Subscribe to Search results

Yvette Cooper believed there were a series of unanswered questions about events in the 1970s - mid 1980s and commissioned an internal review.

Published on:

Jill Taylor wrote in a letter that the information was already in the public domain and a public inquiry was not the way forward.

Published on:

On behalf of the Department of Health, Hazel Blears wrote that the government's position remained that there was no need for a public inquiry because all the information was in the public domain.

Published on:

Lord Filkin told the House of Lords there was no benefit to anyone from a public inquiry and that the Government therefore did not support that.

Published on:

Charles Lister wrote to Peter Thompson stating that if Scottish ministers were forced to set up an Inquiry then it would be likely in England too.

Published on:

Charles Lister referred to the "established government position" of every minister who maintained the no public inquiry line.

Published on:

David Reay wrote to an anonymous recipient asserting that screening for hepatitis C could not have been introduced in the UK before 1991.

Published on:

That the government did not accept wrongful practices had been employed and that a public inquiry was not justified was recorded as the Blood Policy Team's line to take.

Published on:

Melanie Johnson, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Public Health, wrote that the government did not employ any wrongful practices and that a public inquiry was not justified.

Published on:

Following a request from Scottish officials, William Connon confirmed the government's decision was not to hold a public inquiry on the grounds that it was not justified.

Published on:

John Reid wrote to Andy Kerr confirming that the UK government's decision was not to hold a public inquiry on the grounds that it was not justified.

Published on:

William Connon wrote to Sir Nigel Crisp confirming the UK government's decision was not to hold a public inquiry on the grounds that it was not justified.

Published on:

DHSC and Lord Warner consistently said the Government's line was that a public inquiry was not justified in response to Lord Morris' Parliamentary question.

Published on:

The government line remained that no wrongful practices had been employed and there was no justification for a public inquiry.

Published on:

In Scotland, the line to take was to refer to the Executive's internal report and confirm that a public inquiry was not believed to be in the interest of those involved.

Published on:

In Scotland, the line to take asserted that there was no reason to believe anyone had acted wrongly and that a public inquiry would be a difficult, lengthy and expensive process.

Published on:

Bob Stock told the Department of Health in England that he anticipated demands for a public inquiry would be renewed with support from the Scottish Parliament.

Published on:

Malcolm Chisholm was asked by the Health and Community Care Committee when he would be able to comment on whether further evidence provided by campaigners was sufficient to hold a public inquiry.

Published on:

Malcolm Chisholm wrote to Christine Grahame MSP rejecting the contention that there was new evidence that necessitated a public inquiry.

Published on:

Sandra Falconer (MRS) responded to a letter which sought support for a public inquiry into the infection of haemophiliacs with HIV and Hepatitis C.

Published on: