Connect with us

Published

on

Victims of the infected blood scandal say they are “waiting to die in limbo”, with just hundreds having received compensation to date.

For decades, more than 30,000 NHS patients were knowingly given infected blood products, and more than 3,000 people died as a result. Survivors are left living with long-term health complications, including HIV and hepatitis.

An inquiry into the scandal, which published its final report in May 2024, accused the NHS of a “pervasive cover-up”. Recompense payments for the victims and survivors were ordered, with the government setting aside £11.8bn to do this.

Earlier this year, the inquiry was reopened to examine the “timeliness and adequacy” of the compensation, and its report – published today – has accused the scheme of “perpetuating” harm.

Just 2,043 people have been asked to start a claim, 616 have been made offers, and 430 of those have been paid.

“For decades, people who suffered because of infected blood have not been listened to. Once again, decisions have been made behind closed doors, leading to obvious injustices,” says Sir Brian Langstaff, chair of the Infected Blood Inquiry.

“It is not too late to get this right. We are calling for compensation to be faster, and more than that, fairer.”

In his latest 210-page report, Sir Brian says yet more people have been harmed by the way they have been treated by the scheme.

It highlights how the compensation scheme was drafted without any direct involvement from the people most affected – the expert group that advised the government on how financial support should be delivered was not allowed to take evidence or hear from any victim of the infected blood scandal.

“Obvious injustices” within the scheme include the exclusion of anyone infected with HIV prior to 1982 and the unrealistic requirements for proving psychological harm.

How did the infected blood scandal happen?

Between 1970 and the early 1990s, more than 30,000 NHS patients were given blood transfusions, or treatments made using blood products, which were contaminated with hepatitis C or HIV.

The infected blood was used because the NHS was struggling to meet the domestic demand for blood products, so sourced around 50% of them from abroad, including the US.

But much of the blood had been taken from prisoners, drug addicts and other high-risk groups who were paid to give blood.

Blood donations in the UK were not routinely screened for hepatitis C until 1991, 18 months after the virus was first identified.

As a result, more than 3,000 people have died, and survivors have experienced lifelong health implications.

In 2017, the government announced a statutory inquiry into the scandal to examine the impact on families, how authorities responded, and the care and support provided to those affected.

The Infected Blood Inquiry published its findings last year and a multi-billion-pound compensation scheme was announced in its wake.

This included payments for a group of people with the blood clotting disorder haemophilia, who were subjected to “unethical research” while at school and included in secret trials to test blood products.

HIV infections before 1982

The current scheme means any person infected with HIV before 1 January 1982 will not be compensated – something the latest report calls “illogical and unjust”.

The rule “completely misunderstands (or ignores) the central fact that blood products used [before this date] were already known to carry a risk of a dangerous virus – Hepatitis”, the report says.

The rule appears to have been made based on legal advice to the government.

One mother says her daughter was invited to claim compensation, only to be told she was likely “ineligible” because she had been infected prior to 1982.

“To reach this stage of the proceedings to be faced with the unbearable possibility of her claim being declined is yet another nightmare to be somehow endured… This unbearable and intolerable situation is cruel and unjust,” she says in the report.

Read more:
Ten victims of infected blood scandal to receive total of around £13m
Infected blood victims ‘livid’ with ‘paltry’ compensation offer
Trust between citizens and state destroyed in infected blood scandal

One person who is not named in the report said: “It feels as if we are waiting to die in limbo, unable to make any progress in our lives and fearing that as our health declines, we may not ever get the compensation we deserve.”

Analysis by Sky correspondent Laura Bundock: Victims’ painful battle continues – and in some cases time is running out

This is another deeply damning report into the infected blood scandal.

We now know the damage and suffering caused by the worst treatment disaster in the history of the NHS is far from over.

So many were promised long-overdue compensation. But those infected and affected by the scandal are still being harmed by delays, injustices, and a lack of transparency.

Over a year since his final inquiry report was published the chair, Sir Brian Langstaff, does not hold back in his criticism of the compensation scheme.

He finds the system sluggish, slow and difficult to navigate.

What was set up to help the infected blood community, failed to properly involve victims of the scandal. Opportunities were missed opportunities to consult, and decisions were made behind closed doors.

The end result is an unfair, unfit system leaving people undercompensated. What’s worse, very few have received any money. And in some cases, time is running out.

This additional report makes yet more recommendations. Sir Brian is clear that despite a bad start, it’s not too late to get things right. What he says is an important moment of vindication for the victims, who’d felt their voices were being ignored.

They’ve campaigned and fought for this inquiry for decades. Most assumed the battle was over once Sir Brian’s report was published last year. But despite promises and pledges from politicians, their anger and upset hasn’t gone away.

The government says it’s taking steps to speed up the process. For victims, trust in the authorities remains low.

It will take more than warm words to restore faith, as they continue through the painful struggle for justice.

Unrealistic expectations

The report also highlights the unrealistic evidence requirements for someone proving psychological harm.

The current regulations require a consultant psychiatrist to have diagnosed and treated someone, either as in-patient, or in hospital for six months.

But the report says, at the time the scandal was unfolding, “consultant psychiatric services were not the norm across every part of the country”.

“It would be wrong to set a requirement for compensation that such services be accessed when it was not a practical proposition that they could be.”

Those infected were also unlikely to have told even close friends and family about their diagnosis due to the stigma and ostracism.

Therefore, the expectation of having received medical care “would have involved revealing to an unknown clinician what that person dared not reveal, especially if there was a chance that it might leak out”.

Other exclusions

The report also highlighted other exclusions within the compensation scheme.

It says the “impacts of infection with Hepatitis is not being fully recognised in the scheme as it stands”. The scheme also fails to recognise the devastating impacts of interferon, used to treat Hep C. The vast majority of people who received interferon suffered severely, both psychologically and physically.

The compensation regulations also withdraw support for a bereaved partner if the infected person dies after 31 March this year. The argument being that they are eligible for compensation in their own right as an “affected” person.

But removing these payments immediately after death means infected persons “see themselves as worthless and [ignites] fears of leaving partners destitute”.

One man reports being denied compensation as victims of medical experimentation because – despite having evidence it took place – the hospital where he was infected was not named in the regulations.

Read more:
Infected and experimented on

The report issued a number of recommendations to speed up the process.

It says people should be able to apply for compensation, rather than wait to be asked.

The compensation authority should also progress applications from different groups at the same time, giving priority to those who are most ill and older, or who have never received any form of financial support.

It also says anyone who has evidence of being the victim of medical experiments should be compensated for it, regardless of where they were treated.

The report calls for more transparency and openness, as well as involvement from those infected and affected.

Support groups react to latest report

Kate Burt, Chief Executive of the Haemophilia Society, said the government’s “failure to listen to those at the heart of the contaminated blood scandal has shamefully been exposed by the Infected Blood Inquiry yet again”.

“Now government must take urgent action to put this right by valuing those impacted by this scandal through a fair and fast compensation settlement,” she says. “Only then can the infected blood community move on from the past and finally focus on what remains of their future.”

A lawyer advising some 1,500 victims says some of the recommendations “can and should be implemented immediately”.

Des Collins, senior partner at Collins Solicitors, says: “We also urgently need transparency of the timetable for the affected and an acceleration of the payment schedule to them.”

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly.

Please refresh the page for the latest version.

You can receive breaking news alerts on a smartphone or tablet via the Sky News app. You can also follow us on WhatsApp and subscribe to our YouTube channel to keep up with the latest news.

Continue Reading

UK

Police officer punched in face as masked protesters with children march through Canary Wharf shopping centre

Published

on

By

Police officer punched in face as masked protesters with children march through Canary Wharf shopping centre

A group of masked protesters became “aggressive” towards police at Canary Wharf shopping centre after an anti-asylum demonstration, police say.

A group of people entered the shopping centre around 4.30pm and a “small number of masked protesters” then became aggressive towards members of the public and police, the Metropolitan Police said in a statement.

Police issued an order to “prevent people concealing their identity with masks” and a dispersal order was also put in place.

Video seen on social media showed young children among the protesters, with some of them wearing England flags.

Officers said: “We are aware there are young children in the protest area and while we deal with any criminality our officers are ensuring the safety of them is paramount.”

Police said four people were arrested on Sunday afternoon during the protests, including for common assault by a protester on a member of the public, possession of class A and B drugs, assault on police/public order offences and failure to disperse.

“One of our officers was punched in the face – luckily they did not suffer significant injury,” a spokesperson said.

Commander Adam Slonecki, in charge of policing London this weekend, said: “We had plenty of officers on the ground who moved in swiftly to deal with the criminality that occurred inside and outside the shopping centre. We will not tolerate this kind of behaviour.

“Today’s protest saw many community members attend, including women and children, and we worked to ensure the safety of those there to peacefully represent their views. Those who arrive at protests masked and intent on causing trouble will continue to be dealt with robustly at future protests.”

People protest outside the Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf. Pic: PA
Image:
People protest outside the Britannia International Hotel in Canary Wharf. Pic: PA

Counter-protesters also assembled outside the Britannia International Hotel. Pic: PA
Image:
Counter-protesters also assembled outside the Britannia International Hotel. Pic: PA

Read more:
PM promises small boat migrants will be ‘detained and sent back’
Reform deputy leader disagrees with archbishop

Protesters from both sides of the divide over the UK’s immigration policies gathered outside the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf on Sunday afternoon.

Around a dozen anti-immigration protesters were joined by about 100 counter-protesters holding banners saying “stand up to racism” and “stop the far right” on the other side of the road.

Demonstrators then left the hotel location – kept apart by police.

Sunday’s events in east London follow an incident in West Drayton, west London, on Saturday when a group of masked men were among those who attempted to enter a hotel housing asylum seekers.

Continue Reading

UK

Reform deputy attacks govt for ‘protecting rights’ of illegal migrants – and fires back at Archbishop of York

Published

on

By

Reform deputy attacks govt for 'protecting rights' of illegal migrants - and fires back at Archbishop of York

Reform UK has hit back at both the Archbishop of York and the government following criticism of its immigration policies.

Leader Nigel Farage announced the party’s flagship immigration plan during a flashy news conference held at an aircraft hangar in Oxford on Tuesday.

The party pledged to deport anybody who comes to the UK illegally, regardless of whether they might come to harm, and said it would pay countries with questionable human rights records – such as Afghanistan – to take people back.

Politics latest – follow live updates

It also said it would leave numerous international agreements, and revoke the Human Rights Act, in order to do this.

The policy was criticised by the Conservatives, who said Mr Farage was “copying our homework”, while parties such as the Liberal Democrats and the Greens condemned it.

More on Migrant Crossings

Archbishop Stephen Cottrell and Richard Tice MP. Pics: PA
Image:
Archbishop Stephen Cottrell and Richard Tice MP. Pics: PA

But the plan came under fire from an altogether different angle on Saturday, when the Archbishop of York accused it of being an “isolationist, short-term kneejerk” approach, with no “long-term solutions”.

Stephen Cottrell, who is the acting head of the Church of England, told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips that he had “every sympathy” with those who find the issue of immigration tricky. But he said Reform UK’s plan does “nothing to address the issue of what brings people to this country”, and would in fact, make “the problem worse”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

In full: Richard Tice on Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips

Speaking on the same programme, Richard Tice, Reform’s deputy leader, responded to the archbishop’s criticisms, saying that “all of it is wrong”.

The MP for Boston and Skegness said he was a Christian who “enjoys” the church – but that the “role of the archbishop is not actually to interfere with international migration policies”.

Mr Tice then turned his fire on the government, accusing ministers of being “more interested in protecting the rights of people who’ve come here illegally… than looking after the rights of British citizens”.

He accused ministers of having “abandoned” their duty of “looking after the interests of British citizens”.

Mr Tice reaffirmed his party’s policy that the UK should leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), calling it a “70-year-old, out-of-date, unfit-for-purpose agreement”.

The Reform UK deputy leader also:

• Defended plans to pay the Taliban to take migrants back, comparing it to doing business deals with “people you don’t like”

• Said the Royal Navy should be deployed in the English Channel as a “deterrent”, but added: “We’re not saying sink the boats”

• Urged the government to call an early general election

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Farage ‘wants to provoke anger’

Meanwhile, Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, told Sky News that Reform “want to provoke anger, but they don’t actually want to solve the problems that we face in front of us”.

She told Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips the UK had a “proud tradition [of] supporting those facing persecution”.

But she added: “We will make sure that people who have no right to be in this country are removed from this country. That’s right. It’s what people expect. It’s what this government will deliver.”

Ms Phillipson also insisted there “needs to be reform of the ECHR” and said the home secretary is “looking at the article eight provisions”, which cover the right to a private and family life, to see “whether they need updating and reforming for the modern age”.

👉 Listen to Sky News Daily on your podcast app 👈

However, she refused to say what the government would do if it is found that the ECHR is unreformable. Instead, she defended Labour’s position of staying in the governance of the convention, saying that honouring the “rule of law” is important.

She added: “Our standing in the world matters if we want to strike trade deals with countries. We need to be a country that’s taken seriously. We need to be a country that honours our obligations and honours the rule of law.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Asylum seekers to remain at Bell Hotel

Ms Phillipson was also drawn on the recent court ruling in favour of the Home Office, which overturned an injunction banning The Bell Hotel in Epping from housing asylum seekers.

Challenged on whether the government is prioritising the rights of asylum seekers over British citizens, she said it “is about a balance of rights”.

The cabinet minister also repeated the government’s plans to end the use of hotels to house asylum seekers by 2029.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘We should have overruled law’

Shadow Cabinet Office minister Alex Burghart said the Conservatives would be willing to leave the ECHR – if this route is recommended to them.

The Tories have asked a senior judge to look into the “legal intricacies” of leaving the convention, which he said is “not straightforward”. He said when the party receives that report, it will then make a decision.

Challenged on whether the Tories will leave if that is what the report recommends, he added: “If that’s what’s necessary, we will do it.”

Mr Burghart also said he believed the previous Conservative government’s biggest mistake was that “we did not go far enough on overruling human rights legislation”, which prevented it from “taking the tough action that was absolutely necessary”.

But he added the Conservatives have now “put forward very clear legislation that would solve this problem” – though he concluded Labour “isn’t going to do it” so the problem “is going to get worse”.

Continue Reading

UK

Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell tells Nigel Farage ‘kneejerk’ migrant deportation plan won’t solve problem

Published

on

By

Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell tells Nigel Farage 'kneejerk' migrant deportation plan won't solve problem

The Archbishop of York has told Sky News the UK should resist Reform’s “kneejerk” plan for the mass deportation of migrants, telling Nigel Farage he is not offering any “long-term solution”.

Stephen Cottrell said in an interview with Trevor Phillips he has “every sympathy” with people who are concerned about asylum seekers coming to the country illegally.

But he criticised the plan announced by Reform on Tuesday to deport 600,000 people, which would be enabled by striking deals with the Taliban and Iran, saying it will not “solve the problem”.

Mr Cottrell is currently acting head of the Church of England while a new Archbishop of Canterbury is chosen.

Pic: Jacob King/PA Wire
Image:
Pic: Jacob King/PA Wire

The Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell in 2020.
File pic: PA
Image:
The Archbishop of York, Stephen Cottrell in 2020.
File pic: PA

Phillips asked him: “What’s your response to the people who are saying the policy should be ‘you land here, unlawfully, you get locked up and you get deported straight away. No ifs, no buts’?”

Mr Cottrell said he would tell them “you haven’t solved the problem”, adding: “You’ve just put it somewhere else and you’ve done nothing to address the issue of what brings people to this country.

More on Migrant Crisis

“And so if you think that’s the answer, you will discover in due course that all you have done is made the problem worse.

“Don’t misunderstand me, I have every sympathy with those who find this difficult, every sympathy – as I do with those living in poverty.

“But… we should actively resist the kind of isolationist, short term kneejerk ‘send them home’.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What do public make of Reform’s plans?

Nigel Farage at the launch of Reform UK's plan to deport asylum seekers. Pic: PA
Image:
Nigel Farage at the launch of Reform UK’s plan to deport asylum seekers. Pic: PA

Asked if that was his message to the Reform leader, he said: “Well, it is. I mean, Mr Farage is saying the things he’s saying, but he is not offering any long-term solution to the big issues which are convulsing our world, which lead to this. And, I see no other way.”

You can watch the full interview on Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips on Sky News from 8.30am

Mr Farage, the MP for Clacton, was asked at a news conference this week what he would say if Christian leaders opposed his plan.

“Whoever the Christian leaders are at any given point in time, I think over the last decades, quite a few of them have been rather out of touch, perhaps with their own flock,” he said.

“We believe that what we’re offering is right and proper, and we believe for a political party that was founded around the slogan of family, community, country that we are doing right by all of those things, with these plans we put forward today.”

Sky News has approached Mr Farage for comment.

Farage won’t be greeting this as good news of the gospel – nor will govt ministers

When Tony Blair’s spin doctor Alastair Campbell told journalists that “We don’t do God”, many took it as a statement of ideology.

In fact it was the caution of a canny operator who knows that the most dangerous opponent in politics is a religious leader licensed to challenge your very morality.

Stephen Cottrell, the Archbishop of York, currently the effective head of the worldwide Anglican communion, could not have been clearer in his denunciation of what he calls the Reform party’s “isolationist, short term, kneejerk ‘send them home'” approach to asylum and immigration.

I sense that having ruled himself out of the race for next Archbishop of Canterbury, Reverend Cottrell feels free to preach a liberal doctrine.

Unusually, in our interview he pinpoints a political leader as, in effect, failing to demonstrate Christian charity.

Nigel Farage, who describes himself as a practising Christian, won’t be greeting this as the good news of the gospel.

But government ministers will also be feeling nervous.

Battered for allowing record numbers of cross- Channel migrants, and facing legal battles on asylum hotels that may go all the way to the Supreme Court, Labour has tried to head off the Reform challenge with tougher language on border control.

The last thing the prime minister needs right now is to make an enemy of the Almighty – or at least of his representatives on Earth.

Continue Reading

Trending