Hazel Blears

Additional Questions

1. CBCA0000026 - Page 7 - The paragraph spelling out possible prognosis’ appears to be deliberately vague, why is this? E.g. “large number of people”, “some people”, “in a proportion of cases”, “those people”.

   1. Surely DH Civil Servants had access to the actual figures? (Perhaps those figures would have present information unfavourable to DH in its arguments)

2. CBCA0000026 - Page 7 - (1985) "it was only in that year that it became possible to remove viruses from pooled products"

   1. On what basis was this said?

3. CBCA0000026 - Page 8 - “That requires an explanation”

   1. Is she aware of any exercise being undertaken in this case to produce an explanation?

4. CBCA0000026 - Page 14 - "I am not in a position to promise a public inquiry into this matter"

   1. Was that a slightly disingenuous way of saying “there isn’t going to be a public inquiry”?

5. DHSC0002960_007 - Does the description of who the trust should assist match the original trust deed?

6. DHSC0004029_110 - The 1987 date is at odds with the comment made at Q2 above. Why?

7. DHSC0004029_233 - "the fact is that as soon as a technology became available to make blood products free"

   1. Did she have an understanding of what the technology being referred to is?

   2. What investigations had DH undertaken to be able to make such a claim?

8. DHSC0004029_233 -  "The facts have been set out clearly on many occasions through the debates...."

   1. Was it fair to expect those infected/affected to read through parliamentary debates in order to identify and extract the odd statement that might provide some explanation, as far as DH was concerned, as to what had happened?

      1. Is that really a way of setting out “facts” “clearly”?

9. Did she make attempts to look at what had happened, in terms of blood product use and outcomes in the 70s/80s in other countries? (thinking Finland)

10. DHSC0006564_177

    1. "the pool size while it has reduced over time" - The Inquiry has seen evidence that during the 1970s and 80s, pool sizes increased significantly. On what basis could this be said? (Noted it’s not clear what time period is being referred to but the answer is being given in context to a questions about the 1970s#0

    2. "all products were potentially contaminated" - On what basis could this be said? (Thinking Behringwerke which was found to be HCV/HIV safe)

    3. "This was a universal problem in countries with well developed haemophilia services...." - might this be disingenuous bearing in mind the question that was posed about treatment options and looking at countries like Finland?

    4. "It is therefore not the case that these products were, for their time, not the best products available" - Can she explain the thinking behind this line?

11. MACF0000009_018

    1. Would it have concerned her to know that less than half of dependents received help from the trust?

       1. Was that point ever brought to her attention?