What did the Scottish Hospitals Inquiry conclude about the QEUH water system and infections?

1. NHSGGC’s reversal: from denial to “more likely than not”

For years NHSGGC consistently denied that bacteria in the QEUH water supply caused patient infections, but in its closing submissions to the Inquiry it departs from earlier positions and accepts that, on a balance of probabilities, there is a causal connection between some infections and the hospital environment — particularly the water system ^[1][4]. Multiple media reports summarise the submission as conceding it is “more likely than not that a material proportion” of environmentally relevant bloodstream infections in the paediatric haemato‑oncology population between 2016 and 2018 had a connection to the water system ^[3][5].

2. Scope and human consequences flagged by the Inquiry

The admission comes against a backdrop of serious human harm: coverage cites at least two child deaths and dozens of infections linked to the QEUH campus, and the Inquiry itself was established after concerns about unusual infections and multiple deaths, including the high‑profile case of Milly Main in 2017 ^[4][6]. Families and campaigners, who gave evidence to the Inquiry, have long sought official acknowledgement that the water system posed an avoidable risk to vulnerable patients ^[2][7].

3. Evidence and remedial correlation, not a definitive forensic verdict

NHSGGC’s submission frames its conclusion as probabilistic — saying the causal connection is accepted “on the balance of probabilities” and noting a “steady decrease” in infection rates after remedial measures to the water system were implemented, rather than asserting a single definitive forensic cause ^[1]. The health board also acknowledged that it had earlier argued there was no definite link, and that its revised stance follows consideration of the expert evidence heard during the Inquiry ^[1][7].

4. Legal and investigatory aftershocks: prosecutions and calls for further scrutiny

Media coverage records that prosecutors opened investigations into at least one death — that of Molly Cuddihy — and NHSGGC has been named as a suspect in a corporate homicide probe related to several deaths, indicating criminal inquiries have followed the public and judicial scrutiny ^[1][7]. Political figures and opposition voices characterise the QEUH episode as among the worst modern public‑service failures in Scotland and are calling for extension of the Inquiry or further safeguards; the Scottish Government has emphasised the purpose of the statutory inquiry to give families answers and identify lessons ^[8][1].

5. Contrasting framings in press coverage and the limits of the public record

Coverage across outlets frames NHSGGC’s concession in strong terms — “probable link,” “likely caused” and similar headlines appear widely — but the specific legal phrasing from NHSGGC is careful and probabilistic, and several reports underline that the board’s position is a departure from earlier denials after hearing expert testimony ^[7][5]. Public reporting documents the admission and its human toll, but the sources here do not publish the full expert reports, raw data sets, or the Inquiry’s final legal findings; therefore, precise microbiological causation chains and detailed statistical analysis underlying the balance‑of‑probabilities conclusion are not fully visible in these news extracts ^[1][3].

6. What the Inquiry’s conclusion means going forward

NHSGGC’s acceptance that some infections were more likely than not linked to the water system gives families an official acknowledgement that the hospital environment contributed to harm and strengthens the case for systemic reforms, remedial works and potential legal consequences, while leaving open detailed technical and culpability questions that the Inquiry and parallel probes will need to resolve ^[1][4]. The Scottish Government reiterates support for the Inquiry process but has declined to further comment while it participates as an independent core participant ^[1][4].