---

Lord Warner: My Lords, I am well versed in the noble Lord's concerns in this area and I pay tribute to his persistence. But it is important to stress that, despite the Department of Health's decision to make ex gratia payments, we do not accept that any wrongful practices were employed in relation to inadvertent infection of blood which led to hepatitis C, and we do not consider that a public inquiry is justified as we do not believe that any new light will be shed on this issue as a result.

I acknowledge that the appeals system has been rather slow to establish the appeals panel, but it is now at the point where the NHS Appointments Commission is about to appoint members to the panel. We know, regrettably, that 57 applicants have indicated that they wish to appeal. I will certainly be pressing for this process to take place as quickly as possible.

Lord Jenkin of Roding: My Lords, do the Government intend to publish a review of the whole sad story of contaminated blood products and of the haemophiliacs and others who have been infected with
 
12 Jan 2006 : Column 300
 
HIV and hepatitis C? Is the Minister aware that after my long perusal last year of a large number of files that passed across my desk on this subject as Secretary of State for Health, I was able to confirm, as I had been warned, that all the papers dealing with contaminated blood products have been destroyed? How can the review possibly be comprehensive and tell the whole story if the key papers on how these infections reached these patients have been pulped?

Lord Warner: My Lords, let me reassure the House that there has been no deliberate attempt to destroy past papers. Officials have established that during the HIV litigation in the 1990s, many papers from that period were recalled. We understand that papers were not adequately archived and were unfortunately destroyed in the early 1990s. Officials have also established that a number of files were marked for destruction in the 1990s. Clearly, that should not have happened. When it was discovered that files had been destroyed, an internal review was undertaken by officials. The results of that will be made known as soon as possible. I know that the noble Lord has been in correspondence with the Permanent Secretary of the Department of Health and I understand that an answer will be sent to him on some of those issues as quickly as possible.

Baroness Masham of Ilton: My Lords, I also declare an interest as a vice-president of the Haemophilia Society. Why are we not as generous as Canada in helping those unfortunate people? Can the Minister reassure the House that CJD is not also a problem for those unfortunate people?

Lord Warner: My Lords, there is a difference between the position in Canada and in the United Kingdom and it is important to recognise that distinction. The awards being made in Canada follow a class action brought against the Canadian Government. A settlement agreement was reached with the federal government and, as such, the payment structure was based on claims for punitive damages. Subsequent inquiries found that wrongful practices had been employed and criminal charges were laid against the organisations, including the Red Cross Society, who were responsible for screening blood. There was no such wrongdoing in the United Kingdom and it is unfair to compare the two schemes. I will look into the latter point that the noble Baroness raises and write to her.

Lord Winston: My Lords, my noble friend uses the phrase "reassure the House", but is not one of the issues here the need to reassure the public, particularly those who feel very threatened when they are offered blood transfusions? Is there not a need for the Government to show care and compassion to these most unfortunate people?

Lord Warner: My Lords, the Government have shown care and compassion for those who are infected with hepatitis C. The scheme that is the subject of the
 
12 Jan 2006 : Column 301
 
Question was introduced by this Government. It was announced in 2003 and we are moving to make payments to people who were alive then and infected with hepatitis C. We have now spent well over £80 million in compensating them to help to alleviate their suffering.

Lord Addington: My Lords, do the Government not accept that whatever has been done here, they have given the impression of it being legalistic and slow and not being compatible with the needs of a very similar group? Will the Government give us an undertaking that that will not be the attitude in any future case?

Lord Warner: My Lords, let us go back to the basis of the scheme. As I have made clear repeatedly and repeat again today, the infection of people with hepatitis C was inadvertent. Nothing could have been done at the time with the technology available to assess the blood for that level of infection. The blood service did nothing wrong. We as a Government have put in place a scheme to alleviate the suffering of people who were alive after the scheme was announced in August 2003 to provide help for them. We have extended that scheme today in the announcement that I have made, so that the dependants of people who died after the scheme came into operation will also be eligible to make a claim.

Lord Owen: My Lords—

Lord Rooker: My Lords, we are well into the 25th minute. We must move on.

Palestine: Elections

11.30 am

Lord Dykes asked Her Majesty's Government:

Whether they have a view on the possibility that the Palestinian general election, planned for 25 January, might be postponed.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Triesman): My Lords, President Abbas has stated that the Palestinian legislative election will proceed on 25 January. The Israeli Cabinet will vote on the issue of elections in east Jerusalem on Sunday 15 January. We hope that its decision will remove any possibility of the election being delayed. We urge both the Palestinian and Israeli authorities to co-operate in the facilitation of these elections.

Lord Dykes: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that encouraging reply. Will he make sure that the Israeli Cabinet does its best to allow east Jerusalem voters—Palestinian voters—to vote in these elections? It has already indicated provisionally that it would do so. It is crucial for them to take part in what is the effectively de facto renewed attempt to secure a full, sovereign Palestinian state. That is very important. Will he also
 
12 Jan 2006 : Column 302
 
have discussions with the Israeli authorities about easing the restrictions on free movement of Palestinian voters in Gaza and the rest of the West Bank?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, we are urging everyone to facilitate the elections in every way possible and to ensure—and this is important—that there is proper security and safety for those who will observe the elections. So far, acting Prime Minister Olmert has said that he will bring a comprehensive package to his Cabinet meeting. I do not doubt the difficulties of the discussions in that Cabinet given the security issues, but the signs so far are positive. We are urging that there should be a positive outcome.

Lord Janner of Braunstone: My Lords, I have just returned from the Middle East where I met many leading Israeli and Palestinian leaders. Does my noble friend agree that there is every chance that the elections will go ahead with Palestinian and Israeli support? But does he not regard as the greatest danger the refusal of Hamas to remove from its charter its determination to destroy and remove the state of Israel?

Lord Triesman: My Lords, I agree with the proposition that it is vital that all parties throughout the region ensure that these elections and the Israeli elections that will follow shortly thereafter are a complete success. Our position on Hamas participation is clear. The Palestinians have a right to vote for whomsoever they want. We welcome the participation of a wide range of parties in all elections. But, ultimately, those who want to take part in the political process cannot engage in armed activity at the same time. We support the quartet's call on 28 December for all participants in this election to renounce violence, to recognise Israel's right to exist and to disarm. For its part, the United Kingdom will have no dealings with the leadership of Hamas, or any other organisation, unless it renounces violence and its charter commitment to the destruction of the state of Israel.

Baroness Miller of Hendon: My Lords, I also have recently returned from Israel—in fact, last night—where I had discussions with many Israeli leaders and experienced journalists who know what is going on in the Palestinian area. They are of the view that Hamas will take a large percentage of the vote from Fatah. If it takes as much as 40 per cent, which has been suggested might happen, how does the Minister think that that will affect the democracy of the Palestinian state if it does not say that it will give up its desire to get rid of or to wipe out Israel?

---