Contaminated blood scandal victims denied legal funding
VICTIMS of the contaminated blood scandal have spoken of their ‘complete disbelief’ at being refused legal funding to prepare for an upcoming public inquiry.
Campaigners said the Cabinet Office were only fuelling feelings that victims and their families were being treated ‘as cheaply and as insultingly as possible’.
The blood scandal, which took place in the late 1970s to early 1980s, saw the NHS use supplies imported from the US that had been donated by high-risk groups such as prostitutes and drug addicts.
An estimated 7,500 patients, many of whom had the blood clotting disorder haemophilia, contracted hepatitis or HIV as a result.
Efforts by relatives to prove that the government or NHS knew the blood products put lives at risk led to Theresa May announcing last year that a full public inquiry would be carried out, overseen by the Cabinet Office. But it was yesterday revealed that those involved have been told they will not be receiving legal funding to debate the consultation on the inquiry’s terms of reference.
Jason Evans, founder of campaign group Factor 8, claimed this was despite being told by Sue Gray – one of the most influential civil servants in Whitehall – last December that they would do.
The decision came just a day after Kensington and Chelsea Borough Council announced they were setting aside £3.5million in legal fees for those affected by the Grenfell Tower fire.
A letter from the Cabinet Office, seen by the Daily Mail, said the blood consultation had been designed to be ‘accessible, anonymous and user-friendly’ – therefore legal advice was not necessary for participants. It added that ‘no such commitment’ to funding had previously been made.
In regards to giving £3.5mil- lion for Grenfell, it said ‘ circumstances of the Infected Blood Inquiry are different to those arising in relation to Grenfell Tower’.
It added: ‘The commitment in the Grenfell Tower Inquiry was made because of the exceptional and extraordinary circumstances that survivors and victims’ families found themselves in after the fire; traumatised, many of them newly grief-stricken.’
In response, Mr Evans and the heads of eight other campaign groups yesterday wrote to the Cabinet Office detailing their ‘ complete disbelief and anger’ at the decision.
Their letter said: ‘This is totally unacceptable and has only fuelled the long held feeling of this community that the victims and families of this scandal should be dealt with as cheaply and as insultingly as possible.’ Demanding to know how their case was different to the Grenfell tragedy, it added there were several ‘newly grief stricken families in our community also’.
Highlighting the similarities, it noted that over 70 victims of the blood scandal had died since the inquiry was announced last year, compared to 71 in the Grenfell fire.
It continued: ‘The “nature and gravity” of the contaminated blood scandal goes unrivalled in modern times. The number of dead is in the thousands. You seem to be suggesting that the slow and agonising deaths that occur as a result of Hepatitis and HIV/ AIDS resulting in loss of mental capacity, bodily function and causing severe pain ... is in some way a lesser tragedy than the events at Grenfell.’
Calling on the Government to reconsider its decision, it added: ‘The ring-fence that the Government has attempted to present here is based upon a completely flawed argument that shows nothing but contempt and lack of understanding of our community, who will quite simply be outraged should this position be maintained.
‘We do not intend on being side-lined as second class and unworthy of the same representation afforded to others ... An urgent re-think here is in order immediately.’
Tainted blood: Now PM orders inquiry
IT was already an unmitigated scandal that the families of thousands of patients – mainly haemophilia sufferers – infected with HIV and hepatitis from contaminated blood supplies in the 1970s and 80s had to wait so long for a public inquiry.
Now, to compound that injustice, they’re told that – unlike the Grenfell Tower families – they won’t receive legal aid.
With brutal insensitivity, the Cabinet Office implies that Grenfell victims are more deserving because of the ‘exceptional circumstances’ in which they were ‘traumatised’.
Have these cold-blooded bureaucrats any conception of how traumatic it must be to watch a child die a slow, agonising death because of mistakes made by the NHS?