Committee publication · Correspondence · 29 June 2026
Letter from the Chief Operating Officer of the Civil Service and Permanent Secretary at the Cabinet Office relating to Compensation scheme oral evidence follow-up, 18 June 2026
Summary
Catherine Little, Civil Service Chief Operating Officer, responds to PAC's oral evidence follow-up regarding why the Government is not pursuing redress from American pharmaceutical companies in the infected blood scandal. She explains that the Infected Blood Inquiry found many companies no longer exist as separate legal entities due to dissolutions, liquidations, or acquisitions, making it legally inappropriate to hold current corporate successors responsible for historical conduct.
Key findings
- The Infected Blood Inquiry's Volume 4 report identified that pharmaceutical companies involved in the scandal have been dissolved, liquidated, or absorbed through takeovers, with no separate legal identity to pursue
- The Inquiry concluded it would be inappropriate to hold present-day corporate entities responsible for actions taken by different corporate entities decades ago, despite name commonality
- Government's approach to redress is informed by the Inquiry's legal analysis on corporate liability and the moral imperative to provide compensation to victims
- The previous Government accepted the moral case for compensation in 2022; the current Government emphasises the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme as providing closure and upholding justice
Tone
ProceduralTopics
Key actors
Catherine Little, Sir Geoffrey, Public Accounts Committee, Infected Blood Inquiry, Cabinet Office, Previous Government, American pharmaceutical companies
Notable line
“… it would be inappropriate simply by reason of a commonality of label to hold them (as they exist now) responsible for what was done by what were different corporate entities some considerable time ago." The Inquiry's views …”
Key Quotes
“… it would be inappropriate simply by reason of a commonality of label to hold them (as they exist now) responsible for what was done by what were different corporate entities some considerable time ago." The Inquiry's views …”
“… the 'failure to bring the true facts to life has come partly from the inertia of groupthink; but partly, it must be recognised from instinctive defensiveness, to save face and to save expense.”
“… it is absolutely fundamental that those impacted by this scandal have access to redress, not least to uphold justice and fairness in our society”
Source · parliament.uk record ↗