On Monday 11th July 2022, the Inquiry heard evidence from Sir Robert Francis QC regarding the Infected Blood Compensation Framework Study.
Sir Francis was questioned by Counsel regarding his recommended framework for assessing eligibility for compensation, the scope of such compensation, categories of loss, types of award and method of assessment.
Sir Francis’s recommendation that immediate interim awards be paid was discussed. It was noted that there was a compelling case for such payments to be made before the conclusion of the Inquiry, despite this being relatively unusual. Such awards would be available for infected persons who are already beneficiaries of the existing support schemes and would be ‘unlikely to be less than £100,000’. Sir Francis explained his reasoning behind this recommendation. He considered that for the many potentially eligible applicants who are now of advanced age, or very unwell, that they may not survive long enough to see or enjoy the compensation. As such, Sir Francis justified the need for an immediate interim payment as a ‘matter of justice’. During his questioning by Counsel, Sir Francis explained the influence upon his report of the 9/11 Compensation Fund in the United States, which set up a compensation scheme within months. He learned from his research into this matter that ‘the sooner you can get compensation into people’s hands, the more effective it is’.
Recommendations as to how severity should be assessed were also discussed. Sir Francis recommended that assessments are made by both a medical and legal panel. A more standardised model of assessment is proposed in the report, with the possibility that categories are created in relation to the infections and types of loss. A tariff could then be created by reference to these categories. Sir Francis rejected the application of a bespoke individual assessment model due to the level of complexity it would promote at the assessment stage.
Sir Francis recommended that the compensation scheme should be administered by an Arm’s Length Body. This body would be independent of government, ensuring direct oversight and accountability to Parliament for the administration of the scheme. The issue of ‘complete absence of trust on the part of many infected and affected people of the government’ was identified by Sir Francis during his discussions with those infected and affected. Sir Francis concluded that in order for infected and affected people to have trust in a system of compensation, it would need to be a system administered independently from government.
Sir Francis commented that a moral case arises irrespective of the Inquiry’s findings. He stated in his evidence that ‘much of what happened…was in retrospect avoidable’. He went on to comment that a ‘widespread disaster’ such as this should lead to a ‘strong moral obligation on the state which inflicted harm on people when the state was in effect trying to do the very opposite to put that right’.
Sir Francis’s evidence continues on Tuesday 12th July