Recommendation IBI-11c: PACAC Recommendation Power
From Infected Blood Inquiry Final Report, published 20 May 2024.
Recommendation
If it appears to PACAC that there is sufficient concern to justify a public inquiry, either because what happened and why has caused concern (as the committee sees it) or there are likely to be lessons learned which may prevent similar concerns arising in future, the committee may recommend to an appropriate minister that there be an inquiry.
In brief (written by this site)
The Inquiry recommended that the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee propose public inquiries. In May 2025, the UK Government stated that select committees already possess scrutiny powers, noting that Parliament must decide whether to accept the proposal alongside its existing mechanisms (Cabinet Office response, May 2025). In March 2026, Sir Brian Langstaff, Chair of the Infected Blood Inquiry, welcomed the Government's acceptance in principle and its commitment to provide a further update to Parliament (Sir Brian Langstaff, Mar 2026).
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 5 Oct 2026. The record below is the sources' own words.
Government response
It is clear that blood products and blood were contaminated, and despite a wealth of evidence, no action was taken to spell out the risks, and insufficient precautions were taken. It is also evident that despite these failings, no proper action was taken to investigate and understand what had happened. Understandably, a number of participants to the Inquiry have called for a recognised process in deciding whether or not there should be a public inquiry into a matter which is potentially of public concern, or from which lessons might be learned. The Inquiry recommends that the UK Parliament should have a role in recommending the establishment of a public inquiry, and that Ministers should set out the reasons behind a decision not to hold an Inquiry. The Government welcomes these recommendations, recognising that Parliamentary Select Committees already have the power to scrutinise departments and make recommendations, and it is for Parliament to consider these recommendations. The Government also notes that the recent report by the House of Lords Committee on Inquiries recommends that “formal implementation monitoring should be undertaken by a new, joint, select committee of Parliament: the Public Inquiries Committee”. Therefore while we note the recommendations made by the Inquiry, it is for Parliament to decide whether to accept these recommendations, and decide how to fulfil recommendation 11 alongside its existing scrutiny mechanisms. Should Parliament decide to adopt recommendation 11, the Government accepts its obligation under 11d), to set out in detail and publish reasons when it disagrees with a recommendation to establish an inquiry.
Delivery
No statement on delivery from UK Government has been found in the sources searched (last checked 11 June 2026). This is separate from the response above.
What other bodies have found
In their own words. These do not change the delivery statement above.
Infected Blood Inquiry (31 March 2026)
I welcome the Government’s acceptance in principle of Inquiry Recommendation 11 about responding to calls for a public inquiry and the commitment to provide a further update to Parliament.
From: Letter from Sir Brian Langstaff to the Minister for the Cabinet Office
Responsible bodies
Themes and tags
Who has spoken
- UK Government
Response - Infected Blood Inquiry
Finding