needed to be looked at in this new


enquiry. And that struck a chord with me will stop I'm delighted to


be back in the chamber to see this happening. Like many members of the


house on both sides I have been contacted by constituents who have


told me about their experiences and how contaminated blood has affected


them, their family life and their friends. Every so often, in the


experience that you have as a constituency MP, you meet the


saddest constituents, that tell you the most heartbreaking stories, and


you sit there week in week out and these resonate with you, but it is


not a story for these victims. It is daily life, it is wrecked lives,


where nothing has been done, pure injustice. So, it is clear that


destructive effects of contaminated blood products used decades ago have


continued to daily effect people's lives, in a devastating way, that


frankly, when I have heard the stories, of how it has affected


people, it has indeed lived with me, and I can understand the campaigning


nature that has been brought to this house on all sides, and I am


delighted to bring my experience on behalf of my constituents. Today, we


finally recognise that this government has done this and it is


ready to tackle this injustice and I am delighted to see that that is


being done in the name of the victims and the families who have


done nothing to bring this upon themselves. After I became the MP in


May 2015I met one of my constituents in Bishop Stoke, Gary Webster, who


has been left coping with HIV, Hepatitis C, and possibly variant


CJD following NHS blood products used in the 1980s as routine


procedures to treat his haemophilia. I'm very grateful to the Honourable


Lady giving way. One of the important things in this world that


it beat both fire back, the decision made to treat for hepatitis B is in


the 1960s and yet we did not can treat -- treat concentrate, so we


need to make sure all decisions are included. I thank her for that input


and I feel it is very important to bring everything to play in this


investigation, it is absolutely right. Last year, Gary attended a


debate we had here once again to discuss this really heartbreaking


issue. Now, Gary went on to attend a specialist school in Orton, where he


was one of many haemophiliacs who were at school there. He told me


that he kept in contact with around 100 students who had all been


affected by contaminated blood. Now, he along with those other students


continued to stay friends with those students, but only now I believe


around 20 are still alive. These were all fellow students who


contracted illnesses through blood products that they have received


because of haemophilia. And I know that tragically lose the story is


similar to the thousands across this country. I know from other


constituents some who wished not to be named who have had great


financial burdens placed upon them and their families as a result of


the diseases that they have contracted which have affected their


lives to this contaminated bud. -- blood.


It is only right that we support those whose lives have been altered


by this contaminated blood and I hope that this enquiry will be


effective and that the annual payments for hepatitis are being


increased, going up to 18,020 19. And the payments for those with


hepatitis stage to have seen the payments going up ?56,000 500. And


these payments will be linked. This will help all constituents we know


who have been affected. I have also been speaking to Gary and others


about the hardship of these conditions have brought and the


challenges they have brought to the slaves. Being able to bring up and


support their families in the week they would've liked to and chosen to


have they not been affected. There has been almost ?400 million paid


out to those affected by five different organisations. I am


delighted that the additional ?125 million offered by the government


which will double the department 's annual spend to the scheme over the


past -- next five years. This has to go to the people who need it. I know


that people have made daily life decisions which have been really


difficult as they did not have the financial restraints they have had.


She refers to the scheme and the stump constituents and with these


existing schemes. A constituent of mine had the transfusion of


contaminated blood. Which he encourage the government to locate


cases again under the current scheme so that there are not people missing


out I know SNMP there is nothing more frustrating when people have


just fallen outside the bracket. I hope this enquiry will give us a


chance to look at that. The government has done significantly


more than other governments to protect those affected. I know that


is a commitment to ensure that we are currently working to bring the


five schemes together. It is a rather complex nature. And these


people have complicated and difficult waves and I think it is


only right that we make it easier for them to get the support that


they need. I am so pleased that the Prime Minister has announced that


this morning that there will be a wide-ranging enquiry into this


tragedy and I will be pleased it is the type of enquiry drawn together


by victims to suit the victims. They will finally have a voice, the


strongest voice possible, to get the cancers which the absolutely


deserve. It is only right that the consultation will be healed by those


affected by this injustice solea families have a voice. It is my hope


this enquiry will provide the answers to those looking for them.


In particular, the concern regarding the criminality. This is extremely


concerning. This is a vehicle to get their voices here. If there is


anything which should be going to the court, we should be able to do


something about it. We have the opportunity in this enquiry that no


voice will be lost. The victims and the families will get the fullest


compensation and the answer is that they deserve. Can I just advise the


house, colleagues should be thinking in terms of speeches of five


minutes. If the cheer is able to accommodate everybody. Longer


speeches will have to wait for the long winter evenings. I hope we can


give a warm and enthusiastic welcome to were made in Speaker. Thank you


very much. I am grateful to my honourable friend for securing this


debate. As the new MP for Oxford, it is assumed that the Oxford


haemophiliac centre of which supplied blood which so many people


contracting contaminated blood. It advocated the use of humans to test


infectivity. However, I have very proud of the people of Oxford who


have campaigned for many years for justice on this issue. As we have


here, they are fighting for truth and accountability. That is all


events such as this cannot happen again. As I start my maiden speech,


a dedicated to them. The people who fought against the odds. I am


enormously grateful for the people of Oxford for elected me as their


representative. I take over from Andrew Smith. Many people both sides


of the house will know him very well. Andrew came initially to


Oxford unsure whether it would become his home soon recognised its


potential as a great city. As a student, he met his wonderful wife


Valerie, who was also known by many people in the house. She was a


powerful advocate for the community which she served as a county


councillor for many years. Her wisdom came this is still very sadly


missed by many others. Andrew was a diligent constituent MP and care


passionately about this city and its people, including those living in


his home community. He also had a very distinguished career in


Parliament, including serving in the Cabinet as Chief Secretary to the


Treasury and then Secretary of State for Work and Pensions from 2002 -


2004. His work affected listed as a million pensioners out of poverty,


and gotten some of the biggest increases in health and overseas aid


spending our country has ever seen. He also presided over


ground-breaking legislation setting up the pension protection fund,


setting up the pension credit and many other initiatives. He was a


very humble man. He will stress that his achievements came about through


working with others either in this house or in Oxford. When he was in


the Cabinet, his own television was so dilapidated it had to be hit many


times before it would actually work! He was very humble but fairly


straightforward. I am sure that members on all sides of the house


will wish me very long and happy retirement. Oxford East could be


imagined as a constituency populated only by mysterious dawns. But it


also has an industrial heritage and a great industrial potential. What


was the steel plant, know a BMW plant produces nearly 250,000 cars


every year. The engineers and technicians are amongst the best in


the world. Oxford was a city which voted to remain in the European


Union. But no one voted to deny the city its potential. It is essential


that European markets remain open to the likes of BMW and that Oxford


maintains its many links with global science. It is a city which has


always worked out words is the first-ever Oxfam shop remains


others. People from all over the world coal Oxford East its home. We


have many different religion religions within the constituency


and a fuel the potential of all our people has been held back. Yes the


funeral of Bill Buckingham, a Labour councillor for 70 years. He died at


the age of 96. He has many that after he kickbacks from serving in


the Second World War, he wanted social equality. As Bevan put it at


the time, we need high-quality housing so that the grocer, picture


and farm labourer could be neighbours without social


distinction. What of that survives no? House prices rent in Oxford are


the least affordable and Britain out of London. People renting have less


rates and if they were buying a refrigerator. People are being


forced out of this city of having the claim of not coming more than


the minimum wage. People are doing their best to bring up their


children in low-income in Oxford are the heroes and heroines of today.


They are often running between more than one job to make ends meet. They


did like to hear politicians see that there's no such thing as in


work poverty. Oxford needs more genuinely affordable houses, the


affordability is not ?400,000. That is currently the case. It has to


recognise houses as homes and places to live, not merely investment


opportunities. We need to unlock the potential of our communities and not


allow them to be asset stripped. I love of my family in the


constituency which is a very wonderful and friendly place, but


nearly half the children on the estate are being brought up in


poverty. Many people kept the local community centre going through good


times and bad, even after it was burnt down. I loved meeting other


appearance at the children's centre of the my first child four years


ago. By the time my daughter arrived 18 months ago, there were no more


baby sessions available. It was only available for supervised contact


session for two hours a week. Community spaces like children


centre may not grab headlines, but for many people, the mean the


difference between loneliness and friendship, ill health and


well-being and seclusion and neighbourliness. Oxford East and its


incredible people have incredible potential but they feel they are too


often held back. I will devote the time they have given me in this


place to ensure a better, brighter and theatre future for them and


people like them across the country. Thank you. Can I start by paying


tribute to the member for Kingston-Upon-Hull for her


persistence on this issue. To also welcome the ministers statement that


a public enquiry will happen on these important issues and the Prime


Minister has clearly listen to the views across the house on this


matter. Richard and his wife came to tell me about his story. He was the


haemophiliac and went to a physically disabled school in


Hampshire when he was 11. For six years, he was given hundreds of


thousands of units of factor eight. Prior to that, he had been given an


alternative which was perfectly fine in moderating the condition. This


meant for Richard change throughout his lifetime. There were 75 people


in the school alongside him. Sadly, 64 of them are no longer with us and


many of those young people died in the teenage years.


It was an added tragedy when Richard and his wife told me that having got


the very good news that they got married and decided to have


children, they were, due to the risk of the hepatitis affecting his


child, they had a late term termination of that baby. These


diseases affect many things throughout our lifetime. Of course I


neglected to congratulate the Honourable member for Oxford East


for her very fine maiden speech, and she certainly made a better job than


I did two years ago. Highly relevant to the topic. Am sure she will make


many fine contributions in the many years ahead. We have congratulated


her on her maiden speech was not talking about the challenges


affected by contaminated blood sufferers having children. Does the


enquiry needs to consider the situation is of those people who


like my constituent had one round of IVF treatment from the NHS, but not


entitled to the second round, he had to pay for it himself, that kind of


conversation should be considered in the round when looking at the effect


of this people in -- on people. There are so many tragic obligations


with these diseases and the treatment they receive are clearly


of my photos of the afternoon and had they had knowledge of these


treatment with have any adverse impact. My constituents, Helen, who


moved into thousand six, she was infected in the 80s, when moving to


my area within the knee -- with a new GP she was as having these


obligations. There are so many issues, diabetes, rheumatoid


arthritis, it has had a huge impact on her life. She calls herself a


ticking time bomb, having to look at setting up a new life with her


husband and two children. I spoke to both my constituents today who


talked quite incredibly how they seemed to carry these burdens so


lightly, and certainly in terms of when they speak to me about these


issues they have moved on from the principal issues which were


compensation and now what they want is a public enquiry to get to the


bottom of this issue. It is about answers, and I'm not saying that


compensation is and involvement, it is hugely important for them and


their spouses and their children but today what they wanted answers with


what was known. I happy for him to give way and he is making a very


good case. Would it not be the case that now is the chancel transparency


to be at the core of the enquiry, welcoming as we do the funding and


enquiry, but isn't transparently what it is all about? I welcome as


the minister may confirm if he gets the chance at the end of the debate,


the government has I believe released all documents in its


possession. We should have absolute and Rosie, the ability to interview


key witnesses involved in the tragedy. -- absolute transparency.


What is known, won the biggest issues we have had. Helen me about


despite the fact she didn't find out until 20 minutes afterwards -- 20


years afterwards she was infected, the hospital had known for years.


Richard sent me a passage that he had found, done some research and


apparently in 1975 the Professor of California blood medicine rose to


someone in 1975 to warn him of dangerous plasma sourced from high


risk paid skid Row donors and business saying that it was


extraordinary hazardous. These are the questions that my constituents


want answers, what was known about the risks? Should people have been


informed about the change in approach? Why when things were found


out about these issues, why those products were withdrawn. Was it a


case of negligence? Was it a paternalistic approach by


clinicians? Was it incompetence? These are the questions that we need


answers to. I welcome the fact that the government has done more than


any other in terms of compensation and it has now done more than any in


transparency, and bringing forward a public enquiry which I very much


welcome. I hope I can play my part in making sure my constituents get


these answers, and all other people affected by this terrible tragedy,


for my constituents, their loved ones, that we get clear answers and


resolution to many of these questions. Can I just remind


Honourable members that the speaker did ask if speeches could be kept to


around five minutes. Alison Thewliss. Thank you very much. I


would first like to pay tribute for the Honourable member of Kingston


upon Hull North, and to Andy Burnham and others who have pursued this


relentlessly. It is testament to their commitment that they have kept


going with this when all hope seems to be lost. I would also like to pay


tribute to the member for Oxford East on her excellent maiden speech.


There's lots of common ground there, and hope to work together over the


coming months and years. Adams that it is bigger than before Parliament


broke up in April Andy Burnham laid a challenge to all parties in now


has a commitment in their manifestos to the victim of contaminated blood


and I'm pleased my party saw fit to do so, saying within the manifesto


that the victims of the man -- contaminated blood products deserve


answers. In 2008, the Penrose enquiry was established by the


Scottish Government the mail reporting in 2015. We have


substantially improved the compensation scheme, best in the UK.


SNP MPs will support a full public enquiry on the issue, in the rest of


the UK, and they are proud to stand by those words here today. I am


incredibly pleased and surprised here that the government has changed


their stance on this issue. When we met last April, it didn't feel as


though anything much more was going to happen. On this. And the change


in attitude from the government is very, very welcome. I wouldn't want


to appear churlish in this at all but it certainly is a change to


Parliament, and the change numbers in this Parliament do make something


that seemed impossible before now open for debate, and I am very glad


to see that. There has been recognition of the limitations


Penrose, and what this, to -- Scottish Government could do. We had


a limited remit to consider negligence, so it is good to have


now this opportunity to really look at all these issues and I'm glad the


government has committed to work with the devolved administrations


because we now have the experience of having done so, having gone


through the enquiry limited as it was. I hope to hear more about the


ways in which Scottish Government can help, with victims in Scotland


brought in as part of the purposeless. As the debate in April


2016, Mike constituents, Maria, I haven't been able to reach her on


her views, it is a bit late in the day but I would like to put on the


record a gamer reared receive the buttons whose enduring a


miscarriage. -- Maria received a transfusion during a miscarriage.


She would want this house to know that in the 36 years that she has


lived with hepatitis C she doesn't want charity, she doesn't want


vouchers, just one hand-outs, she wants to be treated fairly and with


dignity and that is the very least she was deserve in this process. I


thank her for giving way. The Oxford haemophilia centre serves my


constituents and so I thank the Honourable member for bringing this


to our attention. Do you agree that is not just transparency but also


justice that those victims want, and which she also agree with me that if


we do find evidence of a cover-up that those individuals should also


face the full force of the law? I absolutely agree and I am glad she


raised the point because it is what I was moving on to next. Without


that justice, these victims will never feel as though they have been


well served, they will feel as though they have lost out as part of


the process and there has been no justice. This is why we need to look


at the issues in medical records being changed because there must


have been some clear instruction from somebody to do so. These kinds


of cover-ups do not happen on their own and we must find those lines of


results ability that said two people delete those records, don't tell


people about this, test people that don't let them know. All of these


questions must be answered, what was known, when and by whom. In the


search for answers as well, we must recognise that some of these answers


can't be given because they are held in the United States, and we must


find ways if ministers can reach out and speak to their counterparts, in


other parts of the world, to try and find answers to these questions, if


there are means of doing so, in cooperation with the American


government these must be found as well. We must have confidence in the


processes that we have today as well and I understand the US that it


screening but donations in 1983. We didn't start to do that until 1991,


and I'm conscious that if I go to give but the integrity of the system


is based on my honesty at every stage. We must make sure that


systems that they are as robust as an integral and as good as possible.


The enquiry today, reaching out to those receiving funds through


covering schemes, I would hope that is done with cooperation with the


devolved administrations where they are responsible for that and I would


encourage the government to carry out advertising to seek ways in as


wide a means as possible of contacting people to let them know


because it is maybe a tummy has died and family members aren't aware of


this and we must try to reach out as widely as we can cover to social


media law advertising whatever means, to get as many people


involved in this enquiry as well. We need to make people's supported to


give evidence because this could be a very traumatic and spares for


some, may need counselling or emotional support to attend and


produce documents and make sure the documents reach the enquiry, and on


those documents, in their response this, documents must be treated with


the utmost care and protection. People are quite rightly hugely


sceptical about their documents. We must make sure that the integrity of


these documents is right, that people can trust that if they set


met evidence that evidence will not be lost. I go for government


evidence as well as private Evans belonged to the members of the


public as well. We have waited too long, far too long on this for


justice. We encourage the government to carry out this enquiry, that this


justice is maintained, that this is not dragged out with many many years


without answer, people have waited far too long for justice and they


should not have to wait much longer. Anna Soubry. It is a pleasure to see


you in your place, at Madam Deputy Speaker, it is the first time I have


seen you in that chair. I would like to make a few comments because my


involvement in this was as I think perhaps the 2nd Minister for the


Public health at the Honourable member for Kingston Apollo whole had


the great misfortune I would have said to come and see them as she


did, with all the vim and vigour that she has brought to this


campaign, over seven long delays. -- seven long years. It is to long that


justice is finally to come about. When the Honourable Lady came to


talk to me was the biggest concern them burning injustice, and frankly


it just come from my point of view, it just felt that there was


something not right. Couldn't put my finger on it, there was something


inherently that led you something along the view that something was


not right. That was supported by the attitude of some I came across who


wanted not just to sweep it under the carpet but just not want to do


with it any longer, try somehow to move onto other areas about how we


could help is unfortunate victims. At that time that second part of the


great injustice, I want to talk much more about, the money. There are two


points to all of this. The great injustice of the fact that this


terrible scandal happened, and it happens decades ago, when


governments of both political colours, and in fact the third


colour of the coalition failed to grasp it in the way that I, and I


have to say, others in government wanted to, and I am going to pay


fulsome tribute to my right honourable friend the member for


North East Bedfordshire who if I put it this way absolutely got it, right


honourable friend the member for Guildford who after the Honourable


Lady for Kingston-upon-Hull ask the question last week of the Prime


Minister, we were sitting here, next to each other, I won't repeat


everything that we said, but we basically said to each other for


goodness sakes, words to that effect, let's just get on and get


this done properly. Not just a public enquiry, but most importantly


I would say the money. As I say I will come onto that and I also want


to pay tribute to Jane Anderson who is also the previous Minister for


Public health and I know that Jane got this as well.


It took the extra material forthcoming in recent times to be


able to inform the government is to further evidence that there should


be an enquiry. Members on both sides of the house care about this and see


that something needs to be done. It needs political will, so I pay


handsome tribute to the Prime Minister for not messing about on


this. I know my honourable friend the Secretary of State will have


made the case to the Prime Minister. She has not missed the boat. She has


taken the rate decision and we will know have a public enquiry. But


there is this second grave injustice. I was reminded of this by


correspondence I had from parents and my constituency. The sun went


blind from haemophilia. He was diagnosed with HIV and hepatitis C.


He has been the victim of terrible prejudice. Horrible story is a


bullying. No he is married and the father of a child,


the complaint is that they can only see the good in people and their


only concern is to see the suffering of their child. They just want a


proper financial package. We have heard from many members talking


about this payment scheme. Could a bigger government, that these


schemes have yet to be sorted out. Scrap. Get rid of them. Give these


people the money they deserve and need. Do not give it as an extra


payment. Do not have them scrabbling about on countless bits of paper


going cap in hand for money. As if they have not suffered enough? So


they do not have to go, as the seer, bidding for bits of money. These


things are possible. It can be done. Get the money that is required and


then you have to do is not look at liability, but a quantum. How much


does each individual with the be entitled to if liability was not an


issue and it was just about how much. And then do the right thing. I


do believe government can find the money. I know many members,


including the former Prime Minister David Cameron, said it was not the


right time to do that, but he got the ball moving and it is no time to


sort out the second grave injustice, the money. Get the money together


and give these people everything that they absolutely deserve and the


need and then finally, the great injustice, the national scandal will


be sorted out and solved. Thank you. I first became engaged in this issue


after 2010 when constituents contacted me. One constituent, in a


remarkable man called Andrew, I feel slightly ashamed I did not totally


understand the utter tragedy of contaminated blood. It has not been


with us for just seven years, it has been with as for 30 years. We feel


to with it. In the same way as we have feel to deal with the likes of


Hillsborough quickly. I would like to talk about the remit of the


enquiry. This is not just about the feeling which led to the infections


in the first place. Until recently, the government would not even


mention the word negligence. Thanks to the work and reborn gnome has


done, we are talking about criminality. -- Andy Burnham. We can


make comparisons with Hillsborough over many years. The victims were


ignored and badly treated. We have to look at the Beacon and financing.


The schemes, the administration of it, has been appalling. What we


needed is a bespoke solution. We are talking about a finite and


decreasing number of people. Everybody is in a different


position. There are circumstances, health and personal needs. Finally,


in relation to the way they have had to fight, they do again pay tribute


to my honourable friend from Kingston-Upon-Hull, I just wish the


all-party group had a loving people like her. The victims have had to


fight and fight to get compensation. I have taken part in the seven


defeats during recent years and I am pleased to see the Minister is open


to an enquiry of which has complete power. We need to be able to call


witnesses and interrogate experience. We do need forensic


skills, but the enquiry has to have credibility and trust. We do not


want to make the same stakes we have made with the sexual abuse


enquiries. I was listening to the radio the other day to Doctor


Richard Stone because he was someone trusted by the local community and I


think what we need here is a combination of those skills and


people who know the issues and the skills involved and trusted. We need


full access to documentation. We have to give proper representation


to the victims and their families and I hope the government is now


discovering that it's neglect of social housing over many years I


also force economies. In the last debate, Andy Burnham held it in this


house a few months ago, we were told a public enquiry was not


appropriate. Nonconsensual testing, victims not been informed of results


of testing, nonconsensual research involving previously untested


patients. When people we are informed, they were informed in


hospital corridors. Lies were told. All within the relatively recent


past. The allegations in relation to documents been destroyed and people


not being available to answer questions. All this has to be


addressed through this enquiry. Can I end by referring to the remarks by


Andrew March. With his consent, there are powerful details which she


courageously put out into the public domain because he wanted to get to


the bottom of this. He wrote in a letter to me, essentially, I am one


of the patients who was not informed that I had hepatitis in the 1980s. I


have since been informed I have hepatitis C. Despite testing me


years earlier without myself or my parents knowing, I only found out by


accident in 1992 when I transferred my key from Warwick to London. On


further discussion, Mr March did not seem to be only a few was hepatitis


C and we spent considerable time discussing it and the possibility of


antibody activity. He was one of the 250 HIV haemophiliacs from the 1980s


still lives today. Hundreds have died in recent decades, many of them


my friends. I have to deal with the negative effects of cirrhosis of the


liver. This tragedy, this avoidable tragedy


has completely transformed Andrew 's life. It has put him at the huge


disadvantage. He has never received the proper explanation. Despite


that, he has devoted his life to ensuring justice will be done. Many


of the other victims are already did. We need to read this enquiry


under in which nothing is unexposed we need to it at the speedy claim.


If we do not do so, there will be a reduced number of people who get


justice. Wellcome Madam Deputy Speaker. The very unreal case he


mentioned, few of us could believe it was true if we had not lived with


it ourselves. I would pay tribute to all the campaigners up and down the


country who have got this on the agenda, particularly the member for


Kingston-Upon-Hull. It shows how Parliament can work. People can make


a difference. I hope we will make a difference to those people who have


suffered. I hope today's announcement will really change


people's lives. I would like to thank the Prime Minister and the


government for listening and for responding over this very tragic


affair. I wanted to talk about when I first become the MP for Taunton,


one of the first people who came to see meat came to my surgery the


desperate story of how their whole life had been blighted by being


treated inadvertently with infected blood like so many other examples we


have here today. I was rather naive, having never engaged in anything


like this before and I was very shocked by the whole experience.


Having been given the infected blood, and then plagued the whole of


his life. It was not just that he was ill. His all quality of life was


affected. What resonated most was it affected his haul relationship with


his son. He could not spend enough time with him. One thing we all take


for granted as parents, some sort of inheritance, for a car or a better


financial help, but he was distraught because he thought he had


not done justice to his son because he was so ill he had a problem


holding down continuous employment. He was also carried this with him


for the whole of his life. There were two practical concerns she


raised about the system, where we have tried to help. One was


financial support, which was not sufficient for him to feel secure


and he was constantly struggling. Secondly, the scheme which


administered as payment has been referred to by colleagues today was


not working it effectively and not adequately supporting those designed


to help. I have spoken on this issue number of times before as real as


making recommendations to the Department of Health. The government


have listened and this autumn and new single scheme I absolutely


welcome with the additional funding of ?125 million. That is being made


available and will replace the complicated system of five support


schemes. The devil will be in the detail. But I know the government


will be taking into consideration all the comments from the


consultation and hopefully this will either note some of the problems


that people have been struggling with and will make life better for


the victims. I am pleased as well with the move


is the government has taken over the whole issue of transparency, also


much referred to today in the chamber. I do appreciate that asks a


very serious questions about how this has been handled in the past,


and from now on in I know that ministers are keen to make sure they


will make all information readily available. This has been promised in


the enquiry. I am very grateful for her to give way because I have a


constituent also affected by a contaminated blood since the 1960s


and he will be delighted that this public enquiry is coming forward


because he wants to know why it has happened stop and he wants to know


how he can get exact access to compensation, and that transparency


is absolutely vital in this case. I couldn't agree more. Transparency


really must and should be at Slaley at the heart of this enquiry. I know


that is very important for my constituency but also for my


constituent, but also to all those up the country who have had their


lives changed for ever to no photo of their own. That is what we must


remember, nothing put upon themselves. To wind up, I really do


want to thank the government for listening. And giving this


attention. Having the issue the attention it really deserves. Also,


for more than doubling the Department annual spend in this


area, let's make that funding simple, and let's really make it


gets to the people that really need it. More importantly, I thank the


government for announcing this enquiry and I will be able to go


back to my constituent that I mentioned at the beginning of my


speech and give him a further glimmer of hope. A colour that the


Prime Minister has understood and will listen and has called the


enquiry and beacon that we will get the enquiry right. Public enquiries


are rare events and we need is to ensure this work. New evidence will


emerge, and that will be made available and I urge all relevant


and commercially sensitive documents are made available, and with the


right framework, progress can be done, and Madame Debbie gives the


guy hope that the right thing will be done at last. And I urge the


Minister for this enquiry above all not to drag on. Because for those


who have suffered, too long already time unfortunately is of the


essence. Thank you Madam Deputy Speaker. I wanted to speak today on


behalf of my constituents Lynne Ashcroft and the Smith family who I


will come onto later, who were both victims of the contaminated blood


scandal. I would like to congratulate my honourable friend


from Oxford eased for an excellent maiden speech and you quite rightly


highlighted from the campaign is in her local constituency the


importance of this issue. I look forward to more speeches. I would


also adds to the tribute of the Honourable friend from Kingston and


whole north. We have this debate here today because of her, she has


worked absolutely tirelessly with Honourable members, and indeed it is


a parliamentary life well spent on this issue if not all the other


things I know she has campaigned on. She has done it for the victims, and


welcoming the announcement in the public enquiry today by the


government I would be very much in agreement with mountable friend that


it is important for the families this. This has been a long, long


time coming will stop we have failed this community many times and they


need to be at the heart of it and have confidence in this public


enquiry. Because it is absolutely shameful really that 45 years since


the first people were infected with HIV and hepatitis from NHS supplied


contaminated blood, still we have not got to the truth for the


community affected who have been left so often out but still come


here lured endlessly to lobby and cause manages to -- fight for


justice. I pray tribute to their strength. I am struck, I remember a


family telling me not long ago that in the end they had used up going to


the funerals of the friends that they had made as part of this


campaign because it just got too heartbreaking. There were just too


many funerals to go to. And I think that is really sad. And as the


Honourable member said in his last speech said there is plenty of new


evidence that's backs up what campaigners have known in their


bones. The risks were known at the time and still used. People are used


for testing and guinea pigs and efforts were made to surpass that


truth, and these people went to the NHS for treatment and were infected


by blood provided by the NHS, provided by the state and they have


had to fight for years for this to be acknowledged. Mole -- are no


fault has been admitted by the pharmaceutical companies or the


government. No one could have known at the time about the problem with


this blood, is what has been said. Through the work of the campaign we


now have the new evidence that it was known, which is why the enquiry


must start now so we can get to the truth once and for all. The


Honourable member for whole north said of the 2400 people who have


died, thousand Moors had their lives wrecked. I want to talk about one


Colin Smith from Newport from my constituency. One of the youngest


victims of the contaminated blood scandal. And illustrates just why


this enquiry can't come quickly enough. Colin went into Hospital in


1983, at eight months, for a minor it condition and received factor


eight as a haemophiliac, a freedom of information request reveals that


the factor came from a risen batch in Arkansas. He died in 1990. The


family didn't know he had hepatitis C until three years after his death,


kept secret as so much was hidden, and I hope this is look that in the


enquiry because people like Haydn Lewis, my honourable friend the


member for Cardiff Central mentioned earlier had to battle and battle to


find this information. Colin died aged seven and weighs just about the


same as a baby. I have talked about his story before in this chamber,


but telling these stories is such an important reminder of why here


today. It is also an important reason for having the public enquiry


because we now know as Colin's family knew in their hearts, I


think, for many years, but since is outlined in panorama and privatise


it recently and the light on haemophilia specialists in 1983


reported that following his minor incident, and I quote from the


letter gone without any evidence of intracranial bleed the child, still


given factor eight. The specialists added that all the materials carried


the risk of hepatitis but this is something that haemophiliacs have to


accept. He said he would keep Colin and the close observation as months


go by. Six years later after Colin had died the same specialist wrote


to the pharmaceutical companies saying he could no longer survive


more samples because Colin was no longer at his facility. Colin's


family were never aware of this until much later. This and other


evidence need to be brought before the public enquiries that witnesses


can be compensated and evidence disclosed, because this evidence


evidence points to profit-making American companies go on air


evidence known in the 90s, are three years before and Colin was given


tainted blood. Thousands of people like Colin didn't make this far. He


never had the chance to join the Cubs, play football for school than


I have a girlfriend, go travelling or get married, instead in his short


life revolved around hospital doctors and illnesses and he was


just a little boy but a very special one, who we at tainted blood keep in


mind as we campaign. He is in my mind because everyday in my


constituency at home I drive past the Smith's house often, with my


eight-year-old son sat in the car next to me, and I imagine how I


would feel if this had to me. I would say to the Minister, would I


have been if there was a public apology, the limiting financial


support which people felt they have had to beg for, or would I want to


finally get to the truth? Nothing can bring back Colin or others but


we can at least have a public enquiry to get this right because


and we need to get it right, this time, because Colin's family and


others have been through so much over the years that we cannot let


them down again. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is a pleasure to


follow the member for Newport News and heavy reflection she has brought


and again, the personal stories. This is what brought me to the issue


two years ago, when first elected, someone came into my office heavily


disabled, someone who should have been fit and healthy and relatively


young, not that much older than myself but instead have had their


whole lives dominated by a series of treatments received back in the


1980s. The point I want to make is it is not an issue of a people


having a couple of opportunities away, losing a couple of quid or


working a bit longer to be able to finally retire, this is people who


who have had literally their whole lives going reasonably taken away.


Opportunities removed, and for many, this is touched two and a half


thousand people, the end of their life. This treatment programme


should help cure them. Doctors wouldn't be able to in an operating


theatre in a hospital look at every single thing they do, they had to


rely on those agencies that that things as safe, and certify things


as safe, and clearly in this issue there was a huge failure. I'm


pleased to see their progress has been over the last couple of years


was when I first spoke on this I suspect my predecessor when he was


elected in 1997 wouldn't have suspected his successor in 2015 to


still be talking about this issue. It is very welcome that we've all


finally have a public enquiry to look at the exact leak what went


wrong. The minister said there will be genuine consultation around in


terms of reference and those consultations will be the diary that


like a very important. There is evidence of criminal wondering, I am


clear that nothing done in the enquiry should prevent those people


being held potentially to account for the criminal liability in a


court of law. It will be a pity if the enquiry that finally brought


about justice and finally got answers was then the one that


prevented people from being hands to account criminally. The Bariloche is


be drawn with the Hillsborough enquiry, and everything that has


followed from that and hopefully in the system thing will happen if this


is established that there is evidence there and I think we will


all join the cause for anything made that anyone with evidence should


handed over to the police immediately, certainly should not be


withholding anything that would be interesting to the identification of


whether people need to be held to account in now way. I think it is


right that there is proper consultation on what form the


enquiry takes. Certainly I do think that we need to have some form of


ability to compel people to take part, and to provide some evidence


and I was reassured to hear the Minister consider those issues quite


carefully because that could Mike quite a difference because if there


is knowledge that the potential criminal sanctions are available,


people can take the option not to take part, but may have a real


impact in getting to the truth of what has happened. In terms of


getting to those answers it is appropriate that there is some form


of limit in time, and we can all think of examples public enquiries


that have taken very long periods of time, at that seems to drag out for


ever and it has been touched on already, people had to wait decades


for this to happen. There is a limit to how much longer than many of


those victims will actually be able to wait before the final answer as


to what happens to them and also in many cases for children of families


of those who have already passed on who wants to find out what happened


before they pass on themselves. Very briefly giving way. I'm grateful for


him. The member will be aware that the premise the recently announced


wisely that the government was going to introduce an independent public


advocate for public disasters. Wouldn't it be wholly appropriate


for the brave families -- braved families in this difficult case,


right across the country and the UK to have this independent public


advocate appointed in time to represent them. I thank her for her


intervention, making a powerful point and I'm sure the ministers


that on the bench will have heard it and others wishing to consider those


boys as part of the conservation will be forthcoming around how the


enquiry is structured and how victims are represented. I can


imagine, given what their experience has been over the last year they may


have strong views about whether it is a statement or appointed


personally or how old they are represented is important to be


consulted with them. Perhaps not on the floor of this house but all


representation will be considered carefully to ensure they can be


appropriately represented. Certainly, my own constituency there


has been the ladies constantly raising the matter with me.


They have been determined to pursue this matter and to find the answers


and justice. Berger has been in touch to ask about when the


compensation payments would be made. We are looking about how we can


bring all the issues, as well as finding the answers about what


happened all these years ago. I welcome this payment congratulate


the member for Kingston-Upon-Hull for her parachute of this and


security team -- securing the debate. I hope we can finally get


the answer is that those who have suffered for too long deserved and


deserve. Congratulations, Madam Deputy Speaker. I think the member


for Oxford East for her maiden speech and her powerful


representation of the people within her constituency. It would be


appropriate that I also mention my friend for Kingston-Upon-Hull. There


are over 111 members of the all-party group who have supported


her to get to the bottom of the real effects of the causes of this


scandal and recompense those who have suffered as a result. In the


short time I have got a bit like to comment on these issues. There are


two clear ones. One is the history of why this happened and what could


be done to prevent it and who is liable and responsible. There is


also what the state does to those who have no gleam in this matter


what support is given to those people who are now facing so many


challenges a result of this scandal. I do not expect to minister to be


able to answer those questions today because it is clear that the effort


of my honourable friend and other honourable members and it has been


said by six Party leaders has focused the government mind on how


to respond to this issue. It is important that we do challenge the


form of the enquiry. The Welsh government in Cardiff called for a


public enquiry in January. I am surely would be interested in having


the support of the house for the response. I raise the issue because


like all honourable members who have talked today, I have constituents


who have had the impact of the contaminated blood scandal


throughout their lives for the past 30 years. The wish to remain


anonymous, but in meeting them, I can see the impact on their lives.


Not just the trauma of seeing people infected at the same team who have


died in large numbers, but also the fact that people cannot get


insurance, cannot maintain stable employment and the problems of the


actual live and how long we're going to love. Practicalities, of


constituents with young children. The gentleman is making a powerful


case. There are a lot of people who have not been catered for Judy, who


were badly affected, such as my constituents who have died. The


children ended up any children's home and had the lives devastated.


The problems have not been addressed. My constituents are still


alive and are concerned about what will happen to the in the event of


the day. They are worried about the lack of insurance and the cost to


the lives as a whole. The wreckers that they had have been lost by the


state. There are difficulties that they may not be able to hold the


government liable for because these records have disappeared. That is


one of the problems facing the enquiry. With regard to talk that


this was the United Kingdom wakened enquiry. This happened before devil


you should. I have constituents in Wales who were affected in


Liverpool. I have constituents living in Wales who were affected in


Wales. It is important that we look at that as a whole. I would be


interested in the minister's ultimate discussion on the terms of


reference as to how he will involve devolved administrations. He has


given some indication to date, but also what the terms of reference


will be of how the consultation will take place. I know that my


constituents will want to be reassured who is responsible, what


happened, what can be done and whether there is any compensation to


help them meet their very real challenges such as those mentioned


by the honourable member in his speech. Even we have the


Hillsborough style enquiry, it is important that the Minister in due


course, sets out clearly not just the terms of reference but also the


terms of engagement. I was going to make the point myself that, to be


frank, the people I represent are trying to get on with their lives.


They have had something happened to them when they were very young which


they have had no control over. They want to try and get on with their


lives. I would think it would be very helpful if the government set


out how we could live victims could engage with the enquiry. Not just in


terms of the organisations, such as the haemophiliacs society, but


people who may not be involved in any organisation. But whether people


could be supported financially of that is required for representation.


And be able to put the case effectively to the enquiry. I am


pleased to speak on this occasion. Very briefly picking up on that


point. A constituent of mine called Michael wants justice but also wants


justice involving all the families engaged in shaping this Hillsborough


still style enquiry. We welcome the enquiry. They are impatient for


justice. I am grateful for the intervention. The point I was


finishing on, unless the Minister wishes to intervene. Just briefly, I


would like to remind the Honourable gentleman that after making very


important point, it is our intention to contact all of the families who


are in touch through the various schemes to register today's


announcement so the will have an opportunity to determine the best


form of enquiry. On his second point, once the enquiry is


established, it will be going to the enquiry itself as to how it engages


with the people and it will obviously be interested in advice


given by members of the house. Thank you. That helps reassure me on


behalf of my constituents. I simply see to the Minister, in making the


announcement today, the key thing for the future is confidence and


transparency and to ensure that people can feel they can have the


opinion here, the points they wish to boot I put properly and


effectively and it is essential to have some sort of timescale so that


they know how long of their lives this is going to take. And he


informed the host of any budget set up for the enquiry, the things we


would expect of any enquiry to take place, because that will help


reassure people that the government is responding not just two events


but also getting a positive outcome for the innocent victims of the


national scandal. I think the -- I hope the Minister can keep the house


informed but also keep the victims informed, because at the end of the


day, it is the lives in future and the uncertainties they have deserved


passionate support. I do not want to impose a formal time-limit, but I


would ask members to try and keep to four minutes and in that way I will


not have to impose any claim restrictions. I join other members


in paying tribute to all those affected by this terrible tragedy,


the families, the victims and friends and other people within the


salaries, especially the Honourable member for Kingston-Upon-Hull and


Stratford-upon-Avon. And also the Honourable new member for Oxford


East. I am speaking today to give a voice to my constituent who wishes


to remain anonymous. He was born with haemophilia. He had to endure


this terrible chronic condition and for the condition has in fact


poisoned pen. He has been infected with both HIV and hepatitis C. They


have given him a life of pain, of serious medication which has their


own major side-effects, major surgery. And the constant weight


that must be on his mind on those who love him every day of his life,


because this tragedy has affected every day of his life and affected


his life in every single aspect, from his marriage to his ability to


work, to his family. He told me recently that he and his wife have


told the grown-up child of his condition and of his infections


because as he said to me, when is the right time to deal your child


that you have HIV and hepatitis C? My constituent welcomes today's


remark on an enquiry. He wants a Hillsborough style enquiry because


he says people affected by this do not have time on the side. I must


declare an interest because as a barrister, I hope this public


enquiry will ensure that public money is directed towards those who


need it most, namely the victims and their families, not one massively


expensive tribunal 's costs. I put that out to other colleagues of mine


in the profession. Finally, I am conscious of the wish of other


colleagues to speak. I would like to talk about these school photograph


my constituent brought into the surgery. It was a typical school


photograph. This one was different. It showed my constituent and his


class at a special school he had to go to because of his condition. Eat


of the pupils had haemophilia. Four of them are no dead as a result of


contaminated blood infections. Another one is so ill that in his


early 50s, he is forced to live in a specialist home because of the


condition of his body. My constituent, like thousands of


others we have heard of, other victims of the terrible episode.


They have fought for justice for 30 years and I would like to thank this


Prime Minister and this government for listening and for acting. I very


much hope this enquiry delivers for them. It is the first time I ever


had the pleasure of speaking to the house when you have been the chamber


and I will commute your position. I think the Honourable member for


being able to secure this really important debate. It was a pleasure


to be in the chamber when we hear the maiden speech by the Oxford East


member. I congratulate her. I will not take up too much time in this


house in this debate, but what I wanted to do was to draw the


attention of the house to a constituent of mine. It is a case I


have raised here before. I have spoken on this issue on a number of


different occasions. My constituent is someone who has been


communicating with me for more than two years. She was, as one of my


other colleagues were seeing, one of the first people to come to me after


my election in 2015 to raise this issue. It was one of the first cases


I took to Parliament. As other parliaments -- colleagues have said,


I have to admit to shame, because I was not aware of the background to


the story until I hear the testimony.


I'm going to read part of an e-mail from Sue yesterday when it was clear


the emergency debate was going to happen, I have been in constant


touch with her. She asked me briefly to share with the house her story


because it says in more powerful words I think that anyone else could


I it is so important that we have this full, public enquiry. At the


time, of course, we were not aware of the government announcement which


I warmly welcome, and pay tribute to not only my honourable friend the


Minister for health but also the Prime Minister for driving this


forward. Let me share with you what Sue broke to me in this e-mail


yesterday. My husband Bob died in 1991, aged 47. Spite being a severe


haemophiliac he had lived a relatively normal life until he was


given commercial blood products. Following that his health and his


life followed a deep and dark spiral downhill. He contracted hepatitis B


can see, and HIV. He died a terrible death which I believe was totally


avoidable. He was never informed about the risks known at the time of


imported factor eight. He was never told he had hepatitis C, and indeed


I only found out myself a few years ago. His HIV test result was


withheld from us for many months thus leaving me at risk. I was


fortunate that many other women were not. -- but many women were not. A


few days before he died, a few months later, shattering on his


lungs, contracting pneumonia he was left untreated. He never had the


chance to see his eldest son marry nor meet his grandchildren. He


didn't see his little son graduate from university. He didn't see his


youngest son passed the 11 plus and go to grammar school. Following his


death, our family basically fell apart. Grief sent us in different


directions, and for many years we were completely broken. The fallout


is still there today bubbling away just below the surface. It is my


firm opinion, soothe freckle writes, in conclusion, following campaigning


and research, human beings were acting as guinea pigs. Had people


acted differently at the time Bob and so many others would almost


certainly being alive and well today. Now, I've found my


constituent's e-mail extremely moving and I repeat her words to the


house today because I think it says is better than any other rest of us


could why the decision that has been taken by the government to hold this


public enquiry is so welcome. I will be following very carefully this


process as it goes through to ensure that the form of the enquiry is the


best that it can be, so that fixed in and survivors like my constituent


can get the truth and fairness and justice they deserve. Thank you. I


would first like to start by echoing what has been said by so many in


paying tribute to the victims of this tragedy, their families and


those many honourable members who have campaigned tirelessly for such


a long time to ensure this public enquiry takes place and also to my


Prime Minister who after so many people have not have listened to


these concerns and has organised this formal public enquiry. As a


doctor I prescribe blood products that continued every day for people


not often in a position to make decisions. I have prescribe babies


blood, born prematurely, and those with cancer, not being able to make


their own cases. This is an issue of trust. It is important that when


people go into hospital and receive treatment that they are able to


trust that the risk and benefit and decision that is being made with


them, whether they are small or very unwell, on their behalf, is done


with facts and information available. In this case that appears


not to have been the case. People knew that HIV, hepatitis were


transmittable through blood products. And yet, despite that,


that information was not being made aware to those people receiving


them. And that the blood had not been properly screened and even at


the time as I understand it when blood was being screened elsewhere


objects were being used on people in the UK. I want to thank her for


giving way because trust the key word there, trust and faith to have


that in the enquiry and my constituent, every story is


different, is a twin, is other twin isn't here, and on the hop off and


he wants to have trust in the enquiry, once victims to be heard,


and then deciding the remit and also issuing the evidence taken from


them. She agreed that that is the way to get trust? I thank her for


that intervention. Absolutely I do. The victims and their families have


the right, they deserve to know what happened. They deserve answers to


the questions that they have they need to know when people knew that


these by-products could be causing them harm, and if they did know why


were they still given? The house should be under no allusion, as I'm


sure off the many cases described by the members that they and the


suffering that these people have gone through, losing their family


members, the stigma still exists today of many of these medical


condition that are particularly HIV, the risks that other people have


been put to such as their wives, children. And the suffering that


many still go through today with their poor health. I very much


welcome the public enquiry and I hope it will get to the bottom of


all the answers and I hope that those who have been victims have


received the conversation they deserve. May I also join in


welcoming you to your new role and I am absolutely delighted. I would


like to congratulate the honourable member on her brilliant maiden


speech. And finally paid tribute to the honourable member for Kingston


and hole for being such a doughty champion of the issue in Parliament.


The debate today has been conducted in a way recognised as being hugely


positive, very constructive and that is what people would expect my


people out there in the country expect us to carry out the debate in


a responsible manner because this very much affects people's lives. I


am acutely aware of that because of one of my constituents who has been


caught up in this tragedy, a lady called Sue Watson, a local teacher,


her husband a counsellor, they are friends and people I care very much


about. I was shocked, rather like a number of the colleagues were when


shortly after I was elected Sue and Peter asked me to go round to their


house and they told me all about the things that they had gone through,


and the difficulty that Sue was facing in trying to access the


treatment that she so desperately needed, and so I know that Sue will


be sat at home watching this debate this afternoon, welcoming this


announcement, to no end. Because things have gone so disastrously


wrong in the past, we need to get to the bottom of that. I think what was


a particular shock to Sue is that after 30 years she was diagnosed as


having this condition. It was a bombshell, sat marking books in her


office at school when the telephone call came to tell her that she had


got this condition. And I think what is most welcome about the


announcement today is the fact that there is this firm commitment to


ensure that the victims of this tragedy are properly listens to,


that they have a real involvement in shaping the enquiry and there are


lessons that can be learnt from what has happened in relation to


Hillsborough, it doesn't surprise me in the site is that the Prime


Minister is so committed to addressing this issue, we have seen


her take up a number of injustices and Hillsborough is one of those


examples. We can get the bottom of what has happened in this particular


tragedy, and the victims how they are affected on a day-to-day basis,


the consequences on their family, and they should be listens to and


should help to shape the enquiry. One key point I suspect we'll come


up in all of these discussions in the weeks and months ahead is this


issue of access to treatment, and fortunately for time to time NHS


bureaucracy does get in the way. -- unfortunately Brock as he gets in


the way. For Sue, it was a multitude of drama in getting the treatment


that she so desperately needed. I am grateful to ministers in particular


for all of their efforts in helping to go about achieving that. One


thing that I was remember Sue saying to me, when we first had that early


conversation was she said I'm not worried about compensation, I just


want to get better, and I think that there is a lot of all of that. These


are all issues the public enquiry needs to address. I welcome this


very much and look forward to the debates. Thank you Madam Deputy


Speaker. Like others I welcome you to your position in the chamber


today but would also like to put on record my thanks to the honourable


lady for Kingston upon Hull North for bringing the debate forward


today, and in the short time I have been a member of the space I have


been struck by her determination and perseverance in bringing forward the


campaign. An issue that quite clearly Madam Deputy Speaker cuts


right across both sides of this chamber. I would just like to add my


thanks also and recognition to all of those members who are not in the


chamber to date, those who perhaps have moved on following the election


who have also played a part in this campaign, and of course David


Cameron who at his last prime ministers questioned said they


wanted more to be done on this very important this you. This is an


important matter that too many of the people here and outside, we have


heard today, many constituents have been affected, and are still


affected today. It is an issue that was brought to my attention first


about a year ago when constituent came to Mike and surgery. -- my


surgery. We have heard about the victims and those suffering as a


result of the contaminated blood but this lady came to raise the issue of


support for the spouses of those who have died from contaminated blood.


She had a number of questions, concerns, particularly around


discretionary payments. She particularly wanted to know exactly


what their position would be, and felt as though she was in limbo.


Regarding monthly payments. Adam Deputy Speaker this is a tragedy and


it means so much to so many as we have heard. People who through no


fault of their own suddenly have found themselves in hardship and


really suffering as a result of what has happened. As we know this


tragedy goes back to the 1970s, 1980s, an issue that spans several


governments, a long-running issue but for those families, the family


in my constituency and those across the country, the other members here


have raised today, it is still a priority for them and rightly so. I


sense today that what we have heard from the Minister and from the Prime


Minister in her statement that it is still a priority for the government


as well. We should continue to providing support for those affected


by this tragedy. I am very conscious of time, Madam Deputy Speaker so I


will draw my comments to a close just by saying that I hope the


enquiry does bring together all parties and to the benefit of


families and victims, because there are still families wanting answers


in a sense of inclusion and closure to this tragic issue. Thank you very


much indeed Madam Deputy Speaker and I would like to welcome you to your


place. I have a confession or apology I should make will stop when


I was first briefed on this issue, I put it in the too difficult to deal


with category. Maybe it was too niche, it was too much of the past,


it lacked contemporary feel to it. I was wrong, and the honourable lady


for whole north has proved the point today, she is to be congratulated. I


had been reflecting, listening to this debate. So many of our


constituents view this place through that very narrow prism of 30 minutes


or so on a Wednesday. It shows parliament at its best stop


cross-party, an interest in an issue coming together to try to find a


solution. -- this is Parliament at its best. I welcome the words of the


honourable lady for this issue, and the premise that as a number have


pointed out, lots of ministers have just as lots of ministers listened


to the tragedy of Hillsborough. My right honourable friend seemed to


have something of her essence where she doesn't just listen but she


decides to act in a fair, calm, sensible way, but always in the


pursuit of justice for our constituents, and our fellow


citizens. This speaks of a tame purse, for


different procedures and techniques. It also predates the devolution


settlement, which might give challenges to the enquiry going


forward. But it is contemporary in terms of pain, suffering and anxiety


that so many colleagues across the house of preference. I strongly


welcome the decision to move towards a single payment scheme, to have


five schemes and which to apply and to justify the needs, as my


honourable friend for Stratford alluded to, adds an intolerable


intolerable aspect of justice. Yes, the travesty of the ill-health


placed upon sufferers from contaminated blood is not going to


see greater financial costs, but also their lifestyle costs. I must


confess, I am sanguine on a personal level whether this is the panel or a


judge led enquiry. It has to be done in contact with those who have


survived, to work out the best way. Time is not on the side of this and


we must move forward quickly. This is a campaign which is festered for


too long. I conclude by once again congratulating the member for


Kingston-Upon-Hull and I hope those suffering today are in some way


sustained and comforted in the hope of justice at the end of that


trouble. I would like to thank the government for this announcement. I


pay tribute to the Honourable members who have done much work over


the years. Especially, the Honourable member for


Kingston-Upon-Hull and the member for Stratford-upon-Avon who campaign


for this when it was not fashionable. I have a sense of


relief that the truth around the scandal will come out and I suspect


some of it will make very difficult listening. I did not know whether to


speak, but I did so after listening to some of the very moving


experiences from members of my constituency. They have asked to be


here today to listen to the debate. I have residents who have lived with


this for some decades, including several who had illnesses connected


to contaminated blood as young as nine years old. One of my


constituents worry is not only about herself but other members of her


family, but she said her life had been turned upside down by the


contaminated blood case. She said my infection has caused me to suffer


from a disabling and debilitating disease. You may be amazed to know


that I was refused funding and anti-viral treatment by hepatitis C


by NHS England and was obliged to buy it myself. Not only our resident


suffering, but they feel the NHS, which write them down in the first


place along with others, is not providing the support know which


they should do. This concerns me. In light of the investigation and


interested Party is important in making progress in our society. All


these enquiries can be difficult. We have seen that in Hillsborough


because that asks questions of those in authority. As one of my


colleagues said, it also questions trust in the system and that people


here are here to do the right thing to battle for the constituents.


Summing up, all of us would want to know a series of questions. Some


have been asked. There are two of the outstanding ones. If the


Minister could at some point explained the difference between a


statutory and Hillsborough type enquiry especially for constituents


interest in participating, through the windows and families of those


who have already died, 2400 of them, will be treated and how will the


claims and financial claims be treated? Finally, the reassuring is


of the potential criminal aspects have to be investigated to the


ultimate conclusion, but can we be reassured that this will be as


comprehensive as possible and will be time limited? I will commute to


your post, Madam Deputy Speaker. I thank the Honourable member for


Kingston-Upon-Hull for calling this debate and for her campaigning on


this. I also congratulate the member for Oxford East at Forfar excellent


maiden speech, the first of many contributions I am sure she will


make. I congratulate the members who have been tireless advocates for the


victims of this scandal and I speak on behalf of my constituent, Jackie


Britton, who lives in Port Chester. We have met on several occasions.


She has not given up on this fight. She contracted hepatitis C in 1982


from a blood transfusion during childbirth. She was only diagnosed


six years ago and for many years she has been inflicted with a


debilitating illness and has been suffering for many years. Her


daughter has also been very ill with previous medical conditions. I am


sure she would welcome the news today about a public enquiry into


this matter. It is clear that the government is seriously reflecting


the concerns and the voices of those who have been tragically affected by


this. This is the latest in action which has been taken on the part of


this government over several years. The government has increased the


amount of money spent on payments to victims to regularly levels since


2016, with an additional ?125 million in support funding for those


who need it. I am also pleased to come in and the last year has


announced they were going to reform the package of support schemes for


those affected. For the first time, almost 2500 beneficiaries, with


chronic hepatitis C, we are eligible for an annual payment of ?3500 per


year. That is progress and that is the result of listening and action


on the part of the government. I will conclude my comments because I


am a weir that others want to contribute. There is really nothing


that anyone can do to change the past on this awful, awful incident


and tragedy. But I do hope for the sake of Jackie and all those victims


about whom we have heard today. That being quietly today and the process


of discovering the truth of bringing to justice -- bringing some justice


to those affected will bring some finality to this heartbreaking


tragedy. Thank you for squeezing me in. For the many reasons explained


in the many excellent speeches by members on both sides, I have been


very impressed and pleased that the government have thought this through


a fish, which is significant, given the previous enquiries. And the


apology given by the Minister to date was an important step in


appreciating -- it will be appreciated by the victims. The


minister needs to consult on the form of the enquiry. He makes the


rate decision to engage with the affected groups and I hope that


there is an urgency forced into this process to move it forward so that


we can help the victims. I think the enquiry should look at how we


acquire these products in the first place, who is responsible for the


period anyone in the United Kingdom became infected. This is a tragic


story from time to finish. I congratulate those involved in the


wider campaign to seek the truth. I congratulate the member for


Kingston-Upon-Hull for calling this debate. There are variations in the


interpretation of the facts and the history of the scandal. In the


instance of one of my constituents, she felt elements of his infected


file is medical notes had been removed from his medical records. As


was noted in the 1991 HIV litigation, it has been removed.


Attempts to retrieve this letter have field. His father was given a


bad batch of Factor eight, but his father was not told until 1985,


nearly two years later. Looking at this, I do not know the answer to


these questions and I do not believe my constituent knows these, but it


seems to me from discussions with them and from limited documentation


I have seen that there are serious and horrific mistakes made which led


to unimaginable consequences and it is very important we get to the


truth of what happened. Efforts to deal with this issue today and there


have been a number we need to recognise, have not satisfied the


people concerned. The point is, many of the people affected by the


tragedy, especially children and other family members, in any event,


the do not feel they were ever be closure that they have included --


until the included in the process. I hope the government will have the


proper information, but the fact remains that is a clear disconnect


between the meet various parties involved. As ever, it is not just


what happens between the various parties or you can see fault, but


the light of the flow of information after words which can not only make


the original situation worse, but is immensely frustrating for the


families. As has been explained by constituents, members of the


fatherless generation action group, this is the scandal of epic


proportions. I look forward to seeing continued progress on this.


Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. It is delightful to see you in your new


police. Can I congratulate the Honourable Lady for Oxford on her


maiden speech. It was an excellent start and I am sure she will have a


long career in the House of Commons. Today, we had from some very


important contribute others in this debate. We were very moved by the


contribution by my honourable friend for Newport East when she talked


about the little boy who received contaminated blood products when he


was young and died eventually of hepatitis C. It remains as it is


boys and girls, husbands and wives, sons and daughters. Does she agree


that these blood products should have been removed as soon as the


risks about them became clear? That is one of the major points and it is


one of the points at the I hope the enquiry will get to grips with. I


would generally see to the Minister that we will not be going away on


this. We will be following very carefully parliamentarians from all


sides of the house as to how the consultation is taking place, who is


consulted, making sure that is good timetable, he tamely timetable and


that is legal support for those people in need with representation,


that there are regular updates to the parliament and I just want to


finish with the quote from a person who has just contacted me, seeing,


this is just the end of the beginning and there is still a long


way to go for truth, justice and holding to account. We will be


watching very carefully what the government will do next".


house has considered the need for a public enquiry.


As many as are of that opinion, say Aye.


Importantly, in the context of Article 27 what happens rarely


perfect across. I was talking to the secretary, very good friend of mine


20 months ago,


Live coverage of proceedings in the House of Commons, including (estimated timings):

12.30pm-1.15pm Statement on the Taylor Report on working practices 1.15pm-4.15pm Emergency debate on contaminated blood products.