An urgent inquiry is to be mounted into the removal of body organs from nuclear workers, apparently without the consent of their families, the government announced yesterday. Ministers moved quickly after feelings of "shock and outrage" were expressed over the disclosure that in 65 cases, tissue was taken from individuals which was then analysed for the radionuclide content of organs. A radionuclide is an unstable form of an element that can decay and give off radiation.

Most of the workers covered by the revelation were employed at Sellafield; one individual worked at the Capenhurst nuclear site in Cheshire after transferring from the Cumbria site. There was also data at Sellafield relating to an employee at the Springfields nuclear site in Lancashire and six at Aldermaston. The workers all died between 1962 and 1991.

Michael Redfern, the QC who conducted an inquiry into the removal of organs from children at the Alder Hey Children's Hospital in Liverpool, will investigate the latest controversy.

Trade and Industry Secretary Alistair Darling, who announced the move in an emergency statement to the Commons, said families of workers at the Sellafield site, as well as the public, wanted answers. A special helpline will be set up tomorrow to take calls from concerned families and friends.

British Nuclear Fuels plc (BNFL), which operates the Sellafield site, identified 65 cases in which tissue was taken from individuals which was then analysed for the radionuclide content of organs, but records held by the company were of a limited nature, said the minister.

"These are medical records which show what analysis was done on organs removed following post-mortem examination," Mr Darling said. "Because they are medical records which dealt with the analysis carried out at Sellafield, they do not provide an audit trail which would show in every case who asked for such an examination under what authority and for what purpose.

"Nor do they disclose whether or not the appropriate consent from next of kin was received. "Some records have more information than others but at this stage it is simply not clear what procedures were followed in every case. From the information I have, I can tell the House that 23 such requests for further examination and analysis were made following a coroner's inquest. A further 33 requests appear to follow a coroner's post mortem. Three requests were made associated with legal proceedings and there was one request made by an individual prior to death," said Mr Darling.

It was assumed that these requests were made to help establish the cause of death in the normal way, often as part of the coroner's inquiry, but the minister added: "We cannot be sure of that because there is not an audit trail to establish that as a fact.

"There was a further single request made following a biopsy of a living individual. In respect of a further four cases, I understand that the records do not record by what mechanism the request for the analysis was made. It is clearly important to establish why these requests were made and for what purpose. It's also clear that the data obtained from these examinations has been used in other studies which were subsequently published. One of the questions that arise is therefore whether or not it was appropriate to use the data gathered for this purpose.

"It follows from what I said that the records held by BNFL do not disclose whether or not the next of kin knew of these examinations and analysis. That is something that needs to be established. Most cases appeared to come following a coroner's request. It is possible, therefore, that in some cases there was such knowledge. But it is not at all clear that even if they had known about the analysis, they would have been aware that data gathered was then used as part of wider research studies. However, it will be necessary to examine the coroner's records to find out what the position was. BNFL tell me that they believe that the tissue would have been destroyed as part of the analytical process. They also believe, whilst there was storage of the tissues prior to the examination, any tissue that remained would have been destroyed. Certainly, BNFL tell me that no such tissue exists today. However, they are not certain at this stage what procedures were followed. This is clearly a difficult situation covering events that took place up to 45 years ago."

Gary Smith, national officer of the GMB, on behalf of the Sellafield joint trade unions, said: "The trade unions at Sellafield welcome the inquiry announced by the Government today and we appreciate the way that the Government has dealt with this issue so quickly. "The joint trade unions have asked for transparency and the Government has committed itself to that."

Paul Noon, general secretary of Prospect, which represents thousands of nuclear workers, added: "The Government has recognised the need for speed and openness in clarifying exactly what happened. For the sake of the families that is vitally important. "Michael Redfern is an excellent choice because of his experience of the Alder Hey inquiry but we still need to see the terms of reference. When this inquiry has reported, then in the light of its findings we can judge whether a wider inquiry is needed. Meanwhile the company should be informing relatives as quickly as possible and there should be no hold-up in that process because of the inquiry. That is the only way to reassure families who fear their relatives might have been involved as well as those who were."

BNFL said in a statement: "BNFL welcomes the independent investigation which has been announced by the Secretary of State this afternoon and we will give it our full support and co-operation. We remain very sympathetic to the feelings of our current and past employees and their families and we are working closely with union representatives on this aspect of the issue. This remains our priority. Following the Secretary of State's statement, the matter is now subject to an independent investigation and as such, we feel it would be inappropriate to comment further."

Liberal Democrat trade and industry spokeswoman Susan Kramer said: "It is vital that we know why these samples were taken and what, if anything, was discovered." Tony Cunningham, Labour MP for Workington, said there would be a feeling of "shock and outrage" in the local community that body parts could have been taken without the consent of families.

(By Alan Jones, The Independent, 19/04/2007)