Questions now turn to the interim payments given in October to some of the victims of the infected blood scandal and their partners.

Sunak is asked by Richards, the inquiry member questioning him, about comments he made over the scandal during the Tory leadership campaign of summer 2022, during which he ran for No 10 against ex-PM Liz Truss.

He's told, at the time, he said "survivors and families need certainty now".

Would you stand by those words today, Richards asks.

Sunak says yes, though they were very specifically about making interim payments - which he adds were made shortly after he became prime minister. (There's more on that here.)

Commons leader Penny Mordaunt has been brought up a fair bit in this evidence session, after letters she wrote Sunak in 2020 were the focus of Richards' first questions to the PM.

She now says Mordaunt told the inquiry earlier this week that the Infected Blood Inquiry is one of Sunak's priorities.

Do you stand by those words? Richards asks.

Yes, Sunak says, "it's a focus for me and the government to resolve years of injustice".

Image source, PA Media

And we're back. The technical issue has been resolved and the prime minister is being questioned by the Infected Blood Inquiry once more.

If you're just joining us, it's Jenni Richards KC asking the questions.

You can follow our live text updates on this page or tune in live by clicking the Play button at the top of this page.

While we wait for the session to resume, here's the moment victims and their relatives angrily reacted to Rishi Sunak's evidence - which we covered earlier.

The prime minister was asked if it was "good enough" that there was no "concrete framework" in sight to fully compensate people affected by the infected blood scandal.

When he started to answer the question, there were cries of "no" from many of those in the room.

The inquiry's chair announces a short break while a technical problem with the document display is fixed.

We'll resume our live updates when they're back up and running.

Sunak is asked, again, if he accepts that waiting for the final report means further delay - and could bleed into a general election.

This, again, would prolong the wait for compensation, the inquiry tells him.

Sunak says he will proceed as quickly as thoroughness allows.

"Will you, prime minister, agree to the government looking again at the question over whether we should really wait until the final report?" the lawyer questioning him asks.

Some of those people waiting are dying, she says.

Sunak says this inquiry has taken years, and that it's right given the complexities that it the government is dealing with.

Some people "fear" one reason the government may be waiting until the end of the inquiry could be "an excuse" because the real work started too late, Richards puts to Sunak.

Or, she says, it could be because the inquiry will no longer have powers at that point and "the government will be free to ignore the recommendations with impunity".

Sunak reiterates that his government is the first that has "accepted the moral case" for compensation and made interim payments.

He asks people, again, to look at how the government has acted for reassurance and says "it's entirely normal" for the government to respond following the conclusion of an inquiry.

Richards, questioning Sunak, continues to push the PM on compensation.

"The government has already accepted the moral case for compensation," she says, adding: "Why wait further?"

"What is it you think you will learn from the final report relevant to the subject of compensation that you don't already know?" Richards adds.

Sunak repeats that it's normal for the government to wait for the inquiry's final report, citing "legal precedents".

He also says that while the interim payments made in October were "of course only a step" in eventually redressing all those infected and affected by the scandal, "should give people some comfort over mine and the government's determination".

"I don't want to add to a litany of broken promises," the PM says. "I want a resolution as quickly as practically possible, but these are sensitive complicated matters on a significant scale."

Sunak adds an important step is receiving the final report.

Sunak is asked about the government's position of waiting until it receives the inquiry's final report before it responds to questions around compensation being paid to victims.

He says waiting for the conclusion of the inquiry's findings is "entirely normal and precedented".

"The government will wait for the conclusion of the inquiry's findings so it has the full context of everything relevant before making final decisions," he tells the room.

"Having said that, that doesn't mean that work doesn't begin beforehand and work has been ongoing for all the months that I've been prime minister."

Sunak adds he hopes people will be reassured of his government's "determination to try and move as quickly as practically possible".

Here are some of Sunak's comments as he began to give evidence to the inquiry just under an hour ago.

Speaking about the impact on those affected by the use of contaminated blood products, he said "what has happened has been an appalling scandal", noting that people had "suffered for decades".

Richards, questioning Sunak, presses the prime minister on whether the government has options around compensation ready to implement at the conclusion of the inquiry.

Sunak says advice would not be brought to his attention until it was ready and the situation is "complex".

"Those decisions have not been made but that policy work is ongoing," he says, "so this government is in a position to move quickly, but that work has not been concluded."

Inquiry chair Sir Brian Langstaff interjects again now - this time to ask Sunak a question himself.

Does Sunak wish the process of creating a compensation package could have been quicker, he asks.

"Of course," Sunak replies. "Everyone wants to see as swift a resolution to this appalling tragedy as possible."

But as the inquiry has heard, he adds, there is a range of complicated issues to work through.

"If it was a simple matter, no one would have called for an inquiry," Sunak says.

Jim Reed
Health reporter, at the Infected Blood Inquiry

Quite a moment in the inquiry room as hundreds of victims and their relatives reacted to Rishi Sunak's evidence.

The prime minister was just asked if it was "good enough" that there was no "concrete framework" in sight to fully compensate people affected by the infected blood scandal.

He started answering the question and widespread cries of "no" could be heard coming from many of the roughly 500 people in the audience.

Sunak then repeated that the government was working as "quickly as possible" - and again we could hear widespread disquiet and even laughter from much of the audience at that point.

The chair of the inquiry, Sir Brian Langstaff, has had to remind the audience of the tradition of respecting witnesses even though the evidence may be "emotive".

Richards presses Sunak about his view of the government's position on compensation while he was a senior cabinet member for more than three years, throughout which the inquiry has been ongoing.

Sunak attempts to answer the question, but he is briefly interrupted by those attending the session.

The prime minister says he sympathises with those who wish to see action as soon as possible, but he is not in a position to second guess the inquiry.

He acknowledges that the sooner the better, but it is difficult for him to second guess decisions made by previous governments in good faith.

"If the inquiry has taken this amount of time to provide that evidence, then saying to government 'you should have acted before receiving the evidence' is tricky".

He says people would have been frustrated if the government took the wrong course of action because it did not acknowledge evidence provided by the inquiry once it finishes its work.

Jenni Richards KC, who again is the one questioning Sunak, runs through a timeline, beginning with Mordaunt raising the issue as "urgent and long overdue" more than three years ago.

She points out that it's been three-and-a-half months since the inquiry's second interim report recommending compensation.

She says the people whose lives were "torn apart by those wrongs still have no idea" of the shape, form or scope of the compensation scheme, nor the timescale.

Sunak responds: "Of course people have been waiting far too long to get the recognition and the redress for what's happened."

He repeats that interim payments have been made - he says 4,500 people have received £100,000 - and adds his was the first government to accept the moral case for compensation.​

Sunak is asked, on the basis of Penny Mordaunt's 2020 letter, whether the issue of compensation for victims of the infected blood scandal was urgent and long overdue.

He says it was the view of Mordaunt at the time and clearly it was the right one.

He says that since then, interim payments of £100,000 have been made, although the inquiry points out these payments aren't considered full compensation.

Sunak goes on to say Mordaunt later told Parliament that compensation would follow the inquiry's conclusion.

The closing line from Mordaunt's 2020 letter, which is read out to the inquiry, reads: "I cannot stress enough the urgency of taking long overdue action on financial support and compensation."

Sunak's told that Mordaunt also noted she had been hoping for some time to meet Sunak, then chancellor, over the matter.

Now prime minister, Sunak reiterates that it was officials who dealt with the letter, not him.

He says he was not strictly aware of what was happening, or of the work going on between the Treasury and Cabinet Office.

"It would be normal for matters of public spending to be dealt with by the chief secretary to the Treasury," rather than the chancellor, he says.

Jenni Richards KC, who's questioning Sunak, asks the PM whether the government was aware in 2020 that it would be facing a compensation bill.

Sunak says in his role at the time, as chancellor, that he was not directly involved.

He says the inquiry's work was ongoing in 2020 and decisions on compensation, as well as advice from the inquiry, had not been made.

Sunak adds that forecasts on the compensations had not been crystallised at that point, and repeats that the inquiry was not something he was directly involved with at the time.

Sunak tells the inquiry that he agrees with Mordaunt's letter - that early action could save the government legal costs.

He also accepts, like Mordaunt, that compensation should be provided as soon as possible,

Lots of things have evolved since that letter, he says, adding Mordaunt herself said progress has been made.

Sunak is pressed on whether he agrees with Mordaunt's point - that justice delayed is justice denied.

The prime minister accepts that people have been let down by different governments.

"Over decades, justice has been denied to people, which is why I'm pleased by the work the inquiry is doing," he says.

Sunak repeats that he and the government are committed to "acting as swiftly as possible" to resolve this situation.