Select committee: Public Accounts Committee
Conclusion 20
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 ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
Evidence from the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists suggested that the maternity workforce is struggling under the pressure of delivering increasingly complex care, with more than half of births involving medical intervention, such as a caesarean section or the use of instruments such as forceps.47 Similarly, evidence from Sands and Tommy’s Joint Policy Unit raised concerns that inadequate training, poor workforce planning and failure to adhere to staffing requirements have created the conditions which result in clinical negligence claims being filed.48 NHS England told us it carefully monitored trusts with high levels of maternity related clinical negligence claims and around 30 trusts are taking part in its maternity support programme.49 However it accepted that it had struggled to reduce maternal mortality rates in recent years, pointing to increasing maternal risk factors such as obesity and age.50 NHS England told 41 The Rehabilitation Code is a voluntary framework offered by insurance companies in the context of personal injury claims: Rehabilitation Code (Code of Best Practice on Rehabilitation, Early Intervention and Medical Treatment in Personal Injury claims, 2015 42 CCC (by her mother and litigation friend MMM) (AP) (Appellant) v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (Respondent) 43 Qq 46, 48 44 Qq 43, 48 45 C&AG’s Report, para 3.23 46 Q 48 47 Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (CCN0021) 48 Sands and Tommy’s Joint Policy Unit (CCN0003) 49 Q 84 50 Q 51 15 us that it expects the final part of the Amos Review into England’s maternity and neonatal services in 2026 but this did not mean it was waiting to act in its recommendations.51 Disproportionate legal costs
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.