When a Campaigner Crosses the Divide

Jason Evans became one of the most recognisable campaigners in the infected blood community.

Through Factor 8, its website, pages and groups, he helped uncover evidence, challenge institutions and amplify the experiences of people infected and affected by the scandal. He campaigned for the Infected Blood Inquiry and played a significant role in pushing for a compensation framework.

That work earned him trust, recognition and influence.

Jason is now listed by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority as one of its user consultants. IBCA says his role draws upon both his experience of the infected blood scandal and his professional skills.

But for some members of the community, his move from campaigning outside the system to working within the organisation administering compensation has left difficult and uncomfortable questions.

What happens to the campaign, its pages and the communities built around it when their founder crosses that divide?

What happens to those who trusted Factor 8 to challenge the authorities without fear or favour?

And who now holds IBCA publicly accountable when someone previously relied upon to scrutinise the system is helping shape its processes from within?

IBCA quotes Jason as saying:

> “Only delivery, not words, will bring some form of closure and relief.”

That statement is difficult to disagree with. But delivery must be judged by the experiences of the people currently passing through the scheme.

Across the community, people report long waits, repeated evidence requests, exhausting security procedures, confusing calculations and decisions that leave them feeling unheard or disbelieved. Bereaved families are being asked to reconstruct events from decades ago while grieving people feel forced to prove, repeatedly, the harm inflicted upon them.

Some describe the process as retraumatising. Others say it feels like psychological torture.

These experiences cannot be dismissed simply because compensation payments are being made. A scheme created to provide recognition and redress must not reproduce the coldness, disbelief and institutional defensiveness exposed by the Infected Blood Inquiry.

That is why Jason’s position matters.

A user consultant should be able to take the harshest realities of the scheme directly into the room. The role must involve more than explaining IBCA’s processes to the community or helping people accept how the system operates. It should include challenging those processes when they cause unnecessary harm.

Is Jason raising these accounts inside IBCA?

Is he challenging the treatment of bereaved families, the pace of deceased claims and the obstacles faced by people without complete medical records?

Does he believe the scheme currently reflects the compensation framework for which he campaigned?

And when community experience conflicts with IBCA’s preferred account of its progress, whose voice will he defend?

Joining IBCA does not erase years of valuable campaigning. Nor does it automatically mean that a person has abandoned the community. It is possible to believe that change can be achieved from inside an organisation.

But influence brings accountability.

People are entitled to ask whether the campaign infrastructure and trust built through Factor 8 will continue to be used to scrutinise power—or whether that chapter has quietly ended now that its founder has entered the organisation he might otherwise have been expected to challenge.

The community should not have to guess.

Jason Evans has an opportunity to explain openly what independence he retains, what concerns he has raised, what changes his involvement has achieved and how he responds to those who feel harmed by IBCA’s processes.

The infected blood community has already endured decades of closed doors and unanswered questions. Transparency cannot cease to matter simply because a campaigner is now sitting on the other side of one of those doors.

*The Unheard Voice would welcome a response from Jason Evans and would publish it fairly and in full, subject to our usual editorial standards.*

— The Unheard Voice

— The Unheard Voice