People who contracted hepatitis C as a result of contaminated blood transfusions decades ago are to be given substantially increased compensation, the government announced today.
But any hope on the part of the coalition that it may have finally settled the long-running and damaging dispute with thousands of people injured by the NHS was instantly dashed. A spokesman for one of the campaigning groups, Tainted Blood, pronounced the offer "hugely disappointing", while Haemophilia Society chief executive Chris James said the payments "would not bring closure to many people."
Today's announcement by the health secretary, Andrew Lansley, follows a three-month review of the compensation paid to those who were infected with hepatitis C, which can cause liver damage and cancer. Separate settlements were made to those who contracted HIV through blood transfusions. Some people were infected with both. Many of those who received contaminated blood in the 1970s and 1980s are now dead.
The new deal offers better compensation to those whose hepatitis C infection has progressed to cause serious disease. The current terms allow a one-off payment of £20,000 to all those infected, with a further £25,000 if they develop more severe diseases, such as cirrhosis or liver cancer. Under the new terms, the second group – those with severe diseases – will get an annual payment of £12,800 a year. Those with severe diseases who have already been given a lump sum will have it increased from £25,000 to £50,000. There will also be "discretionary payments" to those most in need, and the dependents of those who died before 2003 will for the first time be able to claim.
"I fully recognise that the unintended and tragic consequences of these treatments have seriously impaired the lives of many people, together with those of their families," said Lansley.
"For too long those people infected with hepatitis C have received different support to those infected with HIV. We now intend to make the financial support for hepatitis C patients fairer and more comparable to the arrangements for those infected with HIV."
But, after decades of fighting for what they consider fair settlement, including an independent inquiry by Lord Archer which recommended much greater generosity from the government, campaigners said they were devastated. Those who had hoped the coalition government would deliver where they believed Labour had failed them were bitterly disappointed.
One of the most vocal groups, Tainted Blood, said in a statement it "believes that the government has missed a huge opportunity to bring closure to all of those affected and has once again made another token gesture to some of those affected".
Sue Threakall, secretary of the group, said: "While there are some minor positive points, we are devastated by this announcement. There are a limited number of people that the new financial support will be available to and the level of payment to those who will qualify is hugely disappointing. It will not bring to an end the years of suffering and will mean that the campaign for achieving proper compensation for all will continue with a new vigour."
Chris James, chief executive of the Haemophilia Society, said he thought the reaction from the community would be that it is "a gesture rather than a settlement. People will not feel that this is going to bring closure in terms of the money being paid. The levels of compensation are not in the region that people still feel is appropriate for the impact on their lives."
Those who were infected but not severely ill would get nothing more – unless they were in serious need and qualified for a discretionary payment – and the increase to the most severely ill was likely to be short-lasting, because of the poor prognosis for those with liver cancer.
Although people would be glad of the concession to allow pre-2003 widows to claim, the new deal did not address the problems people had in getting insurance cover, he said.