Select committee: Public Accounts Committee
Recommendation 3
64th Report - Costs of clinical negligence
Published 30 Jan 2026
Addressed to HM Treasury
Public Accounts Committee Costs of clinical negligence All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Recommendation (the committee's words)
We are concerned there is far too little data on the factors behind clinical negligence, given its huge impact on people’s lives and NHS finances. Behind every clinical negligence claim is a tragic incident of patient harm. We were disappointed that neither the Department nor NHS England could adequately explain how the NHS uses its extensive data on patient harm to identify and address the underlying causes of clinical negligence. Data is not routinely reviewed at a national level as NHS England claim there is no direct connection between data on patient harm 4 and clinical negligence claims. NHS Resolution has committed to making better use of its extensive claims database and to explore options to extract more detailed insight on the causes of harm to prevent the same things happening again. However, we remain concerned that poor investment in data analytics will leave the NHS lagging behind the private sector, where legal firms are now using artificial intelligence to triage clinical negligence claims on an industrial scale. One person we spoke to at our private roundtable described the English NHS having a plethora of data and no information, adding that we need more NHS data in one place. recommendation a. The Department should establish a national system for sharing data between trusts and analysing trends. If there are barriers to sharing protected data, it should develop analysis on an anonymised basis to pull out lessons and provide early warning alerts to trusts. b. The Department, NHS England and NHS Resolution should explore the use of artificial intelligence to analyse live data, detect discrepancies and outliers quickly, and improve the speed of early warning systems.
From: Public Accounts Committee, 64th Report - Costs of clinical negligence (HC 1234), 30 January 2026
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 7 April 2026 (deadline 30 March 2026).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government agrees with the Committee's recommendation to set out an operational plan on clinical negligence, disagrees with others, and has some recommendations "under consideration".
- It agrees to write to the Committee "by this Autumn" with its workplan, key milestones and likely areas of focus for reform, but "disagrees" with publishing David Lock KC's review, saying it has "no current plans" to publish a separate report.
- It "disagrees" with estimating and tracking the costs of treating avoidable harm, stating it "would not be financially or logistically feasible", and "disagrees" with a new national data-sharing system, saying "there is already data sharing arrangements in place".
- On maternity, it agrees with the recommendation to learn lessons. Baroness Amos has confirmed the independent investigation will publish its final report in June 2026, and a National Maternity and Neonatal Taskforce will develop a national action plan.
- Alternative dispute mechanisms and fixed recoverable costs are "under consideration", and the government is "unable to commit" to the six-month timeframe for double recovery estimates. It will write to the Committee by Autumn 2026 on each.