2 February 2023: Closing Statements, Jamie Dawson KC (for most Scottish people) - C

The transfusion of blood topic was next to be dealt with by Mr Dawson. It was more difficult to give an overall and systematic commentary due to the very diverse and individualised nature of infection in these cases. Transfusion infectees often have not benefitted from being already linked to a support group in the way bleeding disorder patients have. Transfusion victims are the majority, yet they have not been afforded the profile in the campaigning or Inquiry due to the lack of coordination or collection of that cohort as a group of people with a common cause.

 

Blood collection practices were subject to underfunding, a fragmented structure, and insufficient oversight. This meant that more people suffered infection by transfusion than might have been. The lookback led by Prof Dillon noted the difficulties with delay. There will still be people who have lived, and maybe died, after having been infected by a transfusion and have never been told or even tested. Their lives were blighted but they had no explanation for their problems. Rather, they were accused of alcohol and drug misuse, or unsafe sexual activity. This itself destroyed aspects of peoples’ lives.

 

Paternalism is unethical Mr Dawson stated. Paternalism is not the benign overview of knowing better by virtue of age and certainly not the fatherhood connotations of “paternal”. Rather, paternalism is about the power dynamic being heavily skewed toward the clinician which may have negatively affected the care given.

 

On research, it is not the assertion that people were deliberately harmed by clinicians, but it is reasonable for people to have come to that conclusion given the considerable attempts to hide what happened. People clearly gave their blood on the assumption that it was being used for their healthcare. Almost as soon as Prof Ludlum arrived in Edinburgh, he agreed to participate in research because of the “useful material” his patients there were seen as. Research objectives appear to be a motivation for the way the treatment of patients was experienced, and so it is reasonable for patients such as those from Edinburgh to associate themselves with the Treloars College assertions of being research subjects before being bleeding disorder patients. Alice and Robert Mackie, along with Bruce Norval, have genuine reason for making a strong link to the research issue within the wider infected blood scandal. It appears that family members too were involved in research without their knowledge. It was also clear that at least one child who had died continued to be a research resource after his untimely death due to infected blood.

 

In relation to the subject of compounding the harms, it was suggested that the Inquiry give attention to creating a public record of the scale and extent of the harms resulting from contaminated blood. The impacts of the harms are not limited to a single viral infection such as HCV. Indeed, there should be recognition of the significance of multiple exposures to multiple viruses. Stigma, in itself, destroyed lives. It is not simply an add-on to a physical damage. Robert Francis noted the special role of stigma by giving it a specific head for consideration.

 

The impact of deaths was bad enough, but for infected families there were massively worsening factors. Mr Dawson then listed a series of horrific examples from his clients of the circumstances of traumatic deaths caused life-long impacts mentally, emotionally, socially, financially, and so many other ways. He summarised a list of what the State had done or not done across so many public bodies, across such a long time period, across the swath of life experiences, and involving so many people caught up in infected blood through no fault of their own. “The entirety of what compounded the harms was completely avoidable”. This matter is seen as worthy of being stressed so much due to the completely unnecessary and significant additional impacts arising from the compounding of harms. It is worthy of specific attention, including for the compensatory components these should attract beyond the more direct injury issues.

 

A number of documents had been submitted which appeared to suggest the origin of some of the lines to take. They may easily have come from a meeting at which Profs Ludlum and Lowe were in attendance. The contemporaneous internal inquiry set up by Susan Deacon was “completely defective”. It was flawed by the very fact that Eileen Keel was central to it despite her being intrinsically connected with the very matters to be investigated. Reference was made to a communication from Sandra Faulkner (civil servant) between Susan Deacon and Jack McConnell the First Minister. McConnell was most interested in ensuring that having an “open mind would not lead to an open cheque”. Deacon reassured him that her investigation was a “PR exercise”.

 

The penultimate theme of “solutions” came next. In doing so, Mr Dawson acknowledged the acceptance and related apologies coming from Mr Bowie. He suggested to the Chair that a sufficiently detailed level of pitching any recommendation could be developed in at a later date than the Inquiry reporting with too prescriptive a recommendation, given the apologies made and the stated willingness to respond positively.

 

The financial solution has been significantly covered in the final submissions, but it was noted that the considerable content is in part down to the fact of Mr Dawson and his junior having that specialist experience and that there are points related to Scots Law which needed to be considered. It was noted that despite the 20-year-old Ross Committee Report which included a call for compensation, there has to date been no compensation paid in Scotland. On the Robert Francis proposal to set up legal and medical panels, Mr Dawson proposed that there would be assertions about the ways Scots Law could inform and improve the resulting tariffs. The Chair was invited to include figures for the various tariffs, or at least to give a scale. Mr Dawson cited recent case law which he suggested would be useful for the Chair to consider.

 

The Scottish Government assertion that “past payments” should be taken into account was rejected. These payments were for daily living costs to keep people out of poverty. This is distinct from the concept of compensation payments. This proposal was considered curious since the position was also for the costs of compensation to come from the UK Treasury. Anyone who did not receive past payments would not be detrimented if an additional back-payment was made to make up the shortfall they had experienced.

 

Mr Dawson paid tribute to the Inquiry personnel for the way it had allowed core participants and their legal representatives to be so involved and supported in that involvement. He made special mention of Bill Wright, Alice Mackie, Bruce Norval and Philip Dolan. He also paid tribute to all the client group core participants. The closing statement concluded with a short video featuring some of those who have lived with, or died from, the impacts of contaminated blood. The background music was provided by Andy Gunn, another vociferous and talented campaigner.

 

Once the video ended there was a natural moment of silence. The Chair appeared to have been moved by the presentation. He thanked Mr Dawson for his particularly useful contributions to the Inquiry.

 

Jamie Dawson is arguably the most experienced and knowledgeable lawyer involved with the Infected Blood Inquiry. He was junior counsel throughout the Penrose Inquiry debacle, and achieved KC status in the first half of the present Inquiry. His inputs to the Inquiry have gone beyond simply Scots issues. Similarly, a small number of core participants or their representatives have been instrumental in taking forward the advocacy on behalf of the infected and affected. Besides those already mentioned by Mr Dawson there is Tommy Leggate from the SIBF with his pivotal role in helping the Scottish Government and Sir Robert Francis to recognise the possibilities of increased levels of payments, and the king of Freedom of Information requests who is Sean Cavens. There are many others who will likely remain unrecognised, and some of them do not even recognise it in themselves. Suffice it to say, the ups and downs of the uniquely Scottish experience have had a disproportionately positive impact on the gains that have been made through the Infected Blood Inquiry. Scots wa’ hae … an’ aw that.