Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps her Department is taking to ensure (a) transparency and (b) accountability in its use of AI systems in public services.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
We have AI governance in place to ensure we use AI in a safe, ethical, and transparent way. DWP is committed to publishing details of its use of algorithms against the cross-Government Algorithmic Transparency Reporting Standard (ATRS). We ensure our generative AI tools can trace outputs back to the source data so that humans can understand how the output has been created. Outputs from our use of AI technology are traceable for governance purposes.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether benefit claimants are informed when their claims are assessed using algorithmic tools.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
DWP’s Personal Information Charter (PIC) (Personal information charter - Department for Work and Pensions - GOV.UK) outlines how DWP processes personal data related to and its use of both Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Automated Decision Making (ADM).
DWP does not use AI to replace human judgement to determine or deny a payment to a claimant.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether any of the algorithmic systems used by her Department are subject to independent oversight.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
The Department is committed to publishing details of its use of complex algorithms in line with the cross-Government Algorithmic Transparency Reporting Standard (ATRS). We also engage with external bodies, such as the Information Commissioner's Office, the National Audit Office, and Parliament as required.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 2 July 2025 to Question 63048 on Blood: Donors, what the ethnic breakdown is of the 4,493 donors deferred due to travel; and what this is as a proportion of (a) total deferrals and (b) total deferrals per ethnic group.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) is responsible for collecting blood donations across England, in order to fulfil hospital requests to meet patient need.
From 1 June 2024 to 31 May 2025, a total of 4,493 donors deferred due to travel. The following table shows the ethnic breakdown of these deferrals as a proportion of (a) total deferrals and (b) total deferrals per ethnic group:
Ethnicity | Total Deferrals | Deferrals due to Travel | % of Total Deferrals | % Total Deferrals by Ethnicity |
Any other Asian background | 3,448 | 63 | 0.0% | 1.8% |
Any other Black/African/Caribbean background | 724 | 21 | 0.0% | 2.9% |
Any other ethnic group* | 1,409 | 44 | 0.0% | 3.1% |
Any other Mixed / Multiple ethnic background | 2,114 | 38 | 0.0% | 1.8% |
Any other White background | 17,343 | 273 | 0.1% | 1.6% |
Arab | 1,005 | 20 | 0.0% | 2.0% |
Asian Bangladeshi | 817 | 11 | 0.0% | 1.3% |
Asian Indian | 7,176 | 157 | 0.1% | 2.2% |
Asian Pakistani | 2,126 | 232 | 0.1% | 10.9% |
Black- African | 6,562 | 265 | 0.1% | 4.0% |
Black- Caribbean | 3,663 | 66 | 0.0% | 1.8% |
Chinese | 1,709 | 34 | 0.0% | 2.0% |
English/Welsh/Scottish/Northern Irish/British | 231,879 | 3,107 | 1.1% | 1.3% |
Mixed White and Asian | 2,071 | 39 | 0.0% | 1.9% |
Mixed White and Black African | 842 | 15 | 0.0% | 1.8% |
Mixed White and Black Caribbean | 2,093 | 23 | 0.0% | 1.1% |
Not Disclosed | 1,516 | 20 | 0.0% | 1.3% |
Unknown | 880 | 19 | 0.0% | 2.2% |
White Irish | 3,634 | 46 | 0.0% | 1.3% |
Grand Total | 291,011 | 4,493 | 1.5% | 1.5% |
Source: NHSBT’s centrally held administrative systems, extracted 27 June 2025.
Note: *Any other ethnic group includes Gypsy or Irish Traveller and Roma to comply with small number suppression.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether her Department collects data on (a) errors and (b) false positives arising from algorithmic fraud detection tools.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
DWP is committed to processing data lawfully, proportionately, and ethically, with meaningful human input and safeguards in place to protect individuals. “Algorithmic fraud detection tool” is not a term we use in DWP however, the department develops, tests, and invests in advanced analytics to support the detection of fraud and error. Currently, the UC Advances model is the only machine learning model deployed at scale in live service. On the 17th July, the Department published a fairness assessment of the UC Advances model, which includes consideration of the model’s performance. The model remains an effective fraud prevention control, performing approximately three times better than a control group in identifying high-risk advances.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many benefit decisions made using (a) automated and (b) AI-assisted systems have been overturned on appeal since 2020.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
No Artificial Intelligence is currently deployed to make decisions regarding benefit entitlement or value in isolation. There is automation in some benefit processes but decisions regarding entitlement and value will have a human decision maker involved.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of its use of algorithmic decision-making tools on levels of risk of (a) bias and (b) discrimination.
Answered by Andrew Western - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Work and Pensions)
DWP is committed to regularly assessing AI use in the Department to ensure it meets business needs, is quality assured, and does not lead to a risk of discrimination or harm. In some areas, the Department uses automated decision-making to make benefit awards, but AI is not used as part of that process. DWP has a legal requirement to ensure appropriate safeguards are in place when carrying out automated decision-making or the use of AI, using tools such as Data Protection Impact Assessments (DPIAs) and fairness assessments to highlight any potential bias or discrimination risks associated with AI and automation. The Department carries out regular checks to ensure our systems are working as intended.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the UN report entitled A/HRC/59/23: From economy of occupation to economy of genocide - Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, published on 16 June 2025, what steps he is taking to raise concerns on the accusations contained within the report with (a) UK-based companies and (b) companies with UK government contracts listed in the report.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
It is the long-standing policy of successive British Governments that judgement as to whether genocide has occurred is for a competent national or international court. Genocide is a crime and whether it has occurred should be decided after consideration of all the evidence available in the context of a credible judicial process.
The UK Government is committed to upholding international law and promoting human rights in all its operations, including procurement. We expect all suppliers to uphold the highest of ethical standards and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
Public sector procurement is subject to a legal framework set out by the Procurement Act 2023 which came into force in February 2025. Individual contracting authorities are responsible for their own procurement and contract award decisions under the Act.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the recent UN report A/HRC/59/23 entitled, From economy of occupation to economy of genocide - Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, published on 16 June 2025, whether his Department will consider updating procurement processes to ensure companies implicated in genocide do not receive (a) public money and (b) Government contracts.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
It is the long-standing policy of successive British Governments that judgement as to whether genocide has occurred is for a competent national or international court. Genocide is a crime and whether it has occurred should be decided after consideration of all the evidence available in the context of a credible judicial process.
The UK Government is committed to upholding international law and promoting human rights in all its operations, including procurement. We expect all suppliers to uphold the highest of ethical standards and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
Public sector procurement is subject to a legal framework set out by the Procurement Act 2023 which came into force in February 2025. Individual contracting authorities are responsible for their own procurement and contract award decisions under the Act.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the UN report entitled A/HRC/59/23: From economy of occupation to economy of genocide - Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967, published on 16 June 2025, whether he is taking steps to review contracts with companies listed in the report.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
It is the long-standing policy of successive British Governments that judgement as to whether genocide has occurred is for a competent national or international court. Genocide is a crime and whether it has occurred should be decided after consideration of all the evidence available in the context of a credible judicial process.
The UK Government is committed to upholding international law and promoting human rights in all its operations, including procurement. We expect all suppliers to uphold the highest of ethical standards and to comply with all applicable laws and regulations.
Public sector procurement is subject to a legal framework set out by the Procurement Act 2023 which came into force in February 2025. Individual contracting authorities are responsible for their own procurement and contract award decisions under the Act.