Public inquiry · Parliamentary scrutiny

Parliamentary activity

Infected Blood Inquiry. Read indexed debates, questions, statements and early day motions, with links to the original parliamentary records.

394 indexed mentions for this inquiry Earliest recorded mention: 15 March 1990

Parliamentary mentions

267 matching mentions · newest first

Coroners

Written Question House of Commons
Chris Coghlan · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Ministry of Justice
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many Prevention of Future Death reports received by the government have outstanding responses.

Government answer

Answering body: Ministry of Justice

Coroners do not make recommendations as part of their inquest findings. However, where a coroner investigation gives rise to a concern that circumstances creating a risk of other deaths will occur, or will continue to exist, in the future, and the coroner considers that action should be taken to prevent future deaths, they have a statutory duty to issue a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to a person (including an organisation, public body, Government department or private company) that may have the power to take such action.

Recipients are required to provide a written response to the coroner within 56 days, or within any extended period agreed by the coroner, setting out action taken or proposed, or explaining why no action is proposed. Reports and responses must be sent to the Chief Coroner and are generally published and available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/?s=&pfd_report_type=&post_type=pfd&order=relevance.

These reports have been intentionally placed into the public domain since July 2013 as part of the Government and the judiciary’s commitment to open justice, so that coroner concerns can be understood, analysed and utilised to improve learning by recipient and other interested organisations, as well as by academics and others with a relevant interest.

The Government recognises the important role that PFD reports play in highlighting circumstances where action may be required to reduce the risk of future deaths and promoting organisational learning. However, whilst the Lord Chancellor has responsibility for the legislative framework governing the coronial system, the Ministry of Justice does not centrally assess, monitor or record the implementation of actions arising from individual PFD reports across Government and does not hold centrally the number of PFD reports received by government departments since 2013, nor the number of reports with outstanding responses. Responsibility for considering concerns raised by coroners, determining any appropriate action and responding to the coroner rests with the organisations and departments to which reports are addressed.

PFD reports are sent directly to the relevant recipients, and as above, are published by the Chief Coroner along with responses. Information on reports received and responses provided can also be obtained from individual recipients. Since 2025, the Chief Coroner has also published periodic lists of reports for which no response has been received by the relevant coroner's office.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all aspects of the coronial system under review and continues to consider evidence and proposals to improve learning from deaths. However, the Department currently has no plans to introduce a national learning from deaths strategy. This reflects the fact that responsibility for preventing avoidable deaths and reducing harm sits across a wide range of government departments, agencies and bodies, each with their own specialist expertise, statutory responsibilities, policy levers, governance arrangements and learning mechanisms.

Many individual government departments and agencies have strategies and frameworks for reducing harm and preventable deaths in their areas of responsibility. One example is the Patient Safety Strategy updated by NHS England in July 2026. The purpose of this strategy is to continuously improve patient safety and evidence shows that is saving around 1,000 extra lives each year. The updated strategy can be found here: https://www.england.nhs.uk/patient-safety/the-nhs-patient-safety-strategy/.

In addition, the National Quality Board produced guidance in 2017 to help standardise and improve the way the NHS identifies, reports, reviews and investigates deaths to inform learning and improvement. Earlier this year, the newly revitalised National Quality Board commissioned a review of the national Learning from Deaths guidance to align with the introduction of the Medical Examiner system and new safety policy introduced via the NHS Patient Safety Strategy in 2019. The revision of the Learning from Deaths guidance will also incorporate a data strategy to support learning from deaths across the NHS in England. NHS England has met with Dr Georgia Richards and others working in the space of PFD analysis and the revised guidance will take this work into account. The Department for Health and Social Care tracks relevant PFD reports and ensures that relevant regulators and other bodies, are made aware of concerns, so that the relevant organisations can consider and act upon learning identified, including recurrent themes and risks.

More broadly, death certification, investigation, and registration system (including the coronial system and, through the reforms introduced by this Government in September 2024, the statutory Medical Examiner system) plays a vital role in establishing and recording universal and robust information about the circumstances of all deaths which take place in England and Wales. This information in turn contributes to work by ONS and other organisations to provide comprehensive and detailed mortality data for public benefit.

The Government recognises calls by the Infected Blood Inquiry and the Grenfell Inquiry that Parliament is the right body to undertake independent oversight of public inquiry recommendations and ensure that public authorities are held accountable for the actions they have committed to undertake. The Public Administration and Constitution Affairs Committee is currently looking at how Parliament can do this.

Ministers and officials regularly engage with a range of stakeholders on matters relating to the coronial system, including academic and research organisations. The Government recognises the contribution of the Preventable Deaths Tracker, led by Dr Georgia Richards of King’s College London, as well as work being undertaken by the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody and by other academics, in supporting access to and analysis of published PFD reports, and ministerial meetings are considered and arranged in the usual way.

Original parliamentary record

Coroners

Written Question House of Commons
Chris Coghlan · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Ministry of Justice
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, a) if his Department plans to introduce a National Learning from Deaths Strategy, and b) if he will meet with Dr Georgia Richards of King’s College London to discuss the work of the Preventable Deaths Tracker and the implementation of such a strategy.

Government answer

Answering body: Ministry of Justice

Coroners do not make recommendations as part of their inquest findings. However, where a coroner investigation gives rise to a concern that circumstances creating a risk of other deaths will occur, or will continue to exist, in the future, and the coroner considers that action should be taken to prevent future deaths, they have a statutory duty to issue a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to a person (including an organisation, public body, Government department or private company) that may have the power to take such action.

Recipients are required to provide a written response to the coroner within 56 days, or within any extended period agreed by the coroner, setting out action taken or proposed, or explaining why no action is proposed. Reports and responses must be sent to the Chief Coroner and are generally published and available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/?s=&pfd_report_type=&post_type=pfd&order=relevance.

These reports have been intentionally placed into the public domain since July 2013 as part of the Government and the judiciary’s commitment to open justice, so that coroner concerns can be understood, analysed and utilised to improve learning by recipient and other interested organisations, as well as by academics and others with a relevant interest.

The Government recognises the important role that PFD reports play in highlighting circumstances where action may be required to reduce the risk of future deaths and promoting organisational learning. However, whilst the Lord Chancellor has responsibility for the legislative framework governing the coronial system, the Ministry of Justice does not centrally assess, monitor or record the implementation of actions arising from individual PFD reports across Government and does not hold centrally the number of PFD reports received by government departments since 2013, nor the number of reports with outstanding responses. Responsibility for considering concerns raised by coroners, determining any appropriate action and responding to the coroner rests with the organisations and departments to which reports are addressed.

PFD reports are sent directly to the relevant recipients, and as above, are published by the Chief Coroner along with responses. Information on reports received and responses provided can also be obtained from individual recipients. Since 2025, the Chief Coroner has also published periodic lists of reports for which no response has been received by the relevant coroner's office.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all aspects of the coronial system under review and continues to consider evidence and proposals to improve learning from deaths. However, the Department currently has no plans to introduce a national learning from deaths strategy. This reflects the fact that responsibility for preventing avoidable deaths and reducing harm sits across a wide range of government departments, agencies and bodies, each with their own specialist expertise, statutory responsibilities, policy levers, governance arrangements and learning mechanisms.

Many individual government departments and agencies have strategies and frameworks for reducing harm and preventable deaths in their areas of responsibility. One example is the Patient Safety Strategy updated by NHS England in July 2026. The purpose of this strategy is to continuously improve patient safety and evidence shows that is saving around 1,000 extra lives each year. The updated strategy can be found here: https://www.england.nhs.uk/patient-safety/the-nhs-patient-safety-strategy/.

In addition, the National Quality Board produced guidance in 2017 to help standardise and improve the way the NHS identifies, reports, reviews and investigates deaths to inform learning and improvement. Earlier this year, the newly revitalised National Quality Board commissioned a review of the national Learning from Deaths guidance to align with the introduction of the Medical Examiner system and new safety policy introduced via the NHS Patient Safety Strategy in 2019. The revision of the Learning from Deaths guidance will also incorporate a data strategy to support learning from deaths across the NHS in England. NHS England has met with Dr Georgia Richards and others working in the space of PFD analysis and the revised guidance will take this work into account. The Department for Health and Social Care tracks relevant PFD reports and ensures that relevant regulators and other bodies, are made aware of concerns, so that the relevant organisations can consider and act upon learning identified, including recurrent themes and risks.

More broadly, death certification, investigation, and registration system (including the coronial system and, through the reforms introduced by this Government in September 2024, the statutory Medical Examiner system) plays a vital role in establishing and recording universal and robust information about the circumstances of all deaths which take place in England and Wales. This information in turn contributes to work by ONS and other organisations to provide comprehensive and detailed mortality data for public benefit.

The Government recognises calls by the Infected Blood Inquiry and the Grenfell Inquiry that Parliament is the right body to undertake independent oversight of public inquiry recommendations and ensure that public authorities are held accountable for the actions they have committed to undertake. The Public Administration and Constitution Affairs Committee is currently looking at how Parliament can do this.

Ministers and officials regularly engage with a range of stakeholders on matters relating to the coronial system, including academic and research organisations. The Government recognises the contribution of the Preventable Deaths Tracker, led by Dr Georgia Richards of King’s College London, as well as work being undertaken by the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody and by other academics, in supporting access to and analysis of published PFD reports, and ministerial meetings are considered and arranged in the usual way.

Original parliamentary record

Coroners

Written Question House of Commons
Chris Coghlan · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Ministry of Justice
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the recommendations arising from coroners' inquests.

Government answer

Answering body: Ministry of Justice

Coroners do not make recommendations as part of their inquest findings. However, where a coroner investigation gives rise to a concern that circumstances creating a risk of other deaths will occur, or will continue to exist, in the future, and the coroner considers that action should be taken to prevent future deaths, they have a statutory duty to issue a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to a person (including an organisation, public body, Government department or private company) that may have the power to take such action.

Recipients are required to provide a written response to the coroner within 56 days, or within any extended period agreed by the coroner, setting out action taken or proposed, or explaining why no action is proposed. Reports and responses must be sent to the Chief Coroner and are generally published and available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/?s=&pfd_report_type=&post_type=pfd&order=relevance.

These reports have been intentionally placed into the public domain since July 2013 as part of the Government and the judiciary’s commitment to open justice, so that coroner concerns can be understood, analysed and utilised to improve learning by recipient and other interested organisations, as well as by academics and others with a relevant interest.

The Government recognises the important role that PFD reports play in highlighting circumstances where action may be required to reduce the risk of future deaths and promoting organisational learning. However, whilst the Lord Chancellor has responsibility for the legislative framework governing the coronial system, the Ministry of Justice does not centrally assess, monitor or record the implementation of actions arising from individual PFD reports across Government and does not hold centrally the number of PFD reports received by government departments since 2013, nor the number of reports with outstanding responses. Responsibility for considering concerns raised by coroners, determining any appropriate action and responding to the coroner rests with the organisations and departments to which reports are addressed.

PFD reports are sent directly to the relevant recipients, and as above, are published by the Chief Coroner along with responses. Information on reports received and responses provided can also be obtained from individual recipients. Since 2025, the Chief Coroner has also published periodic lists of reports for which no response has been received by the relevant coroner's office.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all aspects of the coronial system under review and continues to consider evidence and proposals to improve learning from deaths. However, the Department currently has no plans to introduce a national learning from deaths strategy. This reflects the fact that responsibility for preventing avoidable deaths and reducing harm sits across a wide range of government departments, agencies and bodies, each with their own specialist expertise, statutory responsibilities, policy levers, governance arrangements and learning mechanisms.

Many individual government departments and agencies have strategies and frameworks for reducing harm and preventable deaths in their areas of responsibility. One example is the Patient Safety Strategy updated by NHS England in July 2026. The purpose of this strategy is to continuously improve patient safety and evidence shows that is saving around 1,000 extra lives each year. The updated strategy can be found here: https://www.england.nhs.uk/patient-safety/the-nhs-patient-safety-strategy/.

In addition, the National Quality Board produced guidance in 2017 to help standardise and improve the way the NHS identifies, reports, reviews and investigates deaths to inform learning and improvement. Earlier this year, the newly revitalised National Quality Board commissioned a review of the national Learning from Deaths guidance to align with the introduction of the Medical Examiner system and new safety policy introduced via the NHS Patient Safety Strategy in 2019. The revision of the Learning from Deaths guidance will also incorporate a data strategy to support learning from deaths across the NHS in England. NHS England has met with Dr Georgia Richards and others working in the space of PFD analysis and the revised guidance will take this work into account. The Department for Health and Social Care tracks relevant PFD reports and ensures that relevant regulators and other bodies, are made aware of concerns, so that the relevant organisations can consider and act upon learning identified, including recurrent themes and risks.

More broadly, death certification, investigation, and registration system (including the coronial system and, through the reforms introduced by this Government in September 2024, the statutory Medical Examiner system) plays a vital role in establishing and recording universal and robust information about the circumstances of all deaths which take place in England and Wales. This information in turn contributes to work by ONS and other organisations to provide comprehensive and detailed mortality data for public benefit.

The Government recognises calls by the Infected Blood Inquiry and the Grenfell Inquiry that Parliament is the right body to undertake independent oversight of public inquiry recommendations and ensure that public authorities are held accountable for the actions they have committed to undertake. The Public Administration and Constitution Affairs Committee is currently looking at how Parliament can do this.

Ministers and officials regularly engage with a range of stakeholders on matters relating to the coronial system, including academic and research organisations. The Government recognises the contribution of the Preventable Deaths Tracker, led by Dr Georgia Richards of King’s College London, as well as work being undertaken by the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody and by other academics, in supporting access to and analysis of published PFD reports, and ministerial meetings are considered and arranged in the usual way.

Original parliamentary record

Coroners

Written Question House of Commons
Chris Coghlan · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Ministry of Justice
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many Prevention of Future Death reports the government has received since 2013 broken down by Department.

Government answer

Answering body: Ministry of Justice

Coroners do not make recommendations as part of their inquest findings. However, where a coroner investigation gives rise to a concern that circumstances creating a risk of other deaths will occur, or will continue to exist, in the future, and the coroner considers that action should be taken to prevent future deaths, they have a statutory duty to issue a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to a person (including an organisation, public body, Government department or private company) that may have the power to take such action.

Recipients are required to provide a written response to the coroner within 56 days, or within any extended period agreed by the coroner, setting out action taken or proposed, or explaining why no action is proposed. Reports and responses must be sent to the Chief Coroner and are generally published and available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/?s=&pfd_report_type=&post_type=pfd&order=relevance.

These reports have been intentionally placed into the public domain since July 2013 as part of the Government and the judiciary’s commitment to open justice, so that coroner concerns can be understood, analysed and utilised to improve learning by recipient and other interested organisations, as well as by academics and others with a relevant interest.

The Government recognises the important role that PFD reports play in highlighting circumstances where action may be required to reduce the risk of future deaths and promoting organisational learning. However, whilst the Lord Chancellor has responsibility for the legislative framework governing the coronial system, the Ministry of Justice does not centrally assess, monitor or record the implementation of actions arising from individual PFD reports across Government and does not hold centrally the number of PFD reports received by government departments since 2013, nor the number of reports with outstanding responses. Responsibility for considering concerns raised by coroners, determining any appropriate action and responding to the coroner rests with the organisations and departments to which reports are addressed.

PFD reports are sent directly to the relevant recipients, and as above, are published by the Chief Coroner along with responses. Information on reports received and responses provided can also be obtained from individual recipients. Since 2025, the Chief Coroner has also published periodic lists of reports for which no response has been received by the relevant coroner's office.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all aspects of the coronial system under review and continues to consider evidence and proposals to improve learning from deaths. However, the Department currently has no plans to introduce a national learning from deaths strategy. This reflects the fact that responsibility for preventing avoidable deaths and reducing harm sits across a wide range of government departments, agencies and bodies, each with their own specialist expertise, statutory responsibilities, policy levers, governance arrangements and learning mechanisms.

Many individual government departments and agencies have strategies and frameworks for reducing harm and preventable deaths in their areas of responsibility. One example is the Patient Safety Strategy updated by NHS England in July 2026. The purpose of this strategy is to continuously improve patient safety and evidence shows that is saving around 1,000 extra lives each year. The updated strategy can be found here: https://www.england.nhs.uk/patient-safety/the-nhs-patient-safety-strategy/.

In addition, the National Quality Board produced guidance in 2017 to help standardise and improve the way the NHS identifies, reports, reviews and investigates deaths to inform learning and improvement. Earlier this year, the newly revitalised National Quality Board commissioned a review of the national Learning from Deaths guidance to align with the introduction of the Medical Examiner system and new safety policy introduced via the NHS Patient Safety Strategy in 2019. The revision of the Learning from Deaths guidance will also incorporate a data strategy to support learning from deaths across the NHS in England. NHS England has met with Dr Georgia Richards and others working in the space of PFD analysis and the revised guidance will take this work into account. The Department for Health and Social Care tracks relevant PFD reports and ensures that relevant regulators and other bodies, are made aware of concerns, so that the relevant organisations can consider and act upon learning identified, including recurrent themes and risks.

More broadly, death certification, investigation, and registration system (including the coronial system and, through the reforms introduced by this Government in September 2024, the statutory Medical Examiner system) plays a vital role in establishing and recording universal and robust information about the circumstances of all deaths which take place in England and Wales. This information in turn contributes to work by ONS and other organisations to provide comprehensive and detailed mortality data for public benefit.

The Government recognises calls by the Infected Blood Inquiry and the Grenfell Inquiry that Parliament is the right body to undertake independent oversight of public inquiry recommendations and ensure that public authorities are held accountable for the actions they have committed to undertake. The Public Administration and Constitution Affairs Committee is currently looking at how Parliament can do this.

Ministers and officials regularly engage with a range of stakeholders on matters relating to the coronial system, including academic and research organisations. The Government recognises the contribution of the Preventable Deaths Tracker, led by Dr Georgia Richards of King’s College London, as well as work being undertaken by the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody and by other academics, in supporting access to and analysis of published PFD reports, and ministerial meetings are considered and arranged in the usual way.

Original parliamentary record

Coroners

Written Question House of Commons
Chris Coghlan · Liberal Democrat Answering body: Ministry of Justice
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps have been taken in response to receiving Prevention of Future Death reports.

Government answer

Answering body: Ministry of Justice

Coroners do not make recommendations as part of their inquest findings. However, where a coroner investigation gives rise to a concern that circumstances creating a risk of other deaths will occur, or will continue to exist, in the future, and the coroner considers that action should be taken to prevent future deaths, they have a statutory duty to issue a Prevention of Future Deaths (PFD) report to a person (including an organisation, public body, Government department or private company) that may have the power to take such action.

Recipients are required to provide a written response to the coroner within 56 days, or within any extended period agreed by the coroner, setting out action taken or proposed, or explaining why no action is proposed. Reports and responses must be sent to the Chief Coroner and are generally published and available at: https://www.judiciary.uk/?s=&pfd_report_type=&post_type=pfd&order=relevance.

These reports have been intentionally placed into the public domain since July 2013 as part of the Government and the judiciary’s commitment to open justice, so that coroner concerns can be understood, analysed and utilised to improve learning by recipient and other interested organisations, as well as by academics and others with a relevant interest.

The Government recognises the important role that PFD reports play in highlighting circumstances where action may be required to reduce the risk of future deaths and promoting organisational learning. However, whilst the Lord Chancellor has responsibility for the legislative framework governing the coronial system, the Ministry of Justice does not centrally assess, monitor or record the implementation of actions arising from individual PFD reports across Government and does not hold centrally the number of PFD reports received by government departments since 2013, nor the number of reports with outstanding responses. Responsibility for considering concerns raised by coroners, determining any appropriate action and responding to the coroner rests with the organisations and departments to which reports are addressed.

PFD reports are sent directly to the relevant recipients, and as above, are published by the Chief Coroner along with responses. Information on reports received and responses provided can also be obtained from individual recipients. Since 2025, the Chief Coroner has also published periodic lists of reports for which no response has been received by the relevant coroner's office.

The Ministry of Justice keeps all aspects of the coronial system under review and continues to consider evidence and proposals to improve learning from deaths. However, the Department currently has no plans to introduce a national learning from deaths strategy. This reflects the fact that responsibility for preventing avoidable deaths and reducing harm sits across a wide range of government departments, agencies and bodies, each with their own specialist expertise, statutory responsibilities, policy levers, governance arrangements and learning mechanisms.

Many individual government departments and agencies have strategies and frameworks for reducing harm and preventable deaths in their areas of responsibility. One example is the Patient Safety Strategy updated by NHS England in July 2026. The purpose of this strategy is to continuously improve patient safety and evidence shows that is saving around 1,000 extra lives each year. The updated strategy can be found here: https://www.england.nhs.uk/patient-safety/the-nhs-patient-safety-strategy/.

In addition, the National Quality Board produced guidance in 2017 to help standardise and improve the way the NHS identifies, reports, reviews and investigates deaths to inform learning and improvement. Earlier this year, the newly revitalised National Quality Board commissioned a review of the national Learning from Deaths guidance to align with the introduction of the Medical Examiner system and new safety policy introduced via the NHS Patient Safety Strategy in 2019. The revision of the Learning from Deaths guidance will also incorporate a data strategy to support learning from deaths across the NHS in England. NHS England has met with Dr Georgia Richards and others working in the space of PFD analysis and the revised guidance will take this work into account. The Department for Health and Social Care tracks relevant PFD reports and ensures that relevant regulators and other bodies, are made aware of concerns, so that the relevant organisations can consider and act upon learning identified, including recurrent themes and risks.

More broadly, death certification, investigation, and registration system (including the coronial system and, through the reforms introduced by this Government in September 2024, the statutory Medical Examiner system) plays a vital role in establishing and recording universal and robust information about the circumstances of all deaths which take place in England and Wales. This information in turn contributes to work by ONS and other organisations to provide comprehensive and detailed mortality data for public benefit.

The Government recognises calls by the Infected Blood Inquiry and the Grenfell Inquiry that Parliament is the right body to undertake independent oversight of public inquiry recommendations and ensure that public authorities are held accountable for the actions they have committed to undertake. The Public Administration and Constitution Affairs Committee is currently looking at how Parliament can do this.

Ministers and officials regularly engage with a range of stakeholders on matters relating to the coronial system, including academic and research organisations. The Government recognises the contribution of the Preventable Deaths Tracker, led by Dr Georgia Richards of King’s College London, as well as work being undertaken by the Independent Advisory Panel on Deaths in Custody and by other academics, in supporting access to and analysis of published PFD reports, and ministerial meetings are considered and arranged in the usual way.

Original parliamentary record

Blood: Contamination

Written Question House of Commons
Nick Timothy · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many prosecutions have been brought in connection with the infected blood scandal; and if he will make a statement.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

Whether individuals are prosecuted is rightly a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service and is independent of Government. Given the nationwide scope of the Infected Blood Inquiry, the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) has engaged experienced senior investigators to conduct a review of available evidence.

Since the review began following the Infected Blood Inquiry’s May 2024 report, the NPCC has published regular updates on its progress. The review’s initial scope was limited to chapters 1 and 2, but the NPCC’s most recent statement in August explained that it will be extending the scope of the review to all 7 chapters of the Inquiry’s May 2024 report. The Government has committed to making any and all relevant information around the Infected Blood Inquiry available to the relevant authorities where requested.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Written Question House of Commons
Iqbal Mohamed · Independent Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what estimate she has made of the average time taken to process compensation payments to the estates of deceased infected blood victims; and what steps she is taking to processing times in cases where the estate was previously registered with an infected blood support scheme.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

The delivery of compensation is a matter for the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA). With regards to estates of deceased infected people, IBCA has asked each registered estate where there is a beneficiary who is nearing the end of their life, to start their claim, and is now contacting estates with beneficiaries aged 75 or over. This is in line with the prioritisation criteria recommended by the Infected Blood Inquiry in its July 2025 Additional Report.

As of 25 August 2026, 1,099 people acting on behalf of a deceased infected person have been asked to start their claim, with over £65 million paid. Where the deceased infected person was registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme, IBCA is using all the information they have already provided to handle their claim, and only asks for additional information if there is any necessary information missing, such as date of diagnosis.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Written Question House of Commons
Iqbal Mohamed · Independent Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of the different compensation awards available under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme on (a) infected people who are still living and (b) the estates of infected people who have died; and if she will take steps to review those arrangements.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

Under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, an infected person’s compensation, whether claimed while living or via an estate, includes the same core award amounts for the Injury, Social Impact, and Autonomy awards. The core Financial Loss and Care awards are awarded differently. An estate is compensated for the financial loss the deceased person experienced from the point of infection to the date of their death. It is reasonable to assume that the infected person would have spent some of their earnings on financially supporting a partner, children, or other dependents. Therefore, the compensation scheme also provides compensation in the form of dependency payments to eligible affected people, which recognise the financial losses they experience as a result of the early death of the infected person. There is no limit on the number of affected people who can claim a dependency award as long as they can provide evidence of their eligibility.

The Government publicly consulted on a number of changes to the compensation scheme between 30 October 2025 and 22 January 2026. The core purpose of this consultation was to gather views on how the Government intends to implement the Infected Blood Inquiry’s recommendations. The Inquiry did not recommend changes to how the Financial Loss award is calculated for estates of deceased infected people. The changes to the compensation scheme made in the recent Infected Blood Compensation Scheme (Amendment) Regulations 2026 reflect directly what we heard in the consultation. The Government is of the view that the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme fairly compensates living infected people and the estates of deceased infected people for the financial loss they have felt as a result of the infection.

Original parliamentary record

Cabinet Office: Buildings

Written Question House of Commons
Mike Wood · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what the specific event was for each of the individual room hires since 4 April 2025 other than Civil Service Live and the Infected Blood Inquiry.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

I am unable to provide this information as the details are not held centrally and complying with this request would incur a disproportionate cost to the Cabinet Office.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry: Costs

Written Question House of Commons
Mike Wood · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the Answer of 22 April 2026 to Question 126586 on Infected Blood Inquiry: Costs and with reference to the Infected Blood Inquiry Finance Report 2025-26, whether the Infected Blood Inquiry financial report includes the associated costs of the inquiry to all relevant Government departments and agencies, including the provision of legal advice to them.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

The Infected Blood Inquiry closed on 31st March 2026. Its final financial report has been published on the Inquiry website, and includes a breakdown of the whole life costs of the Inquiry. This can be viewed here: https://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/sites/default/files/2026-04/IBI%20Finance%20report%202025-26.pdf

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
John Glen · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, when he expects the financial report for the Infected Blood Inquiry for the financial year 2025-2026 to be published.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

We expect the Inquiry, which has now formally completed its work, to publish its final financial report soon

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry: Costs

Written Question House of Commons
Mike Wood · Conservative Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, pursuant to the Answer of 4 September 2025 to Question 70519 on Public Inquiries, what the total cost to the public purse to date of the Infected Blood inquiry has been; and whether there is a total budget for t

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

The Infected Blood Inquiry publishes its own financial reports, which can be found here: https://www.infectedbloodinquiry.org.uk/about/financial-reports.

Original parliamentary record

Haemophilia: Health Services

Written Question House of Commons
Yasmin Qureshi · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department has taken to (a) increase funding and (b) tackle inequities between haemophilia centres.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders support the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding and would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

For 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
Yasmin Qureshi · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to Recommendation 9 (d) of the Infected Blood Inquiry report, what progress his Department has made on establishing functioning multi-disciplinary networks.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders support the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding and would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

For 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
Yasmin Qureshi · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to Recommendation 9(f) of the Infected Blood Inquiry report, what consideration has been given to providing additional funding for the national haemophilia database.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders support the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding and would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

For 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Written Question House of Commons
Gavin Robinson · Democratic Unionist Party Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what information his Department holds on the number of claimants to the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme who have less than 12 months to live; and whether they are being prioritised.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

IBCA are prioritising claims for those who are sadly nearing the end of their lives, followed by older age groups, as recommended by the Infected Blood Inquiry.

Based on community feedback, the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) is prioritising claims for people who have been told by a medical professional that they may have 12 months or less to live. This is regardless of whether they are infected, affected, a beneficiary of an estate of a deceased infected person, or registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme. IBCA collects information regarding this via their registration service, allowing them to prioritise claims appropriately.

The delivery of compensation is a matter for the IBCA as an operationally independent body. IBCA publishes regular updates on its website of the progress made in delivering compensation, including how many individuals have received compensation payments across all groups. The latest update can be found here: https://ibca.org.uk/statistics/registration-and-compensation-progress-update-9-April-2026.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Written Question House of Commons
Pete Wishart · Scottish National Party Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what considerations have been given to extending the cut-off date for eligibility for the Unethical Research Award in the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme beyond 1984, given the evidence in the Infected Blood Inquiry (Additional Report on Compensation) that experimentation on both adults and children continued beyond this date.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

The Inquiry, in its Additional Report, made a set of recommendations about the Unethical Research awards. The Government has consulted on these recommendations, including on a proposal to expand eligibility for Unethical Research awards to all infected people who received treatment for a bleeding disorder in the UK before 1985. The Government is now carefully considering the range of responses it received on this issue before determining its final position on eligibility.

The consultation closed on 22 January, and the Government will publish its response within 12 weeks of this closing date.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
Clive Efford · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what progress is being made in replacing plasma-derived products with recombinant coagulation factor products, where clinically appropriate, in accordance with Recommendation 9 of the Infected Blood Inquiry Report.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

In relation to recommendation 9, a to c, of the Infected Blood Inquiry, peer review of United Kingdom comprehensive care centres has been an essential part of haemophilia services for many years. The triennial audit was replaced in 2019 with a more formal peer review process on a five-year cycle.

The final peer review report is expected to be published imminently and once published, it will be shared with the NHS England Specialised Commissioning Quality Oversight Group for consideration and action. This will be supported by a letter to integrated care boards and trust boards, emphasising the valuable role of peer review and asking for confirmation of their commitment to review and implement the peer review findings.

The Haemophilia Service Specification has been updated by the Blood Disorders Clinical Reference Group and is making its way through final approvals, having undergone public consultation. The new specification includes a contractual requirement for providers to participate in and act upon peer review findings.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders supports the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding, and which would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

In response to 9e, all diseases or conditions where a non-plasma treatment exists to replace a plasma/blood-derived treatment are now addressed by commissioning policies or funding agreements. There are some specific regimens which are subject to ongoing clinical policy development but in each case there are alternative regimens or treatment approaches which negate the use of plasma-derived medicines.

Of particular interest to the clinical and patient community is the development of a clinical commissioning policy for recombinant Von Willebrand factor, which is currently licensed for prophylaxis in adults, as regular treatment for those with the severest bleeding, but which is not currently commissioned for this indication. Funding will be required to implement this clinical policy for all ages, and this has not yet been identified.

Finally, for 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Haemophilia: Databases

Written Question House of Commons
Clive Efford · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what consideration he has given to supporting the National Haemophilia Database through additional central funding.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

In relation to recommendation 9, a to c, of the Infected Blood Inquiry, peer review of United Kingdom comprehensive care centres has been an essential part of haemophilia services for many years. The triennial audit was replaced in 2019 with a more formal peer review process on a five-year cycle.

The final peer review report is expected to be published imminently and once published, it will be shared with the NHS England Specialised Commissioning Quality Oversight Group for consideration and action. This will be supported by a letter to integrated care boards and trust boards, emphasising the valuable role of peer review and asking for confirmation of their commitment to review and implement the peer review findings.

The Haemophilia Service Specification has been updated by the Blood Disorders Clinical Reference Group and is making its way through final approvals, having undergone public consultation. The new specification includes a contractual requirement for providers to participate in and act upon peer review findings.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders supports the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding, and which would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

In response to 9e, all diseases or conditions where a non-plasma treatment exists to replace a plasma/blood-derived treatment are now addressed by commissioning policies or funding agreements. There are some specific regimens which are subject to ongoing clinical policy development but in each case there are alternative regimens or treatment approaches which negate the use of plasma-derived medicines.

Of particular interest to the clinical and patient community is the development of a clinical commissioning policy for recombinant Von Willebrand factor, which is currently licensed for prophylaxis in adults, as regular treatment for those with the severest bleeding, but which is not currently commissioned for this indication. Funding will be required to implement this clinical policy for all ages, and this has not yet been identified.

Finally, for 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Haemophilia: Health Services

Written Question House of Commons
Clive Efford · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what progress he has made on establishing functioning multi-disciplinary networks to ensure best practice is followed in the treatment and care of haemophilia.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

In relation to recommendation 9, a to c, of the Infected Blood Inquiry, peer review of United Kingdom comprehensive care centres has been an essential part of haemophilia services for many years. The triennial audit was replaced in 2019 with a more formal peer review process on a five-year cycle.

The final peer review report is expected to be published imminently and once published, it will be shared with the NHS England Specialised Commissioning Quality Oversight Group for consideration and action. This will be supported by a letter to integrated care boards and trust boards, emphasising the valuable role of peer review and asking for confirmation of their commitment to review and implement the peer review findings.

The Haemophilia Service Specification has been updated by the Blood Disorders Clinical Reference Group and is making its way through final approvals, having undergone public consultation. The new specification includes a contractual requirement for providers to participate in and act upon peer review findings.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders supports the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding, and which would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

In response to 9e, all diseases or conditions where a non-plasma treatment exists to replace a plasma/blood-derived treatment are now addressed by commissioning policies or funding agreements. There are some specific regimens which are subject to ongoing clinical policy development but in each case there are alternative regimens or treatment approaches which negate the use of plasma-derived medicines.

Of particular interest to the clinical and patient community is the development of a clinical commissioning policy for recombinant Von Willebrand factor, which is currently licensed for prophylaxis in adults, as regular treatment for those with the severest bleeding, but which is not currently commissioned for this indication. Funding will be required to implement this clinical policy for all ages, and this has not yet been identified.

Finally, for 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
Clive Efford · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps have been taken towards implementing Recommendation 9 of the Infected Blood Inquiry.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

In relation to recommendation 9, a to c, of the Infected Blood Inquiry, peer review of United Kingdom comprehensive care centres has been an essential part of haemophilia services for many years. The triennial audit was replaced in 2019 with a more formal peer review process on a five-year cycle.

The final peer review report is expected to be published imminently and once published, it will be shared with the NHS England Specialised Commissioning Quality Oversight Group for consideration and action. This will be supported by a letter to integrated care boards and trust boards, emphasising the valuable role of peer review and asking for confirmation of their commitment to review and implement the peer review findings.

The Haemophilia Service Specification has been updated by the Blood Disorders Clinical Reference Group and is making its way through final approvals, having undergone public consultation. The new specification includes a contractual requirement for providers to participate in and act upon peer review findings.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders supports the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding, and which would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

In response to 9e, all diseases or conditions where a non-plasma treatment exists to replace a plasma/blood-derived treatment are now addressed by commissioning policies or funding agreements. There are some specific regimens which are subject to ongoing clinical policy development but in each case there are alternative regimens or treatment approaches which negate the use of plasma-derived medicines.

Of particular interest to the clinical and patient community is the development of a clinical commissioning policy for recombinant Von Willebrand factor, which is currently licensed for prophylaxis in adults, as regular treatment for those with the severest bleeding, but which is not currently commissioned for this indication. Funding will be required to implement this clinical policy for all ages, and this has not yet been identified.

Finally, for 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme: Hepatitis

Written Question House of Commons
Pete Wishart · Scottish National Party Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what consideration is being given to altering the Hepatitis C Financial Loss Award to reflect people who received older and more harmful treatments; and if he will make a statement.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

In its Additional Report, the Infected Blood Inquiry recommended changes to the infection severity bands to give greater recognition for the suffering caused particularly by interferon treatment. The Government agrees that changes are needed and has consulted on a proposal to introduce a new infection severity band, referred to as Level 2B, which would increase people’s financial loss and care compensation awards where relevant, to recognise the short-term side-effects that many people suffer due to interferon treatment.

The Government will publish its response to the consultation, which will set out its final decisions on the compensation scheme, within 12 weeks of the closing date. I therefore hope to update Parliament soon on the changes I intend to make to the compensation scheme as a result of the public consultation.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Inquiry

Written Question House of Commons
Ian Lavery · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he has taken with Cabinet colleagues to implement recommendation nine of the Infected Blood Inquiry's report.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

This includes peer review of UK comprehensive care centres, which has been an essential part of haemophilia services for many years. The triennial audit was replaced in 2019 with a more formal peer review process on a five-year cycle.

The final peer review report is expected to be published imminently and once published, will be shared with the NHSE Specialised Commissioning Quality Oversight Group for consideration and action. This will be supported by a letter to Integrated Care Boards and Trust Boards, emphasising the valuable role of peer review and ask for confirmation of their commitment to review and implement the peer review findings.

The Haemophilia Service Specification has been updated by the Blood Disorders Clinical Reference Group and is making its way through final approvals, having undergone public consultation. The new specification includes a contractual requirement for providers to participate in, and act upon peer review findings.

Original parliamentary record

Haemophilia: Health Services

Written Question House of Commons
Clive Efford · Labour Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps have been taken to address funding shortfalls and inequities between haemophilia centres around the UK, identified by 2024-25 peer review of haemophilia care.

Government answer

Answering body: Department of Health and Social Care

It is crucial we protect the safety of haemophilia care, and the Government is committed to implementing recommendation 9 of the 2024 Infected Blood Inquiry report.

The Government is committed to improving the lives of those living with rare diseases, such as haemophilia. The UK Rare Diseases Framework sets out four priorities collaboratively developed with the rare disease community: these include getting a final diagnosis faster; increasing awareness of rare diseases among healthcare professionals; better coordination of care; and improving access to specialist care, treatments, and drugs. We published the fifth annual England action plan in February 2026, where we report on the steps we have taken to advance these priorities.

In relation to recommendation 9, a to c, of the Infected Blood Inquiry, peer review of United Kingdom comprehensive care centres has been an essential part of haemophilia services for many years. The triennial audit was replaced in 2019 with a more formal peer review process on a five-year cycle.

The final peer review report is expected to be published imminently and once published, it will be shared with the NHS England Specialised Commissioning Quality Oversight Group for consideration and action. This will be supported by a letter to integrated care boards and trust boards, emphasising the valuable role of peer review and asking for confirmation of their commitment to review and implement the peer review findings.

The Haemophilia Service Specification has been updated by the Blood Disorders Clinical Reference Group and is making its way through final approvals, having undergone public consultation. The new specification includes a contractual requirement for providers to participate in and act upon peer review findings.

Regarding 9d, the Clinical Community and the NHS England Clinical Reference Group for Blood Disorders supports the need to develop and strengthen multi-disciplinary networks. NHS England has drafted a proposed National Clinical Network Specification specifically for these networks, which is dependent on additional funding, and which would embed key new requirements for providers to participate in a networked model of care.

In response to 9e, all diseases or conditions where a non-plasma treatment exists to replace a plasma/blood-derived treatment are now addressed by commissioning policies or funding agreements. There are some specific regimens which are subject to ongoing clinical policy development but in each case there are alternative regimens or treatment approaches which negate the use of plasma-derived medicines.

Of particular interest to the clinical and patient community is the development of a clinical commissioning policy for recombinant Von Willebrand factor, which is currently licensed for prophylaxis in adults, as regular treatment for those with the severest bleeding, but which is not currently commissioned for this indication. Funding will be required to implement this clinical policy for all ages, and this has not yet been identified.

Finally, for 9f, NHS England currently provides ‘central’ funding of approximately 40% of the total annual cost for running the National Haemophilia Database. A task and finish group relating to the database has been established, reporting into the overarching recommendation 9 expert group.

As of February 2026, stakeholders involved in the recommendation 9f working group are in agreement that the registry has been and remains immensely valuable in supporting the provision of clinical care. NHS England continues to work with the United Kingdom Haemophilia Centres Doctors' Organisation to understand the requirement for increased funding.

Further progress on implementing recommendation 9 is subject to additional funding, and this has not yet been identified. NHS England and the Department will continue to work together to provide progress updates on the Government Reporting Integration Platform.

Original parliamentary record

Infected Blood Compensation Scheme

Written Question House of Commons
Grahame Morris · Labour Answering body: Cabinet Office
Parliamentary excerpt

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that the (a) consultation responses and (b) feedback from impacted people on proposed changes to the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme are taken into account.

Government answer

Answering body: Cabinet Office

On 30 October, the Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme. The core purpose of this consultation was to gather views on how the Government intends to implement the Infected Blood Inquiry’s recommendations, and responses from the infected blood community were particularly encouraged.

Every response to this consultation is being considered carefully and with the seriousness the issue deserves. The consultation closed on 22 January, and the Government will publish its response within 12 weeks of this closing date.

Original parliamentary record