Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether payments received by a surrogate mother in the UK are treated as income for the purposes of benefits assessments.

Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)

Surrogacy payments in the United Kingdom should only be for reasonable expenses. They are not taken into account as income for Universal Credit purposes. If any of the surrogacy payment is unspent in the period it is paid for, then this can be treated as capital if not spent by the end of the next assessment period. The normal capital rules apply to the build-up of unspent income if capital exceeds £6,000.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether he has made an assessment of the potential impact of the increase in the number of children entering the UK who have been born through surrogacy in countries where commercial surrogacy operates on the UK's not-for-profit surrogacy framework.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Department has not made an assessment of the potential impact of the increase in the number of children entering the United Kingdom who have been born through surrogacy in countries where commercial surrogacy operates, on the UK's not-for-profit surrogacy framework.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office have published advice for those considering surrogacy overseas, which is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/surrogacy-overseas/surrogacy-overseas

This clearly sets out the possible risks and the processes for returning to the UK with a child born through an international surrogacy arrangement.

The Department Health and Social Care does not hold any information on trends in the number of children born via surrogacy abroad, in particular in Kazakhstan and Nigeria.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what information his Department holds on trends in the number of children born via surrogacy abroad, in particular in (a) Kazakhstan and (b) Nigeria.

Answered by Karin Smyth - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Department has not made an assessment of the potential impact of the increase in the number of children entering the United Kingdom who have been born through surrogacy in countries where commercial surrogacy operates, on the UK's not-for-profit surrogacy framework.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office have published advice for those considering surrogacy overseas, which is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/surrogacy-overseas/surrogacy-overseas

This clearly sets out the possible risks and the processes for returning to the UK with a child born through an international surrogacy arrangement.

The Department Health and Social Care does not hold any information on trends in the number of children born via surrogacy abroad, in particular in Kazakhstan and Nigeria.

Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:

To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment she has made of the role that small, high‑harm online platforms play in hosting antisemitic content that is subsequently amplified by larger platforms.

Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)

Antisemitic content is divisive, hateful and has no place online. The government expects Ofcom to use its full powers in the Online Safety Act to tackle it.

Antisemitic material that meets the criminal threshold is illegal content, and the Act’s duties apply to all regulated services, regardless of size.

To address risks from smaller platforms, Ofcom has established a ‘small but risky’ supervision taskforce. This focuses on identifying smaller services posing severe risks, engaging with them, assessing compliance and escalating concerns to Ofcom’s Enforcement team.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many patients have reported adverse outcomes following rectopexy mesh procedures in the last ten years; and whether his Department has considered those cases in determining eligibility for mesh-related redress schemes.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

Up to and including the 16 March 2026, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has received a total of 3,303 adverse incident reports. Please note that this search was conducted across all relevant brands, models, and manufacturers associated with the Global Medical Device Nomenclature CT codes listed above and the data is not linked to specific procedures. As such, the data provided will include reports concerning mesh used in a range of different surgical applications, not limited to rectopexy. It is important to note that this data does not directly correlate to the number of United Kingdom procedures undertaken in the UK.

Adverse incident reports are not a direct measure of the number of individual patients affected, as the same incident, or user, may be reported multiple times and duplicates cannot always be reliably linked, and figures may also include cases drawn from published literature and may change slightly as further details are received. Reports may describe recognised complications, and their inclusion does not establish causation or fault with any particular device, so the data should not be interpreted as a summary of known or proven adverse reactions.

The Government is carefully considering the work by the Patient Safety Commissioner and her report, which set out options for redress for those harmed by valproate and pelvic mesh. The abovementioned data will form part of the Department’s considerations regarding a redress scheme.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment was made of the potential merits of including an examination of the evidence base relating to the spike protein and lipid nanoparticles used in Covid‑19 mRNA vaccines within the scope for oral evidence of the UK Covid‑19 Inquiry; and whether the Government has received any correspondence from the Inquiry on whether such issues fall within its remit.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The UK COVID-19 Inquiry is an independent statutory inquiry. As an independent body, it is responsible for determining its own scope, lines of investigation, and the evidence it seeks. Decisions about whether to include examination of specific scientific or technical matters, such as the evidence base relating to spike proteins or lipid nanoparticles, fall within the inquiry’s discretion.

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency has not received any specific correspondence or instruction from the inquiry relating to spike proteins or lipid nanoparticles.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, whether the Department has modelled alternative funding structures for the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency that would reduce reliance on industry fees; and if it will publish any assessments made of the impact of such models on regulatory independence.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

No such modelling has been undertaken.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency is taking to improve clinician reporting of myocarditis and pericarditis in the Yellow Card system; and whether the Department has assessed under‑reporting rates for these conditions.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) is committed to continually strengthening the Yellow Card scheme to support patient safety. The MHRA regularly promotes awareness through public health campaigns, conferences, established networks, and new educational resources available on the Yellow Card website. Further information is available on the MHRA website at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/medicines-and-healthcare-products-regulatory-agency

Reporting rates through spontaneous reporting systems, such as the Yellow Card Scheme, are highly variable, and dependent not just on the condition, but other factors such as the product, public interest, and media attention. As such, the MHRA does not hold estimates of under reporting rates for these conditions.

The MHRA is expanding and improving digital reporting routes. Every National Health Service webpage relating to a medicine or vaccine now links to the Yellow Card scheme, and the MHRA is working with NHS colleagues to enhance integration with the NHS App to increase visibility and reporting by the public. Yellow Card reporting is now embedded in almost all general practice clinical IT systems, enabling healthcare professionals to submit reports directly on behalf of patients.

Over recent years, the MHRA has delivered a major upgrade programme to modernise the Yellow Card scheme’s technology and infrastructure. This includes improving the quality and timeliness of submitted information, making it easier to report, adding conditional questions to reduce follow up, and support real time signal detection of safety issues.

The Yellow Card app has also been modernised to mirror the website, broaden reporting options, including defective and counterfeit medicines, and improve access to safety data. Multifactor authentication has been introduced to enhance account security and enable future integration with the NHS login. The app has also been upgraded to a progressive web application, providing a seamless and engaging user experience across devices.

Together, these improvements increase public awareness, make reporting, including of myocarditis and pericarditis, easier, and enhance the MHRA’s ability to identify and assess emerging safety concerns across healthcare products.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many staff of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency have, in each of the last five years, (a) moved to roles with pharmaceutical companies or industry-funded bodies and (b) joined the Agency from such organisations; and what safeguards are in place to manage potential conflicts of interest arising from such movement.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) requires all staff to undertake a conflict-of-interest declaration upon joining the agency and then on a yearly basis. All declarations are assessed according to MHRA policy to ensure due consideration and agreement of required mitigations. The MHRA does not routinely record where staff move to when leaving the agency, however all staff are bound by the business appointment rules for crown servants and are required to seek prior agreement if they fall within the specified criteria. Further information on the business appointment rules for crown servants is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/business-appointment-rules-for-crown-servants/business-appointment-rules-for-crown-servants

In relation to staff joining the agency, the MHRA does not record the information in the manner requested, but a manual review of the records from new joiners between the financial years 2021 to 2026 indicates that 47 staff have declared previous employment in a pharmaceutical or industry funded body. The following table shows a breakdown of the 47 staff who have declared previous employment in a pharmaceutical or industry funded body from 2021/22 to 2025/26, and in total:

It should be noted that this assessment is a best estimate to match within the criteria requested and the number may be subject to change.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many whistleblowing reports relating to conflicts of interest have been submitted within the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency in each of the last five years; and whether the Department will publish anonymised summaries of the issues raised.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

In the last five years, three internal whistleblowing reports relating to conflicts of interest have been made to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency’s (MHRA) nominated officers.

Nominated officers are trained individuals designated to give confidential advice, support, and guidance on whistleblowing concerns to staff, and to help staff escalate those concerns appropriately. The following table shows the number of whistleblowing reports related to conflicts of interest, from 2021/22 to 2025/26, up to 20 March 2026:

There are no requirements or plans to publish summaries of these whistleblowing reports. The MHRA submits data annually to the Cabinet Office on all whistleblowing investigations that have taken place and publishes a short summary of its internal whistleblowing actions, including the number of whistleblowing investigations, in its Annual Report and Accounts.

Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:

To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what steps her Department is taking to enable smaller charities to contribute more effectively to public policy development, including through improving access to (a) tenders, (b) grant applications and (c) policy consultations.

Answered by Stephanie Peacock - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)

This Government is doing much to reset the relationship with civil society and ensure we listen to - and heed - a broad range of voices from across the sector, including those from small charities. The Civil Society Covenant, launched by the Prime Minister in July 2025, sets out the ambition of this government to fully recognise the value of civil society. No.10 has established the Civil Society Council, to work in partnership with government at the highest level to drive and oversee the implementation of the Covenant.

Our recently-launched £11.5 million Local Covenant Partnerships (LCP) Fund puts many of the Covenant’s principles into practice, including testing new approaches to commissioning and procurement. The LCP Fund will invest in 15 places across England to develop innovative partnership models between VCSE organisations and local public sector bodies. This in turn will increase levels of local VCSE delivery of public services, including from small charities, and work towards developing the local sector’s knowledge and confidence of commissioning structures and procurement processes.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the capacity of the Infected Blood Compensation Authority to process claims made in a timely manner.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

As of 10 March, the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) has paid over £2 billion in compensation. As of 1 October 2025, IBCA had asked every living infected person who is registered with a support scheme to come forward and start their claim. IBCA has now opened the service for the first claims from infected people who were never compensated, deceased infected people, and living affected people. This met the Government’s targets for compensation delivery in 2025.

With each new cohort, IBCA are starting small, allowing them to learn what additions to the claim service are needed. This will allow them to open their service to more people as the service is built around specific needs. Whilst the roll out of the Scheme is an operational decision for IBCA as an independent body, the Government fully supports their commitment to moving forward as swiftly as possible.

Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many Infected Blood Compensation scheme claimants, with a prognosis of less than 12 months life expectancy, are having their claims and registered intent notifications prioritised.

Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office

Based on community feedback, the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) are 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 collect 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.

Museum online sales to Northern Ireland

75th anniversary of Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster

50 years of Downtown Radio

70 years of the Ballywalter Women's Institute

90th anniversary of Upper Crossgar Pipe Band

European Remembrance Day for Victims of Terrorism (No. 2)

90th anniversary of Killaloo Accordion Band

Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month (No. 2)

America250 and Ulster Scots connections

54th anniversary of IRA murders of two police officers in Londonderry

HPV Awareness Day

Found: Ireland officials and I know even personally you have been engaged with colleagues of mine, Carla Lockhart