Public inquiry · Parliamentary scrutiny

Parliamentary activity

Infected Blood Inquiry. Read indexed debates, questions, statements and early day motions, with links to the original parliamentary records.

394 indexed mentions for this inquiry Earliest recorded mention: 15 March 1990

Parliamentary mentions

2 matching mentions · newest first

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Ministerial Statement House of Commons
Mr David Lidington · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

On 24th September, I attended the commemoration that preceded the preliminary hearings of the Infected Blood Inquiry, and watched the moving and powerful testimony from those infected and affected by the infected blood scandal. The commemoration brought home the terrible human cost of this tragedy, and emphasised to me the importance of this Inquiry, to get to the truth of what happened, and provide the answers that the people infected and affected so desperately need. When the public Inquiry...

Recorded statement

Answering body: Cabinet Office

On 24th September, I attended the commemoration that preceded the preliminary hearings of the Infected Blood Inquiry, and watched the moving and powerful testimony from those infected and affected by the infected blood scandal. The commemoration brought home the terrible human cost of this tragedy, and emphasised to me the importance of this Inquiry, to get to the truth of what happened, and provide the answers that the people infected and affected so desperately need.

When the public Inquiry was launched in July this year, I deferred making a decision on whether to appoint a panel to sit with Sir Brian until he was able to take the view of core participants. Sir Brian Langstaff wrote to me this week following the preliminary hearings, and has advised me that he has now done so, and there has been no demand for a panel. In the place of single experts, sitting as panellists, Sir Brian is establishing expert groups to provide openness and transparency across a range of truly expert opinion. He recommended that I should not appoint co-determining panel members. I accept his recommendation.

In his letter Sir Brian also called for action in relation to financial and psychological support for the affected and infected. The Government will consider those comments and Sir Brian’s recommendations carefully and will respond as soon as possible.

The Cabinet Office takes seriously its role as sponsor to the Infected Blood Inquiry and is determined to do all it can to support the Inquiry with its work. Regrettably, an administrative error earlier this year has come to light, which had delayed the circulation of an instruction to government departments about the retention of records. I can reassure the public that this has resulted in no actual harm, but it is an error for which I apologise to the Inquiry, and most importantly, to the people infected and affected.

The facts are these: Cabinet Office official circulated a Government-wide notice on 3rd April this year, instructing departments to preserve all information relevant to the Infected Blood Inquiry. A further, more comprehensive message was issued to departments by Cabinet Office on 11th June.

However, following a query from the Inquiry about the notice, Cabinet Office officials discovered that the 3rd April email containing the retention notice did not reach its recipients, due to the failure of the collective IT address used. My officials have provided a detailed explanation to the Inquiry which will be published on the Inquiry’s website.

Since the error was discovered, all relevant departments and relevant areas within departments have worked urgently to confirm that they have not destroyed any documents relevant to the Inquiry during the period between 3rd April and 11th June. Because of their size and the complexity of some of the records they hold, HM Courts and Tribunals Service and the Legal Aid Agency are continuing to work to provide this assurance and have committed to doing so as urgently as possible.

The Department of Health and Social Care put in place a moratorium on the destruction of historical records as soon as the Inquiry was announced in July 2017. No material damage has resulted from this administrative error, but I am very sorry it occurred, and I would like to reassure the public that the Cabinet Office will learn the lessons from this to avoid such an error occurring in future.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Ministerial Statement House of Commons
Mr David Lidington · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

I am announcing today the appointment of Sir Brian Langstaff to head the public inquiry into the Infected Blood scandal. The inquiry will be established under the 2005 Inquiries Act, with full powers, including the power to compel the ​production of documents, and to summon witnesses to give evidence on oath.In relation to the appointment of the Chair, the Lord Chief Justice was asked to recommend a judge who, in his view, would be best suited to the task. The Lord Chief Justice recommended S...

Recorded statement

Answering body: Cabinet Office

I am announcing today the appointment of Sir Brian Langstaff to head the public inquiry into the Infected Blood scandal. The inquiry will be established under the 2005 Inquiries Act, with full powers, including the power to compel the ​production of documents, and to summon witnesses to give evidence on oath.

In relation to the appointment of the Chair, the Lord Chief Justice was asked to recommend a judge who, in his view, would be best suited to the task. The Lord Chief Justice recommended Sir Brian Langstaff: a highly respected and hugely experienced High Court judge. I have accepted the Lord Chief Justice’s recommendation.

Sir Brian will be the full time Chair of the Inquiry from 1 May following his retirement from the High Court. However, in order that those who have been affected by this tragedy face no further undue delay, he will use the intervening period to conduct a further consultation on the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference

The infected blood scandal of the ’70s and ’80s was an appalling tragedy that should never have happened. The victims of this tragedy who have endured so much pain and hardship deserve answers. It is crucial that their views are properly reflected in the Inquiry’s Terms of Reference. He will want to listen carefully to the voices of those that have suffered before making a recommendation to me on what the scope of the Inquiry should be. I will return to Parliament with the final terms of reference as soon as this process has been completed.

The Government will ensure that the inquiry has the resources that it needs to complete its work. The Inquiry will, of course, also be independent of the Government.

It is very important that the Inquiry can identify why and how this tragedy occurred and provide answers for the all victims who have suffered so terribly, and can identify lessons to be learned so that a tragedy of this scale can never happen again.

Original parliamentary record