Delaying payouts for blood and Post Office victims is scandalous
LEON NEAL/GETTY IMAGES
The familiar truism that justice delayed is justice denied has taken on a morbid sense of urgency for the many victims of the Post Office and infected blood scandals. Thanks to the courageous persistence of campaigners, public officials have been forced to face up to the moral enormity of these past wrongs: respectively, the most widespread miscarriage of justice, and gravest case of medical malpractice, in recent memory. Yet, those charged with remedying these injustices are continuing to drag their feet in awarding victims due redress.
It has been estimated that at least 100 further victims of the infected blood scandal have died in the protracted interim between the conclusion of Sir Brian Langstaff's inquiry last year and being invited to apply for compensation. Likewise, some 345 former sub-postmasters are thought to have died before securing any financial restitution. Those still pursuing claims now find themselves caught in an interminable, tortuous, legalistic wrangle: one that seems cynically designed to delay and minimise the total amount of compensation that will eventually have to be paid out.
• Keir Starmer: infected blood victims deserve justice now
A report published last week into the human toll of the prosecutions made on the basis of the Post Office's defective Horizon IT system was unsparing in its grim detail. Its author, Sir Wyn Williams, concluded that the scandal had driven 13 people to suicide. Many other lives were blighted by addiction, divorce and financial ruin. Yet, the government's declared determination to correct these wrongs is belied by the gross deficiencies Sir Wyn identifies in the remuneration of those harmed.
The Post Office compensation programme is byzantine in its complexity, with four separate schemes running in parallel. 3,700 former subpostmasters are yet to receive any payout. Many are locked in a legal limbo while their claims are subjected to excessively bureaucratic and adversarial scrutiny. Claimants are disadvantaged if they can't produce decades-old forms, often long lost. One sub-postmistress claims to have received a compensation offer worth just 0.5 per cent of her original claim. Sir Alan Bates, who championed his fellow sub-postmasters' cause, has fallen victim to what he describes as a 'quasi-kangaroo court', receiving a 'take it or leave it' quote amounting to less than half his submitted claim.
Similarly shameful treatment has been meted out to those survivors among the 30,000 NHS patients infected with HIV and hepatitis by contaminated blood products. Last week, Sir Brian Langstaff warned that this compensation system too is creating 'obvious injustice'. Only 460 people have received full payouts, the result of a dilatory process forcing victims to be invited to make a claim rather than initiate one themselves.
• Infected blood victims 'left suicidal' by compensation delays
It is clear that government officials and civil servants tasked with disbursing payouts are subjecting comparatively powerless individuals to a level of rigoristic penny-pinching they would not dream of applying elsewhere. When set alongside the kind of financial waste casually tolerated within government, from the eye-watering sums sunk into HS2 to the near £2 billion in 'bounce back loan' fraud complacently written off by the very same department of business overseeing appeals by victims of the Post Office, the contrast is galling. Victims of the infected blood and Post Office scandals have had their right to restitution established by due process. Obstructionist officials should not be allowed to deny them justice.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
21 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump does deal with Nato allies to arm Ukraine and warns Russia of severe sanctions
Donald Trump has said he has sealed an agreement with Nato allies which will lead to large-scale arms deliveries to Ukraine, including Patriot missiles, and warned Russia that it will face severe sanctions if Moscow does not make peace within 50 days. After a meeting with the Nato secretary general, Mark Rutte, Trump said they had agreed 'a very big deal', in which 'billions of dollars' worth of military equipment is going to be purchased from the United States, going to Nato … And that's going to be quickly distributed to the battlefield.' Speaking in the White House alongside a clearly delighted Rutte, the US president said the arms deliveries would be comprehensive and would include the Patriot missile batteries that Ukraine desperately needs for its air defences against a daily Russian aerial onslaught. 'It's everything: It's Patriots. It's all of them. It's a full complement, with the batteries,' Trump said. He did not go into any more detail, but made clear the weapons would be entirely paid for by Washington's European allies, and that initial missile deliveries would come 'within days' from European stocks, on the understanding they would be replenished with US supplies. At a White House lunch with religious leaders later in the day, Trump said the deal was 'fully approved, fully done'. 'We'll send them a lot of weapons of all kinds and they're going to deliver those weapons immediately … and they're going to pay,' he said. At his meeting with Trump, Rutte said there was a significant number of Nato allies - including Germany, Finland, Denmark, Sweden, Norway, the Netherlands and Canada – ready to rearm Ukraine as part of the deal. 'They all want to be part of this. And this is only the first wave. There will be more,' he said. The German chancellor, Friedrich Merz, said last week that Berlin was ready to acquire additional Patriot systems. Trump claimed there was one country, which he did not name, but which had '17 Patriots getting ready to be shipped'. Monday's deal would include that stockpile, or 'a big portion of the 17', he said. Such an arms delivery would represent a significant reinforcement of Ukraine's air defences. Kyiv is currently thought to have only six Patriot batteries, at a time it when is coming under frequent and intense Russian drone and missile bombardments. At the same time, Trump expressed increased frustration with Vladimir Putin, whom he accused of giving the impression of pursuing peace while intensifying attacks on Ukrainian cities. He gave the Russian president a new deadline of 50 days to end the fightingor face 100% tariffs on Russian goods, and more importantly, sweeping 'secondary tariffs', suggesting trade sanctions would be imposed on countries who continue to pay for Russian oil and other commodities. 'The secondary tariffs are very, very powerful,' the president said. The announcement marked a dramatic change for the administration, both in substance and tone. The Trump White House had not only made clear it would continue its predecessor's policy of continuing to supply Ukraine out of US stocks, but the president and his top officials have been derisive about Kyiv's chances of prevailing. On Monday, Trump delivered his most admiring language on Ukraine and its European backers to date, with Rutte on one side and the US vice-president, JD Vance, the administration's biggest sceptic on US involvement in Europe, on the other. 'They fought with tremendous courage, and they continue to fight with tremendous courage,' Trump said of the Ukrainians. 'Europe has a lot of spirit for this war,' he said, suggesting he had been taken by surprise by the level of commitment shown by European allies at the Nato summit in The Hague last month. 'The level of esprit de corps spirit that they have is amazing,' he said. 'They really think it's very, very important. 'Having a strong Europe is a very good thing. It's a very good thing. So I'm okay with it,' he said. Trump described his deepening disillusion with Putin, and suggested his wife, Melania, may have played a role in pointing out the Russian leader's duplicity in talks over a peace deal. 'My conversations with him are always very pleasant. I say, isn't that a very lovely conversation? And then the missiles go off that night,' Trump said. 'I go home, I tell the first lady: I spoke with Vladimir today. We had a wonderful conversation. She said: Really? Another city was just hit.' Ukrainian regional officials reported at least six civilians killed and 30 injured by Russian bombing in the past 24 hours. The country's air force said Moscow had attacked with 136 drones and four S-300 or S-400 missiles. 'Look, I don't want to say he's an assassin, but he's a tough guy. It's been proven over the years. He's fooled a lot of people,' Trump said, listing his predecessors in the White House. 'He didn't fool me. But what I do say is that at a certain point, ultimately talk doesn't talk. It's got to be action,' he said. Russian officials and pro-war bloggers on Monday largely shrugged off Trump's announcement, declaring it to be less significant than anticipated. Konstantin Kosachev, a senior Russian lawmaker, wrote on Telegram that it amounted to 'hot air'. It was broadly welcomed in Kyiv, where there has been longstanding and deep anxiety about Trump's intentions. Andrii Kovalenko, a member of Ukraine's national security and defence council, posted a one-word response: 'Cool'. There was still scepticism however, over whether even the promise of new weaponry for Ukraine combined with the threat of trade sanctions would be enough to halt Russia's offensive. Illia Ponomarenko, a Ukrainian journalist and blogger wrote: 'How many Ukrainian lives could have been saved if, from the very beginning, Trump had listened to wise and honest people about helping Ukraine, instead of the artful lies of that cannibal Putin on the phone?'.
Times
21 minutes ago
- Times
The NHS model is on its last legs — time to replace it
At last, the unthinkable is being seriously thought about healthcare in Britain. The NHS is bust. More and more billions are periodically thrown at it, but its waiting lists are horrendous and relative to other comparable countries it does poorly in life expectancy and healthy life chances. Only the US does worse. As the largest employer in Europe, the NHS has some 1.38 million full-time equivalent staff who absorb almost half the budget for day-to-day spending. It's virtually impossible to run efficiently, and examples abound of rotten management and excessive bureaucracy. So says a report by Policy Exchange, which declares that this has to end. From 1955 to 2023, real health expenditure per capita rose by about 850 per cent. At 9 per cent of GDP, government health spending is almost the highest of all developed countries and by some estimates will rise to more than 20 per cent of GDP by 2070. Without radical reform, says the report, other public spending would have to be squeezed or taxation would need to be increased to eye-watering levels. This would damage the economy so badly that 'it simply cannot be allowed to happen'. In his foreword, the former health secretary Sir Sajid Javid says Britain is now at a crossroads. The NHS model can't cope with spiralling demand. It's run entirely by the state and its agencies. By contrast, says Javid, the very best performing healthcare systems combine high levels of state subsidy, mandatory insurance, co-payments, and individual choice. The report accordingly proposes replacing the tax-funded NHS by compulsory insurance, backed up by a publicly funded safety net to cover the poor, plus some element of co-payment to incentivise people to look after themselves. It recommends the model adopted by the Netherlands in 2006 under which people choose their insurance providers, with the state's role reduced to regulating insurers and providing the safety net for those who can't afford to insure themselves. Dutch healthcare costs are now proportionately lower than in the UK, waiting lists are smaller and health outcomes generally better. It has been clear for years that European-style social insurance systems fulfil the moral obligations of the NHS while providing better outcomes. Yet the NHS has been treated by Conservatives and Labour alike as the most sacred of political cows. This is even though it's not just failing to deliver adequate healthcare but the enormous sums it's swallowing are seriously distorting the economy, diverting essential investment from services ranging from education to defence. However, the whole public sector is on its knees for which the NHS is not the principal cause. The criminal justice system, for example, is collapsing through sustained and serious underfunding. The retired senior judge Sir Brian Leveson has now controversially proposed to limit trial by jury to tackle the immense backlog of cases, some of which take years to come to trial and may have to be abandoned because of the passage of time. Limiting jury trial, however, won't solve the problem because the lower courts are also under immense strain, as are the prisons and the police. The essence of the problem is that for decades Britain has been living a lie. It has indulged itself in a welfare state without taking the measures to pay for it. This goes back to the end of the Second World War, when the Attlee government decided that the spirit of the times demanded the building of a brave new world based on collective provision and equality. Far less attention was paid to creating the wealth to pay for this nirvana. It was assumed that redistributing wealth from rich to poor would pay for it all. Society thus moved from making to taking, producing less and less while telling itself that it had a right to welfare provision and that the rich should stump up. No government (other than Margaret Thatcher's) was brave enough to deliver some essential home truths about spending above the country's means. Instead, governments lied that things were getting better and that more was being spent. In fact, the public sector was being salami-sliced to shuffle funds from one service to another; and all were being fleeced to pour more billions into the black hole of the NHS. The ultimate symbol of this irresponsibility, and a principal force behind Britain's slide from making to taking, has been the benefits system. According to the Centre for Social Justice, people claiming universal credit and payments for ill health will soon earn £2,500 more than through the minimum wage. The Office for National Statistics says nearly one in four working-age people are classified as disabled. The NHS Confederation says that in 2021-22, 63,392 people went straight from university on to long-term sickness benefits, with an incredible increase among 25 to 34-year-olds of 69 per cent in five years. Last week, Kemi Badenoch rightly said the UK was 'sitting on a ticking time bomb' of spiralling welfare dependency, spending more on sickness benefits than on defence. The NHS model must be replaced to provide the equitable and efficient provision of healthcare to which politicians pay such dishonest lip service, and to protect the economy from such damaging distortions. But the underlying issue of an unaffordable welfare state can only be tackled by a government brave enough to recreate the work ethic, and an economy that delivers the jobs to inspire it.
Daily Mail
32 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Colombian man accused of Clifton suspension bridge murders tells court one of his victims 'raped him every day'
A Columbian migrant accused of murdering two men and cutting them up has claimed he was 'raped every day' by one of his alleged victims. Yostin Andres Mosquera, 35, is on trial following the deaths of Albert Alfonso, 62, and Paul Longworth, 71, at their flat in Shepherd's Bush, west London, on July 8 last year. Mosquera is alleged to have repeatedly stabbed Mr Alfonso, who suffered injuries to his torso, face and neck, while Mr Longworth was attacked with a hammer to the back of his head and his skull. It is claimed the 35-year-old then travelled to the Clifton Suspension Bridge in Bristol with some of the victims' body parts. Under cross-examination today, Mosquera claimed Mr Alfonso had 'raped him every day' and that left him feeling 'sad' but not angry. Prosecutor Deanna Heer KC said Mosquera was planning to steal money from the two men and had 'made up' a claim of rape against Mr Alfonso. But speaking through a translator, Mosquera, who was involved in filmed sex sessions with Mr Alfonso, told the court: 'I felt sad. I never felt anger. I do not get angry with anybody,' Mosquera had first come to the UK from Colombia in June 2024 on the promise of English lessons and financial support from Mr Alfonso, whom he had met years earlier through webcam sex websites. Of the alleged sex assaults, Mosquera told the court: 'I felt humiliated, sad, trapped - I never tend to get to anger.' The alleged rapes sometimes 'would happen so quickly because [Mr Alfonso] would drink beer and not be aware of what was happening'. He also claimed there were times when Mr Alfonso was 'out of control'. Ms Heer took Mosquera to his 'detailed' defence statement produced for the trial and said 'there is no mention of Albert Alfonso raping you'. She told Mosquera: 'Albert Alfonso insisted the defendant and he would make a number of sex videos and you did not feel you had any option, you felt sexually exploited. 'You were aware that Mr Alfonso was making money out of posting videos of your sexual activity and that made you feel even more exploited - but you do not mention at all Mr Mosquera, that Mr Alfonso was raping you every day. 'Is that because you are making it up?' Mosquera replied: 'No.' Mosquera admits killing Mr Alfonso but claims it was manslaughter by reason of loss of control. He denies murdering either man and insists Mr Alfonso killed Mr Longworth. Both Mr Alfonso's and Mr Longworth's remains were later found in a suitcase near Clifton Suspension Bridge in Bristol. Within minutes of killing Mr Alfonso, Mosquera was online and trying to look at the man's bank account, the court heard. Then in the early hours of the morning, Mosquera took Mr Alfonso's bank card and walked to the cashpoint and withdrew money. Mosquera said: 'In the beginning I did not know where I was going to take the suitcases. I was going to go to Brighton.' Ms Heer said: 'You decided to take money from Mr Alfonso after you killed him.' Mosquera said: 'Yes, because he was supposed to give me money before but he was not able to. He was supposed to give me money to go to Brighton.' The prosecution also said Mosquera had got hold of Mr Alfonso's financial information. Ms Heer said: 'You copied over pages from spreadsheets containing Mr Alfonso's bank account details, user names and id's, passwords - relating to Barclays, Halifax, Natwest, Moneygram, PayPal account - all of that information you copied on to your computer on June 27.' Ms Heer continued: 'The purpose of taking this document was because you wanted to steal money from Mr Alfonso.' Mosquera replied 'no', saying he moved 'many documents, not just that one' and he sometimes cleared space on Mr Alfonso's computer. Ms Heer said that by July 4, Mosquera had access to all of Mr Alfonso's and Mr Longworth's bank details. Mosquera was making searches in Spanish about whether it is possible to connect to a switched-off computer to see what is on the hard disc. He asked questions about property values and how much he could withdraw from the Halifax Bank - even though he did not have an account with them. Mosquera said he was studying English and claimed some of his fellow Spanish-speaking students said bank accounts could be opened with certain data, so he tried it. The court heard Mosquera also made a search for buildings for sale in his hometown of Medellin, Colombia. Mosquera said: 'I was always searching for these things. When I am in Colombia - how much building cost and cars. I even looked up how much Liverpool Football Club cost, because I am a fan.' Searches on his computer brought up the value of the Scotts Road flat shared by the victims, including one on July 8 at 8.30am, the jury heard. Mosquera said the search was done out of 'curiosity like always' and that this information would come up when you put the address into the computer but he was not looking for properties to rent or sell. Ms Heer told him: 'You were planning to steal from Albert Alfonso and Paul Longworth and you were trying to find out what they were worth.' Mosquera replied: 'No, if I wanted to do that I would have done this in Medellin in my own country. Why would I look for something I do not know.' The trial continues.
