Senin, 20 Mei 2024

Woman mauled to death by XL Bully at London home - Evening Standard

You must be at least 18 years old to create an account

* Required fields

Already have an account? SIGN IN

By clicking Sign up you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use , Cookie policy and Privacy notice .

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMieGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnN0YW5kYXJkLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvY3JpbWUvd29tYW4ta2lsbGVkLXhsLWJ1bGx5LWRvZy1ob3JuY2h1cmNoLWVhc3QtbG9uZG9uLW1ldHJvcG9saXRhbi1wb2xpY2UtYjExNTkwNjUuaHRtbNIBAA?oc=5

2024-05-20 21:13:10Z
CBMieGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnN0YW5kYXJkLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvY3JpbWUvd29tYW4ta2lsbGVkLXhsLWJ1bGx5LWRvZy1ob3JuY2h1cmNoLWVhc3QtbG9uZG9uLW1ldHJvcG9saXRhbi1wb2xpY2UtYjExNTkwNjUuaHRtbNIBAA

Romford: Woman dies in XL bully attack at home - BBC

picture of Cornwall CloseGoogle

A woman in her 50s has died after an XL bully attack at a house in east London, the Met Police has confirmed.

Officers were called to Cornwall Close, Hornchurch, east London at about 13:12 BST on Monday.

The woman was treated by medics from London Ambulance Service, but was pronounced dead at the scene.

Due to the threat posed, armed officers attended and safely seized two dogs, the Met said.

They were registered XL bully dogs and had been shut inside a room before they arrived.

The family of the woman, who was the owner of the dogs, are being supported by officers, the force added.

From 1 February, it became a criminal offence to own the XL bully breed in England and Wales without an exemption certificate.

Anyone who owns one of the dogs must have had the animal neutered, have it microchipped and keep it muzzled and on a lead in public, among other restrictions.

The government move to ban XL bullies followed a series of attacks on people.

Presentational grey line

Listen to the best of BBC Radio London on Sounds and follow BBC London on Facebook, X and Instagram. Send your story ideas to hellobbclondon@bbc.co.uk

Related Topics

Related Internet Links

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiNWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL3VrLWVuZ2xhbmQtbG9uZG9uLTY5MDQxNDkz0gE5aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvdWstZW5nbGFuZC1sb25kb24tNjkwNDE0OTMuYW1w?oc=5

2024-05-20 20:52:22Z
CBMiNWh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL3VrLWVuZ2xhbmQtbG9uZG9uLTY5MDQxNDkz0gE5aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuYmJjLmNvLnVrL25ld3MvdWstZW5nbGFuZC1sb25kb24tNjkwNDE0OTMuYW1w

Infected blood scandal prompts politicians to again say ‘never again’ - The Guardian

Remember Hillsborough? Remember Grenfell? Remember the Post Office Horizon scandal? Of course you do. So you probably don’t have much faith in organisations and government to tell the truth. Because on every occasion, what you get from politicians is a lot of hand-wringing. Bucketfuls of faux piety. Verging on the lachrymose. Not forgetting the sincerity. Always the sincerity.

“This. Must. Never. Be. Allowed. To. Happen. Again,” they say. Talking extra slowly and over-emphasising each word. Because this time they think the public might be watching them. Because this time they expect to be believed. “Read my lips. I’m an honest broker.” Except we all know they’re not. That every time they say this mustn’t happen again, there’s another thing coming just round the corner they had said must never happen again.

Weird, isn’t it? What are the chances? It’s almost as if the politicians are just mouthing platitudes. The sort of banalities that get wheeled out on the death of a minor public figure whom no one really knew. More an expression of helplessness than genuine intent.

Something must be done. But no one’s really bothered enough to do it. Let it drop and leave it to someone else. It’s all a bit difficult. Embarrassing even. And what’s missing is the sense of shame. The acknowledgment that government or public institutions might in some way be complicit. Might bear some responsibility. The political class lives to fight another day.

No doubt the Theresa May government thought Brian Langstaff would be a safe pair of hands to head the infected blood inquiry when he was appointed in February 2018. An establishment man through and through. One of us.

Someone who could be relied on to do a thorough job. But not too thorough. Examine the causes but go easy on apportioning the blame. Especially to successive governments. Politicians always want to have someone else to blame. Never themselves.

But Langstaff is very much his own man. There’s nothing like spending five years listening to the testimony of patients and relatives to fuel righteous anger. Nothing like being talked down to and dismissed by politicians who you knew were lying through their teeth to turn you into a caped crusader. Give him a beard and he could be a Dumbledore for a new generation. The voice of ancient truths.

Come Monday afternoon, Langstaff had one last chance to make a difference. His report had been published that morning. The victims had given their press conference at lunchtime. Now it was left to Brian to make a splash. To make sure his report survived beyond one day’s news cycle. That everyone didn’t just go, “Oh that’s terrible” in the afternoon and have moved on by the following morning. Recommendations? What recommendations? Just shove them aside to join the pile of all the other things that are far too difficult to action now.

There was a standing ovation when Langstaff took to the stage of Methodist Central Hall to deliver his hour-long statement in front of an audience of victims and journalists. He was very much their man. They had spent long enough in the inquiry, they had read enough of his 2,000-page report, to know he was on their side. There was no whitewash. He was the real deal.

“You’re applauding the wrong man,” said Langstaff, with a bashful smile. You don’t get to have spent a career as a barrister without knowing how to work a crowd. “This report comes from you and your stories. Look to your right. To your left. In front of you and behind you. These are the people who have written this report. So please stand up to applaud yourselves.”

They did. The ovation was even longer second time round.

Then to the details. There had been 30,000 people treated with infected blood, 3,000 had died. More were dying by the day. Then there were the families and friends affected. Who had given up their careers, their lives to care for their loved ones. Dreams and ambitions lost.

There was the stigma. Many victims had been shunned or abused by their neighbours. Some of the early treatments for HIV and hepatitis C had been more traumatic than the conditions themselves.

And most of it had been entirely avoidable. The dangers of passing on infections in blood products had been well known since the 1940s and 50s. This hadn’t been an accident. Hospitals had covered up their errors and misconduct. As had all governments from the 1980s onwards.

Worse, they had actually lied to the victims. Told them that they had been warned of the dangers of HIV and hep C at the earliest opportunity. That they had always had the best treatment available. That everything was for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

There had been cover-ups. The current government had even tried to delay paying compensation. Hey, these victims had waited long enough. It wouldn’t hurt for them to wait a bit longer. Let Labour find the £10bn when they won the election. The Tories could then taunt them for not balancing the books.

Langstaff ended by saying his job was not done. The publication of his report was just a waypoint on the journey. The real work started now. Making sure the government implemented his recommendations. It was a bravura performance. His voice had been heard. As had the victims’ voices. For the first time in decades they were people again. They counted. We ended with yet more sustained applause.

Much later in the afternoon, Rishi Sunak came to the Commons to give a statement. This was less convincing theatre. The prime minister used his extra slow, extra serious voice. Empathy turned up to three. That’s about as far as he goes. No one cared more about the infected blood victims than he did. They had been let down by health professionals and governments. He was truly, truly sorry.

Though not sorry enough – as pointed out by Labour’s Diana Johnson, who has campaigned on the issue for years – to have done as Langstaff had recommended in his interim report and establish a compensation scheme. Doing so now just looked like he had been embarrassed into it. Amazing how you can find an extra £10bn when it’s convenient. Almost as though the figures in every budget were imaginary.

Sunak ended with the inevitable. “We must make sure nothing like this ever happens again.” Except it will. It’s all too easy for politicians to apologise for the guilt of their predecessors. But it’s odds on there’s another scandal bubbling below the surface right now in which the state is implicated. And in 10 or 20 years’ time, the prime minister of the day will be saying sorry.

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMifGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnRoZWd1YXJkaWFuLmNvbS9wb2xpdGljcy9hcnRpY2xlLzIwMjQvbWF5LzIwL2luZmVjdGVkLWJsb29kLXNjYW5kYWwtcHJvbXB0cy1wb2xpdGljaWFucy10by1hZ2Fpbi1zYXktbmV2ZXItYWdhaW7SAXxodHRwczovL2FtcC50aGVndWFyZGlhbi5jb20vcG9saXRpY3MvYXJ0aWNsZS8yMDI0L21heS8yMC9pbmZlY3RlZC1ibG9vZC1zY2FuZGFsLXByb21wdHMtcG9saXRpY2lhbnMtdG8tYWdhaW4tc2F5LW5ldmVyLWFnYWlu?oc=5

2024-05-20 20:37:00Z
CBMifGh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LnRoZWd1YXJkaWFuLmNvbS9wb2xpdGljcy9hcnRpY2xlLzIwMjQvbWF5LzIwL2luZmVjdGVkLWJsb29kLXNjYW5kYWwtcHJvbXB0cy1wb2xpdGljaWFucy10by1hZ2Fpbi1zYXktbmV2ZXItYWdhaW7SAXxodHRwczovL2FtcC50aGVndWFyZGlhbi5jb20vcG9saXRpY3MvYXJ0aWNsZS8yMDI0L21heS8yMC9pbmZlY3RlZC1ibG9vZC1zY2FuZGFsLXByb21wdHMtcG9saXRpY2lhbnMtdG8tYWdhaW4tc2F5LW5ldmVyLWFnYWlu

£5bn Brexit border checks system still has no timetable for launch, watchdog says - The Independent

A post-Brexit border control system designed to “take control” of Britain’s borders has no clear timetable for completion, warned the National Audit Office (NAO) on Monday.

The public spending watchdog said repeated changes and deferrals to the government’s flagship plan for full import controls from the EU was leading to uncertainty for businesses and extra costs for government and ports.

The Border Target Operating Model (BTOM) is being brought in through phases, with the second for animal and plant exports coming in on 30 April. A third part of the model on safety and security declarations is due to be introduced in October - but it’s not clear when full controls will be in place.

Lorries at the Sevington Inland Border Facility in Ashford as the National Audit Office warns over uncertainty for a post-Brexit border controls system (Gareth Fuller/PA Wire)

The scheme, hoped to make the “world’s most effective border”, lacks a clear timetable and an integrated cross-government delivery plan, said the NAO in a report issued.

The office said that since the transition period concluded at the end of 2020, the government had delayed its plans five times and spent money on infrastructure and staff that were ultimately not needed.

The overall cost of the system is set to be £4.7bn, estimated the NAO.

The government has no clear timetable to fully implement its post-Brexit border controls with the EU, the National Audit Office said on Monday (Gareth Fuller/PA Wire)

Gareth Davies, head of the NAO, said: “The UK leaving the EU created a large-scale change in arrangements for the movement of goods across the border. However, more than three years after the end of the transition period, it is still not clear when full controls will be in place.

“The border strategy has ambitious plans to use technology and data to facilitate trade while managing risks. To achieve its objectives, government requires strong delivery and accountability – including a more realistic approach to digital transformation – together with effective monitoring to enable future improvements.”

The BTOM is a new approach to security controls (applying to all imports), and sanitary and phytosanitary controls (applying to imports of live animals, animal products, plants and plant products) at the border.

It sets out how controls will be simplified and digitised, and Britain’s ambition for the UK’s new single trade window - but it’s had critics. Many fear the system will add delays, red tape and costs to many imports, with small and medium-sized businesses to be the most impacted.

The second phase of the border checks system was rolled out on the Easter Monday bank holiday weekend, with Marco Forgione, director general of the Institute of Export and International Trade, claiming it a “smart” move to introduce the additional checks during a time when traffic was going to be reduced.

The report by the NAO did note that border processes, including the introduction of full customs controls, have largely operated smoothly since the UK’s exit from the EU, but said that businesses trading goods between the UK and the EU have faced additional costs and administrative burden.

Martin McTague, national chair of the Federation of Small Businesses, said that the group’s research shows almost one in 10 small firms that used to export or import goods have stopped doing so in the past five years, in part due to the volume of paperwork, costs and supply chain or logistical issues.

He said: “Government needs to ensure that changes are better planned, timetabled and tested to ensure that operations run smoothly. This will minimise damage to trade and indeed our international global reputation.”

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiY2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmluZGVwZW5kZW50LmNvLnVrL25ld3MvdWsvcG9saXRpY3MvYnJleGl0LWJvcmRlci1jb250cm9scy1idG9tLWNvbXBsZXRpb24tYjI1NDc4NTkuaHRtbNIBAA?oc=5

2024-05-20 09:54:11Z
CBMiY2h0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmluZGVwZW5kZW50LmNvLnVrL25ld3MvdWsvcG9saXRpY3MvYnJleGl0LWJvcmRlci1jb250cm9scy1idG9tLWNvbXBsZXRpb24tYjI1NDc4NTkuaHRtbNIBAA

Post-Brexit border checks forecast to cost UK £4.7bn, says NAO - The Guardian

The government expects to have spent at least £4.7bn on introducing post-Brexit border controls, which have been repeatedly hit by delays, the public spending watchdog has warned.

Plans to bring in border checks on goods coming from the EU faced “significant issues” including critical shortages of inspectors before their introduction last month, the National Audit Office said in a report.

The UK has said it hopes to have the “world’s most effective border” by 2025, but the watchdog said the strategy lacked “a clear timetable and an integrated cross-government delivery plan”, with individual departments responsible for implementing different aspects.

The government estimates it will spend at least £4.7bn on the 13 most significant border-related programmes over their lifetimes, of which £2.6bn had been spent by March 2023.

The report found that the Cabinet Office’s confidence in physical checks on plant and animal imports being introduced in April had been rated as “amber” at the start of the year. The department, which monitors the government and business readiness for the changes, said the amber rating meant that while the implementation was “feasible”, there were “significant issues that required management attention”.

This included difficulties recruiting and training port health authority inspectors to carry out the checks, with the government admitting that authorities “would not have 100% of the staff they required from day one”.

The Cabinet Office also raised concerns over whether the government had sufficient legislation in place to support the new checks.

The revelations over a lack of government preparedness for the changes, come a week after an IT outage led to lorries being held at the border posts for up to 20 hours, affecting many import businesses bringing in goods from the EU.

On 30 April, the government introduced physical checks on lorries bringing in animal and plant products coming from the continent, in a move that would mirror those the EU brought in for UK imports when the country left the single market in 2021.

The report found that the Cabinet Office had raised the lack of staff as a “critical issue” in January as well as the fact that an approach on compliance and enforcement had yet to be agreed.

Gareth Davies, the head of the NAO, said: “The UK leaving the EU created a large-scale change in arrangements for the movement of goods across the border. However, more than three years after the end of the transition period, it is still not clear when full controls will be in place.

“The border strategy has ambitious plans to use technology and data to facilitate trade while managing risks. To achieve its objectives, government requires strong delivery and accountability – including a more realistic approach to digital transformation – together with effective monitoring to enable future improvements.”

Crucial laws, including those that allowed border posts to be officially designated to process goods, were eventually passed by parliament in April, while the government revealed publicly it would be scaling back some checks to avoid disruption only weeks before they were introduced.

The implementation followed five previous delays stretching back to July 2021, including an overhaul of approach in 2022 that led to the number of checks needed being significantly reduced.

These repeated delays and changes to approach meant the government had spent taxpayer funds on infrastructure and staff that were ultimately not needed, the report said.

This included spending £62m on procuring or building two sites near Dover that were intended to be border control posts but were not used, while also forking out £258m on eight temporary border facilities that have now been closed.

Port health authorities recruited 520 staff to undertake border checks between 2020 and 2021, of which 370 were no longer required after the government changed approach in 2022. Only some were reassigned roles within local authorities.

However, the NAO said the government was yet to set out a clear timetable on when policies to deliver it would be implemented, and there was no cross-government integrated plan for the strategy.

Meg Hillier, the Labour MP who chairs the public accounts committee (PAC), said:“A key promise of Brexit was that we would take back control of our border. Yet more than three years after the end of the transition period, full import controls are still not in place.

“Delays and changes in direction have caused unnecessary costs to government and businesses. As the PAC often sees across government, this could have been avoided with a clearer vision and better planning.”

A government spokesperson said: “Our borders strategy introduces essential, risk-based checks to protect the UK from potentially devastating pests and diseases. And we are making good progress, having successfully rolled out new checks in January and April this year while taking a pragmatic approach which minimises disruption.

“To support traders, we are also launching the Single Trade Window, a single secure gateway, which will make it easier for traders to provide information to government when importing goods.”

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMigAFodHRwczovL3d3dy50aGVndWFyZGlhbi5jb20vcG9saXRpY3MvYXJ0aWNsZS8yMDI0L21heS8yMC9icml0YWluLWJyZXhpdC1ib3JkZXItY2hlY2tzLWV1LWNvc3QtdWstZmlybXMtNDcwbS1hLXllYXItc2F5cy13YXRjaGRvZ9IBgAFodHRwczovL2FtcC50aGVndWFyZGlhbi5jb20vcG9saXRpY3MvYXJ0aWNsZS8yMDI0L21heS8yMC9icml0YWluLWJyZXhpdC1ib3JkZXItY2hlY2tzLWV1LWNvc3QtdWstZmlybXMtNDcwbS1hLXllYXItc2F5cy13YXRjaGRvZw?oc=5

2024-05-20 08:34:00Z
CBMigAFodHRwczovL3d3dy50aGVndWFyZGlhbi5jb20vcG9saXRpY3MvYXJ0aWNsZS8yMDI0L21heS8yMC9icml0YWluLWJyZXhpdC1ib3JkZXItY2hlY2tzLWV1LWNvc3QtdWstZmlybXMtNDcwbS1hLXllYXItc2F5cy13YXRjaGRvZ9IBgAFodHRwczovL2FtcC50aGVndWFyZGlhbi5jb20vcG9saXRpY3MvYXJ0aWNsZS8yMDI0L21heS8yMC9icml0YWluLWJyZXhpdC1ib3JkZXItY2hlY2tzLWV1LWNvc3QtdWstZmlybXMtNDcwbS1hLXllYXItc2F5cy13YXRjaGRvZw

Infected blood scandal: Inquiry into NHS disaster to publish findings - BBC

Protesters holding placards with messages related to the NHS infected blood scandalGetty Images

The public inquiry into the infected blood scandal, known as the biggest treatment disaster in NHS history, is due to publish its findings.

More than 30,000 people were infected with HIV and hepatitis C from 1970 to 1991 by contaminated blood products and transfusions.

About 3,000 of them have since died - many haemophiliacs given infected blood products as part of their treatment.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is expected to issue an apology on Monday.

Chairman Sir Brian Langstaff will deliver his findings after the Infected Blood Inquiry took evidence between 2019 and 2023.

Two main groups of people were caught up in the scandal.

One was people with haemophilia, and those with similar disorders, who have a rare genetic condition which means their blood does not clot properly.

In the 1970s, a new treatment was developed to replace the missing clotting agents, made from donated human blood plasma.

But whole batches of the treatments - Factor VIII and Factor IX - were contaminated with deadly viruses.

Some of the treatments were imported from the US where blood was bought from high-risk donors such as prison inmates and drug-users.

The second group affected include people who had a blood transfusion after childbirth, accidents and during medical treatment.

Blood used for these patients was not imported, but some of it was also contaminated, mainly with hepatitis C.

One victim said any potential apology from the government "won't bring back the dead".

Ros Cooper, who was infected with hepatitis C after treatment for a bleeding disorder as a child, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme that "words don't mean a lot".

"To a lot of people who've lost loved ones, what are words going to do? It's not going to bring back the dead, it's not going to wash away crimes that have been committed," she said.

"Lives were effectively ruined because of those decisions. Any kind of apology, to be worth anything to the victims, needs to come from somebody who truly understands that."

The key issues addressed by the inquiry include:

  • whether the victims have been supported enough

  • whether there were attempts by the government or NHS to conceal what happened

  • what more should have been done to prevent people becoming infected, including whether screening could have been introduced sooner.

Sir Brian's two interim reports, published in July 2022 and April 2023, made recommendations about compensation for victims and their families.

The government has said it accepts the "moral case" for compensation, and interim payouts of £100,000 each have already been made to about 4,000 survivors and bereaved partners.

Ministers have promised to address the issue of final compensation once the inquiry's report is published. The total cost is likely to run into billions.

On Sunday, the Conservatives and Labour both committed to compensation for victims, no matter the outcome of the general election expected later this year.

Shadow health secretary Wes Streeting told Laura Kuenssberg there was a "rare moment of consensus", as Defence Secretary Grant Shapps agreed families had been let down "over decades".

Infected blood scandal victim Andy Evans

The Tainted Blood campaign group chairman, Andy Evans, who was infected with HIV and hepatitis C as a child through his haemophilia treatment, said publication of the report would be a "defining" moment after decades of campaigning.

"This is where we pin our hopes, really - we don't have anywhere else to go after this," he said.

"From the very beginning, victims have been gas-lit by government saying that the treatment was the best available and every decision was made with the best intention and with the best information they had available at the time.

"Through the course of the inquiry, that's proven to be false. The testimony that we've heard, both from victims and from people in office and the NHS, has shown that that wasn't true."

During the four-year inquiry, victims and their families have given evidence alongside former and current ministers, including Lord Clarke, who was health minister in the 1980s, and the current chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, who also gave evidence in his former role as health minister.

Speaking to the BBC's Westminster Hour on Radio 4, Labour's Dame Diana Johnson, the leading MP campaigning in parliament for the victims of the scandal, said many of the victims and their families were "apprehensive" and "worried" ahead of the report's publication, as "so many times before they've been let down".

She said those affected by the scandal had had to "battle and battle" against successive governments who had denied any wrongdoing since the 1980s, and that compensation for them would be "an acknowledgment of what the state did to those individuals and their families".

She said there was hope that their main questions - "Why was this allowed to happen and why was it covered up for so many years?" - would be answered by Sir Brian.

Speaking on the same programme, former Business Secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg said, "If the state has killed people it has got to pay the price", and that the government "should not shy away from it being expensive".

He added that the scandal demonstrated a "defence mechanism within the institutions of the state which we need to break down".

"For some reason there is a desire to cover up the mistakes made by long since passed government to no benefit of anybody who is currently in government...I do not understand why the state is not more open to saying yes mistakes were made."

On the issue of compensation for victims and their families, the Conservative MP said: "People deserve this compensation. This is one of the most important bills the government will pay."

Campaigners have also been critical of how long it has taken to get a public inquiry.

In other countries that faced contaminated blood scandals, including France and Japan, investigations into the medical disasters were completed many years ago.

In some cases, criminal charges were brought against doctors, politicians and other officials.

In the UK, a private inquiry in 2009 - funded entirely by donations - lacked any real powers, while a separate Scottish investigation in 2015 was branded a "whitewash" by victims and their families.

In 2017, following political pressure, then-Prime Minister Theresa May ordered a UK-wide public inquiry.

The findings are set to be presented at 12:30 BST.

Banner saying 'Get in touch'

Are you affected by the issues raised in this story? Please share your experiences by emailing haveyoursay@bbc.co.uk.

Please include a contact number if you are willing to speak to a BBC journalist. You can also get in touch in the following ways:

If you are reading this page and can't see the form you will need to visit the mobile version of the BBC website to submit your question or comment or you can email us at HaveYourSay@bbc.co.uk. Please include your name, age and location with any submission.

Around the BBC

Related Internet Links

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiKmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNtIBLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNi5hbXA?oc=5

2024-05-20 08:07:26Z
CBMiKmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNtIBLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNi5hbXA

Infected blood scandal: Inquiry into NHS disaster to publish findings - BBC

Protesters holding placards with messages related to the NHS infected blood scandalGetty Images

The public inquiry into the infected blood scandal, known as the biggest treatment disaster in NHS history, is due to publish its findings.

More than 30,000 people were infected with HIV and hepatitis C from 1970 to 1991 by contaminated blood products and transfusions.

About 3,000 of them have since died - many haemophiliacs given infected blood products as part of their treatment.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is expected to issue an apology on Monday.

Chairman Sir Brian Langstaff will deliver his findings after the Infected Blood Inquiry took evidence between 2019 and 2023.

Two main groups of people were caught up in the scandal.

One was people with haemophilia, and those with similar disorders, who have a rare genetic condition which means their blood does not clot properly.

In the 1970s, a new treatment was developed to replace the missing clotting agents, made from donated human blood plasma.

But whole batches of the treatments - Factor VIII and Factor IX - were contaminated with deadly viruses.

Some of the treatments were imported from the US where blood was bought from high-risk donors such as prison inmates and drug-users.

The second group affected include people who had a blood transfusion after childbirth, accidents and during medical treatment.

Blood used for these patients was not imported, but some of it was also contaminated, mainly with hepatitis C.

The key issues addressed by the inquiry include:

  • whether the victims have been supported enough

  • whether there were attempts by the government or NHS to conceal what happened

  • what more should have been done to prevent people becoming infected, including whether screening could have been introduced sooner.

Sir Brian's two interim reports, published in July 2022 and April 2023, made recommendations about compensation for victims and their families.

The government has said it accepts the "moral case" for compensation, and interim payouts of £100,000 each have already been made to about 4,000 survivors and bereaved partners.

Ministers have promised to address the issue of final compensation once the inquiry's report is published. The total cost is likely to run into billions.

On Sunday, the Conservatives and Labour both committed to compensation for victims, no matter the outcome of the general election expected later this year.

Shadow health secretary Wes Streeting told Laura Kuenssberg there was a "rare moment of consensus", as Defence Secretary Grant Shapps agreed families had been let down "over decades".

Infected blood scandal victim Andy Evans

The Tainted Blood campaign group chairman, Andy Evans, who was infected with HIV and hepatitis C as a child through his haemophilia treatment, said publication of the report would be a "defining" moment after decades of campaigning.

"This is where we pin our hopes, really - we don't have anywhere else to go after this," he said.

"From the very beginning, victims have been gas-lit by government saying that the treatment was the best available and every decision was made with the best intention and with the best information they had available at the time.

"Through the course of the inquiry, that's proven to be false. The testimony that we've heard, both from victims and from people in office and the NHS, has shown that that wasn't true."

During the four-year inquiry, victims and their families have given evidence alongside former and current ministers, including Lord Clarke, who was health minister in the 1980s, and the current chancellor, Jeremy Hunt, who also gave evidence in his former role as health minister.

Speaking to the BBC's Westminster Hour on Radio 4, Labour's Dame Diana Johnson, the leading MP campaigning in parliament for the victims of the scandal, said many of the victims and their families were "apprehensive" and "worried" ahead of the report's publication, as "so many times before they've been let down".

She said those affected by the scandal had had to "battle and battle" against successive governments who had denied any wrongdoing since the 1980s, and that compensation for them would be "an acknowledgment of what the state did to those individuals and their families".

She said there was hope that their main questions - "Why was this allowed to happen and why was it covered up for so many years?" - would be answered by Sir Brian.

Speaking on the same programme, former Business Secretary Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg said, "If the state has killed people it has got to pay the price", and that the government "should not shy away from it being expensive".

He added that the scandal demonstrated a "defence mechanism within the institutions of the state which we need to break down".

"For some reason there is a desire to cover up the mistakes made by long since passed government to no benefit of anybody who is currently in government...I do not understand why the state is not more open to saying yes mistakes were made."

On the issue of compensation for victims and their families, the Conservative MP said: "People deserve this compensation. This is one of the most important bills the government will pay."

Campaigners have also been critical of how long it has taken to get a public inquiry.

In other countries that faced contaminated blood scandals, including France and Japan, investigations into the medical disasters were completed many years ago.

In some cases, criminal charges were brought against doctors, politicians and other officials.

In the UK, a private inquiry in 2009 - funded entirely by donations - lacked any real powers, while a separate Scottish investigation in 2015 was branded a "whitewash" by victims and their families.

In 2017, following political pressure, then-Prime Minister Theresa May ordered a UK-wide public inquiry.

The findings are set to be presented at 12:30 BST.

Related Internet Links

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.

Adblock test (Why?)


https://news.google.com/rss/articles/CBMiKmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNtIBLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNi5hbXA?oc=5

2024-05-20 05:42:22Z
CBMiKmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNtIBLmh0dHBzOi8vd3d3LmJiYy5jby51ay9uZXdzL2hlYWx0aC02OTAyMjcyNi5hbXA