Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what is their current assessment of the percentage of "avoidable deaths" among those with a learning disability following the revision to the data published in the 2026 LeDeR report; and how this corrected figure will influence the targeted interventions within the NHS 10-Year Health Plan.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The headline findings of the updated 2023 Learning from lives and deaths – people with a learning disability and autistic people report remain consistent with those previously published. The updated analysis reaffirms that people with a learning disability continue to experience significant health inequalities, and on average, they die 19.5 years younger than the general population and are almost twice as likely to die from an avoidable cause of death. The proportion of deaths classed as avoidable is now higher than originally reported, at 40.2% compared to 38.8% previously reported. The downward trend over time remains, however the level of deaths classed as avoidable remains unacceptable.

The Government is committed to improving care for people with a learning disability and autistic people and has recognised the unacceptable inequalities and poor life expectancy this group of people faces within the 10-Year Health Plan. There is a range of work underway to drive service improvements and implement the plan’s goal to ensure more holistic, ongoing support in the community. This includes mandatory training on learning disability and autism for health and care staff, continued uptake of annual health checks, and roll out of a Reasonable Adjustment Digital Flag.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure that care providers do not use contact restrictions as a punitive measure against families who raise safeguarding concerns or complaints regarding the quality of care provided to learning-disabled individuals.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Government remains committed to ensuring that people in health and care settings can maintain meaningful contact with those who matter the most to them. This principle is central to delivering high-quality, person-centred care.

It is unacceptable for care providers to punish people for raising safeguarding concerns or complaints. The Government is clear that professionals applying the Mental Capacity Act are expected to keep up to date with guidance and caselaw, and to correctly use the principles within the act. Any restrictions placed on a person must be in that individual’s best interests, necessary, and proportionate. Care Quality Commission (CQC) guidance states that complainants must not be discriminated against or victimised, and people's care and treatment must not be affected if they make a complaint, or if somebody complains on their behalf. Where anyone alleges poor care, neglect or abuse, we expect those providing the service, local authorities, and the CQC to take swift action. The CQC will investigate any such cases shared with them.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to review the use of transparency orders in the Court of Protection to ensure that such orders do not prevent families from seeking public accountability in cases where they allege that visiting rights have been disproportionately restricted by local authorities or private providers.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

Court of Protection proceedings involve personal, sensitive matters and enable decisions to be made in the best interests of the person, who lacks the mental capacity to make those decisions themselves. The Government has no plans to review the use of transparency orders in the Court of Protection.

A transparency order in the Court of Protection restricts the publication and communication of information from proceedings. They support the principle of open justice by allowing Court of Protection hearings to be heard in public whilst protecting the privacy of vulnerable individuals.

The use of transparency orders is a matter for the judiciary. If the recipient believes an order is unfair, too restrictive, or no longer needed, they can apply to the court to vary it.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of any impact that a shortage of residential care placements for learning disabled individuals may have on the choice available to families; and what steps they are taking to ensure that any shortage of placements does not lead to the acceptance of any restrictive contact regimes that infringe on a resident's right to family life.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Local authorities are best placed to understand and plan for the needs of their population, which is why, under the Care Act 2014, they are tasked with the duty to shape their care market to meet the diverse needs of all people. This includes commissioning a variety of different providers and specialist services that provide genuine choice to meet the needs of local people and that offer quality and value for money.

Contact with family and friends is a crucial part of a person’s care and no one should be denied reasonable access to visitors while they are a resident in a care home, or a patient in a hospital or hospice. Regulation 9A: Visiting and accompanying in care homes, hospitals and hospices is a Care Quality Commission (CQC) fundamental standard which came into force on 6 April 2024 and sets out what providers must do to make sure they respect the right of each person to receive visits and to be accompanied. Providers also have a responsibility to comply with relevant Court of Protection orders.

In April 2025, the Department launched a review of the effectiveness of CQC Regulation 9A: Visiting and accompanying in care homes, hospitals and hospices, to consider whether it has been effective in meeting its objectives. The Department will be publishing the outcome of the review shortly.

Question to the Department for Transport:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of compliance by airlines with the Air Passenger Rights and Air Travel Organisers’ Licensing (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019; and what steps they are taking to ensure that airlines do not misinform UK passengers regarding their eligibility for compensation for flights departing from UK airports.

Answered by Lord Hendy of Richmond Hill - Minister of State (Department for Transport)

In the UK, Regulation (EC) 261/2004 sets out passenger rights in the event of certain flight disruptions. This includes a requirement for airlines to provide affected passengers with information on their rights.

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) is responsible for ensuring airlines meet their obligations under the Regulation. It is currently undertaking a Regulation 261/2004 compliance programme to assess airline performance.

The CAA also published research in July 2025 as part of its work programme aiming to improve industry communications with consumers during disruption. This makes 12 recommendations for airlines, focusing on the timing, content and channels of communication that should be used during disruption.

In addition, the CAA and the Department have published guidance that helps passengers understand their rights when flying.