Blood scandal compensation 'needs to get faster and fairer'

THE Government has been slammed for its “behind closed doors” approach to infected blood scandal compensation which “repeats the mistakes of the past”.

- SAM VOLPE

That's according to a highly-critical report from Infected Blood Inquiry chair Sir Brian Langstaff following hearings held this May.

Sir Brian took the unprecedented step of reopening hearings at the inquiry after hearing huge criticism of how compensation was being handled for people infected and affected by the scandal.

Now, in a new “additional report”, Sir Brian has called for the Government to act to get payouts to people “fairer and faster”.

A day after similarly damning criticism was levelled at the handling of compensation following the Post Office Horizon scandal, the Government faced both barrels from Sir Brian, too.

He said “action needs to be taken without delay” if trust in the compensation system is to be regained.

The contaminated blood scandal saw thousands infected with lethal viruses through treatment they were given on the NHS.

Some were haemophiliacs given blood products they were told were a “miracle treatment” - including at hospitals in Newcastle. Others were infected through blood transfusions. More than 3,000 people have died.

Now Sir Brian has laid bare a situation which has seen those awaiting compensation for what is widely seen as the NHS’ biggest ever treatment disaster as “being talked at, rather than talked to”.

The new report highlights concerns including:

■ The slow speed of compensation;

■ Injustices when it comes to how some groups are assessed - including people infected with HIV prior to 1982;

■ The lack of engagement with those waiting for compensation themselves, and their recognised legal teams;

■ That haemophilia doctors themselves have reported “significant concerns” about the nature of questions they have received from the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA);

■ The fact that people have to wait to be invited for compensation, rather than being able to proactively apply;