Home/ Public Inquiries/ Infected Blood Inquiry/ Parliamentary activity
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
Clear all filters
Clear record type Member: Mr Kevan Jones · Clear member

Parliamentary mentions

2 matching mentions · newest first

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Mr Kevan Jones · Labour Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will take steps to expedite compensation for those affected by the infected blood scandal.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

The Government will respond in full to Sir Brian Langstaff’s recommendations on compensation following the publication of the Inquiry’s final report. Additionally, we will bring forward amendments at Report Stage of the Victims and Prisoners Bill in the Other Place with the intention of speeding up the implementation of the Government’s response to the Infected Blood Inquiry.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Framework Study

Written Question House of Commons
Mr Kevan Jones · Labour Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether people affected by contaminated blood products will have access to legal representation for the infected blood compensation framework review.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

The compensation framework study will provide advice on potential compensation framework design and solutions to Government. It is important that Sir Robert Francis QC, the independent reviewer, is able to complete his work as quickly as thoroughness allows.

At the outset of the Infected Blood Inquiry, the then Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster decided that it was overwhelmingly in the public interest that legal representation for infected and affected core participants in the inquiry should be funded by Government, and without means testing. This funding will continue until the conclusion of the Inquiry. However, this study is quite separate from the Inquiry. Sir Robert will want to hear directly from infected and affected people and put them at the heart of the process. Legal representation will not be required in order to put forward views.

Original parliamentary record