July 2026: Government declines to widen the Thirlwall terms of reference (16 July) · new 100-page insulin report to the CCRC challenging the trial evidence (9 July) · Thirlwall report still expected no earlier than September · inquests relisted to 2027 · Shoo Lee Panel: no medical evidence of deliberate harm.
The authors of the 2016 RCPCH Invited Service Review gave evidence at the Thirlwall Inquiry about the terms of reference for that review — service-level rather than individual-case — and how those terms of reference came to be agreed with Trust executives.
Editorial summary — not a verbatim transcript.
This page is a summary written for this site. It is not a mirror of the primary document, and nothing on it should be quoted as the words of any person. An earlier version of this page carried quotations that could not be verified against the primary record; those have been removed. For the underlying record, consult the primary source at thirlwall.public-inquiry.uk. See our corrections policy.
Status: Editorial summary written for this site — not a mirrored document
Publisher: thirlwall.public-inquiry.ukThis links the publisher’s site, not the document itself — we have not yet established a direct link to it.
The authors of the 2016 RCPCH Invited Service Review gave evidence at the Thirlwall Inquiry about the terms of reference for that review and how those terms were agreed with Trust executives.
See the RCPCH review profile and Ian Harvey’s evidence on the commissioning of the review.