Public inquiry · Parliamentary scrutiny

Parliamentary activity

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

20 indexed mentions for this inquiry Earliest recorded mention: 21 March 2002

Parliamentary mentions

20 matching mentions · newest first

Equitable Life Assurance Society

Written Question House of Lords
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Callanan  on 22 November (HL3771), what assessment they have made of the critiques by the Penrose Inquiry into Equitable Life summarised in points (a) – (e) of Appendix IV paragraph 1.6 of FRS 27 of December 2004; and for each point, how they have addressed it with the IFRS Foundation; and if any points have not been addressed, why not.

Government answer

Answering body: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

FRS 27 has addressed many of the critiques made by the Penrose Inquiry in the development of IFRS 17, except for the differences between the accounting bases for regulatory and financial reporting. Insurance is inherently a complex business so some complexity in the related financial reporting is inevitable. However, a standardised basis for financial reporting will go a long way to addressing concerns related to complexity.

The Penrose Inquiry also identified regulatory failures to restrain the hazardous conduct of firms and to protect stakeholders. The Financial Services Authority (now the Financial Conduct Authority) took the recommendations from the report to enhance the solvency and liquidity requirements and set other boundaries more tightly in the Solvency II legislation.

The accounting basis for regulatory purposes is not within the remit of the IFRS Foundation and regulatory reporting is not designed to report performance. The Prudential Regulatory Authority has responsibility for promoting the safety and soundness of insurers and the protection of policy holders.

Original parliamentary record

Equitable Life Assurance Society

Written Question House of Lords
Baroness Bowles of Berkhamsted · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask Her Majesty's Government which of the deficiencies in insurance company accounting that were identified by the Penrose Inquiry into Equitable Life have been dealt with by the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation; how they were dealt with; and if they were not dealt with, why not.

Government answer

Answering body: Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

The Penrose Inquiry into Equitable Life focussed on UK financial and regulatory reporting in the years leading up to 2001, and how they related to the Equitable Life Assurance Society.

The Inquiry identified that life insurance company accounts needed a consistent and realistic accounting basis for the preparation of accounts. They recommended the creation of consistent standards for the preparation and presentation of accounts for long term business. The IFRS Foundation has stated that this was a key aim when developing and publishing IFRS17. In order to make insurers’ financial statements more useful for users of financial statements.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Dame Diana Johnson · Labour Answering body: Treasury
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if his Department will make additional funding available to the Department of Health to enable improvements in the infected blood support schemes.

Government answer

Answering body: Treasury

The Budget confirmed that the existing health grant for those affected by Thalidomide will continue when the existing funding commitment expires in 2022/23.

Infected blood support schemes were established in 2017, following the publication of the Penrose Inquiry, and the government confirmed increased financial support in 2019 for those infected and affected.

We will consider any recommendations when the Infected Blood Inquiry reports, including any around financial support.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Dame Diana Johnson · Labour Answering body: Treasury
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the announcement in Budget 2021 that lifetime financial support will be provided for survivors of the Thalidomide scandal, whether the Government plans to provide lifetime financial support to the survivors and victims of the contaminated blood scandal.

Government answer

Answering body: Treasury

The Budget confirmed that the existing health grant for those affected by Thalidomide will continue when the existing funding commitment expires in 2022/23.

Infected blood support schemes were established in 2017, following the publication of the Penrose Inquiry, and the government confirmed increased financial support in 2019 for those infected and affected.

We will consider any recommendations when the Infected Blood Inquiry reports, including any around financial support.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Diana Johnson · Labour Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, how many documents did the 2015 Penrose Inquiry on contaminated blood in Scotland request from his Department; how many of these requests were (a) accepted and (b) rejected; and how many documents submitted contained redacted information.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health

Although the Department was not called to provide witnesses to the Penrose Inquiry, we cooperated fully with Lord Penrose’s requests for documentary evidence, and the Departmental evidence that Lord Penrose used is referenced in his final report. Lord Penrose published the report of his public inquiry into infections acquired in Scotland on 25 March 2015. Nothing was withheld.

All documents up to 1995 are available through the National Archive.

Any redacted documents provided to the Inquiry will have been redacted in line with standard practice to protect personal information and with current Freedom of Information requirements.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Diana Johnson · Labour Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether all documents (a) disclosed in previous legal cases and (b) used for previous Departmental reports into contaminated blood were provided to (i) the Independent Public Inquiry on NHS Supplied Contaminated B

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health

The Department cooperated with Lord Archer and Lord Penrose’s requests for documentary evidence, and the Departmental evidence that Lord Penrose used is referenced in his final report.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Diana Johnson · Labour Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what proportion of documents related to contaminated blood which were previously disclosed to (a) litigants, (b) the 2009 Independent Public Inquiry on NHS Supplied Contaminated Blood and Blood Products, (c) the 2015 Penrose Inquiry into contaminated blood in Scotland and (d) used to inform his Department's report on Self-Sufficiency in Blood Products in England and Wales published in 2007 are (i) currently readily accessible to members of the public ...

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health

The Department has released a large quantity of relevant papers for inspection by Parliamentarians and the public.

Documents covering the period from 1970 to 1985 were published in 2007 and 2009, in line with the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

All relevant documents on blood safety for the period up to 1995 are now available on the National Archives website, having gone live in March 2016.

It is not possible to separately identify the proportion of documents disclosed for the various purposes requested.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Stephen Kinnock · Labour Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, with reference to the Prime Minister's oral statement of 26 March 2015, Official Report, column 1423, on the Penrose Report on contaminated blood, when the Government plans to respond to the findings of that report.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health

Lord Penrose made one recommendation in the Final Report, to ‘take all reasonable steps to offer a hepatitis C test to anyone who had a blood transfusion before September 1991 who has not been tested for hepatitis C’ through reminding general practitioners, nurses and other clinical staff of this matter, along with the National Health Service guidance to offer a hepatitis C test to those who may be at risk. The Penrose Inquiry was set up by the Scottish Government and so there is no requirement for the Department in England to provide a formal Government response to the final report published on 25 March 2015. We have, however implemented the recommendation in the Penrose Report by issuing reminders as recorded in the Written Ministerial Statement made on 20 July 2015 (Official Record HCWS146) and addressed in the Contaminated Blood Products debate (HC Deb, 9 September 2015, c86WH).

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood

Written Ministerial Statement House of Commons
Jane Ellison · Conservative Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

My noble Friend Lord Prior of Brampton has made the following written ministerial statement. Before 1991, thousands of patients contracted HIV, hepatitis C, or both viruses, from treatment with NHS-supplied blood or blood products. This is aptly described by many as one of the great tragedies of modern health care and on the 25 March 2015 the Prime Minister apologised on behalf of the government to all those that were infected. I would like to start by repeating this sentiment and state, on ...

Recorded statement

Answering body: Department of Health

My noble Friend Lord Prior of Brampton has made the following written ministerial statement.

Before 1991, thousands of patients contracted HIV, hepatitis C, or both viruses, from treatment with NHS-supplied blood or blood products. This is aptly described by many as one of the great tragedies of modern health care and on the 25 March 2015 the Prime Minister apologised on behalf of the government to all those that were infected. I would like to start by repeating this sentiment and state, on behalf of this Government, how sorry we are for what happened and for the distress caused to those affected and their families.

In March, Lord Penrose published the report of his public inquiry into infections acquired in Scotland. As infection occurred before devolution, this is of relevance for the Westminster Government. Lord Penrose scrutinised events over a period of nearly 18 years between 1974 and 1991. The Report, together with over 5,000 documents from the period 1970-85 which have already been published by Government provides a comprehensive picture of events and decisions made. We have also committed to releasing all additional documents from 1986-1995 late this summer.

Lord Penrose made one recommendation: to take all reasonable steps to offer a hepatitis C test to everyone [in Scotland] who had a blood transfusion before September 1991 and who has not been tested for hepatitis C. In England, guidance to GPs has been issued over the years by the Department of Health, the NHS, and other health organisations which recommend that a hepatitis C test should be offered to patients who received a blood transfusion in the UK before 1991 or were treated with blood products before 1986. This can currently be found on the NHS Choices website. In light of Lord Penrose’s recommendation, the Department will be acting to ensure that GPs are reminded of this duty.

The terms of reference of the Penrose Inquiry did not include financial support for those affected. However for some time we have been listening to the many concerns about the existing arrangements and have been considering how we might improve that support. Concerns have been raised by individuals that have been affected, MPs, and the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Haemophilia and Contaminated Blood, and include: the complex nature of the organisations, and the criteria for, and charitable nature of, some payments. I would therefore like to briefly acknowledge the work of all the MPs who have raised the profile of this tragedy. Most significantly, however, I would like to recognise the work of affected individuals, and their representatives, who have tirelessly campaigned for many years.

On the 25 March the Prime Minister also announced that £25 million would be allocated to ease transition to a reformed system of support for affected individuals. While no decisions have yet been made on how this money will be spent, I must emphasise that the money will not be used for administrative costs, but will be used appropriately to support any transitional arrangements once we have consulted on how a new scheme might be structured.

Transition to a reformed scheme remains a priority for this Government. Decisions on the overall DH budget from 2016-17 onwards will be determined as part of the forthcoming Spending Review.

While I understand that beneficiaries to the current schemes may be frustrated by this wait, this is an extremely complex and sensitive area and any reform plans must be carefully considered before a consultation can be launched.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood

Written Ministerial Statement House of Lords
Lord Prior of Brampton · Conservative Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

Before 1991, thousands of patients contracted HIV, hepatitis C, or both viruses, from treatment with NHS-supplied blood or blood products. This is aptly described by many as one of the great tragedies of modern health care and on the 25 March 2015 the Prime Minister apologised on behalf of the government to all those that were infected. I would like to start by repeating this sentiment and state, on behalf of this Government, how sorry we are for what happened and for the distress caused to t...

Recorded statement

Answering body: Department of Health

Before 1991, thousands of patients contracted HIV, hepatitis C, or both viruses, from treatment with NHS-supplied blood or blood products. This is aptly described by many as one of the great tragedies of modern health care and on the 25 March 2015 the Prime Minister apologised on behalf of the government to all those that were infected. I would like to start by repeating this sentiment and state, on behalf of this Government, how sorry we are for what happened and for the distress caused to those affected and their families.

In March, Lord Penrose published the report of his public inquiry into infections acquired in Scotland. As infection occurred before devolution, this is of relevance for the Westminster Government. Lord Penrose scrutinised events over a period of nearly 18 years between 1974 and 1991. The Report, together with over 5,000 documents from the period 1970-85 which have already been published by Government provides a comprehensive picture of events and decisions made. We have also committed to releasing all additional documents from 1986-1995 late this summer.

Lord Penrose made one recommendation: to take all reasonable steps to offer a hepatitis C test to everyone [in Scotland] who had a blood transfusion before September 1991 and who has not been tested for hepatitis C. In England, guidance to GPs has been issued over the years by the Department of Health, the NHS, and other health organisations which recommend that a hepatitis C test should be offered to patients who received a blood transfusion in the UK before 1991 or were treated with blood products before 1986. This can currently be found on the NHS Choices website. In light of Lord Penrose’s recommendation, the Department will be acting to ensure that GPs are reminded of this duty.

The terms of reference of the Penrose Inquiry did not include financial support for those affected. However for some time we have been listening to the many concerns about the existing arrangements and have been considering how we might improve that support. Concerns have been raised by individuals that have been affected, MPs, and the All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Haemophilia and Contaminated Blood, and include: the complex nature of the organisations, and the criteria for, and charitable nature of, some payments. I would therefore like to briefly acknowledge the work of all the MPs who have raised the profile of this tragedy. Most significantly, however, I would like to recognise the work of affected individuals, and their representatives, who have tirelessly campaigned for many years.

On the 25 March the Prime Minister also announced that £25 million would be allocated to ease transition to a reformed system of support for affected individuals. While no decisions have yet been made on how this money will be spent, I must emphasise that the money will not be used for administrative costs, but will be used appropriately to support any transitional arrangements once we have consulted on how a new scheme might be structured.

Transition to a reformed scheme remains a priority for this Government. Decisions on the overall DH budget from 2016-17 onwards will be determined as part of the forthcoming Spending Review.

While I understand that beneficiaries to the current schemes may be frustrated by this wait, this is an extremely complex and sensitive area and any reform plans must be carefully considered before a consultation can be launched.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Tim Farron · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, whether his Department has received any adverse notifications from the Penrose Inquiry relating to people in Scotland infected with hepatitis C and HIV acquired from exposure to contaminated blood and blood produc

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health

The Penrose Inquiry has stated that the identities of the recipients of warning letters are confidential. We are therefore unable to either confirm or deny whether the Department has received a warning letter.

Original parliamentary record

Equitable Life Independent Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
Diana Johnson · Labour Answering body: Department of Health
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what discussions he has had with the Scottish Executive about the timetable for publication of the Penrose Inquiry.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health

The timetable for Lord Penrose to complete his report and publish it, is a matter for Lord Penrose himself to decide. Lord Penrose has publicly announced that he will publish his report in the autumn of 2014, but we do not know the exact date. We are keeping in touch with the Cabinet Secretary for Health and Well Being of the Scottish Government.

Original parliamentary record

EQUITABLE LIFE (no. 2)

Early Day Motion House of Commons
Mr Stephen O'Brien · Conservative
Parliamentary excerpt

leave out from "accountants" to end and add"Burgess Hodgson,which appears to show that the liabilities of Equitable Life,including an appropriate reserve for terminal bonus,exceeded the available assets for most of the 1990's:is concerned about press reports that several witnesses,including at least one former director of Equitable Life,have refused to co-operate with the Penrose inquiry:notes that the then Economic Secretary to the Treasury stated in a radio interview on the BBC programme Mo...

Original parliamentary record

EQUITABLE LIFE

Early Day Motion House of Commons
Mr Christopher Chope · Conservative
Parliamentary excerpt

That this House notes that the Treasury Committee took evidence on 30th October 2001 and 13 November 2001 in relation to the regulation of Equitable Life; is concerned that the Government no longer expects Lord Penrose to report in 2002; regrets that the Treasury Committee has no plans to take further evidence or investigate the conduct of the Treasury as regulator of Equitable Life; calls upon the Committee to resume forthwith its Inquiry and, in particular, to investigate the reasons underl...

Original parliamentary record