Asked by: Baroness Ritchie of Downpatrick (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what evidence, analysis or expert advice Ministers relied on in concluding that broadening the scope of health technology assessments for vaccines to include wider economic and societal impacts is unnecessary; and whether this conclusion was informed by any assessment of the capability and remit of the National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence and the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation in areas beyond pure health system cost-effectiveness, such as macro-economics, public finance, and social and welfare analysis.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
We are proud to have one of the most comprehensive vaccination programmes in the world. Our approach to evaluating vaccination programmes, underpinned by recommendations and advice from the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), is grounded in rigorous and evidence-led cost-effectiveness analysis, and ensures that decisions are objective, consistent, and based on high-quality data on health benefits and costs.
Basing our approach on these factors avoids the uncertainty of less direct benefits, where the evidence and therefore the decision is likely to be less defensible. This approach is also informed by previous work on this topic.
For example, earlier work by the independent Cost-Effectiveness Methodology for Immunisation Programmes and Procurement (CEMIPP) considered, amongst other things, whether wider socio-economic impacts should be included in the framework used to assess the cost-effectiveness of vaccines. CEMIPP conducted a consultation as part of their wider work and drew upon a broad body of expert opinion. The group concluded that wider socio-economic impacts should not be included in vaccine cost-effectiveness assessments unless doing so becomes standard practice across all health technology assessments.
Additionally, in 2022, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) undertook a detailed appraisal of whether it should broaden the perspective it uses in its economic evaluations, including consideration of wider societal impacts. Following this review, and after examining both international comparisons, and the significant methodological and ethical challenges involved, NICE’s Board concluded that it should retain its current approach of using a health-sector perspective routinely, but with the flexibility to include wider societal benefits when they are especially relevant.
Whilst the expertise of the JCVI rightly centres on disease burden, vaccine efficacy, health outcomes and health-related costs, as outlined this is not a key reason for why the cost-effectiveness methodology for vaccines does not formally take into consideration wider socio-economic benefits.
Asked by: Chris Coghlan (Liberal Democrat - Dorking and Horley)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if she plans to undertake a public awareness campaign to promote the new Highway Code rules as part of the Road Safety strategy.
Answered by Lilian Greenwood - Government Whip, Lord Commissioner of HM Treasury
Improving road safety is one of my Department’s highest priorities. Injuries and fatalities from road collisions caused by driving are unacceptable, and this Government will work hard to prevent these tragedies for all road users.
That is why on 7 January 2026, we published our new Road Safety Strategy, setting out our vision for a safer future on our roads for all.
Following updates to the Highway Code in 2022, the department ran large-scale THINK! advertising campaigns to raise awareness of the changes.
Via the THINK! campaign, we are also running year-round radio filler adverts encouraging compliance with the guidance to improve safety for those walking, cycling and horse riding. We will also continue to promote the changes via THINK! and Department for Transport social media channels, as well as through partner organisations.
However, as set out in the strategy, more work is needed to continue embedding these changes and overall awareness of the Highway Code. We are considering options in this area, and further details will be shared in due course.
As our road environment and technologies evolve, providing education for all road users throughout their lifetime is vital to improving road safety. As announced in the strategy to support a Lifelong Learning approach in the UK, the government will publish for the first time national guidance on the development and delivery of road safety education, training and publicity. Alongside this, the government will publish a manual to support the implementation of a Lifelong Learning approach for road safety.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what steps he is taking to help ensure that bereaved families are treated equitably within the compensation scheme and retain a route to seek recognition of the full extent of injuries suffered by their relatives.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides compensation to affected people, who have suffered the impacts of infected blood through their relationship with an infected person. This includes partners, parents, children and siblings.
All eligible affected people receive the Injury, Autonomy, and Social Impact awards. The Injury award compensates for both physical and mental injury, including the death of an infected person or the likely death of a loved one in the future. The Injury award is higher in circumstances where it is likely that the infection had caused or could cause death.
A supplementary route is also available to compensate financial dependents where the infected person has sadly died. Financial dependents include bereaved partners, and children who were under 18 at the time of death.
In its Additional Report, the Inquiry asked the Government to give consideration to there being a supplementary route for affected people, suggesting that this include opening the supplemental award for severe psychological harm to affected people.
The Government has consulted on whether, and how, an expanded supplementary route for affected people could be constructed whilst continuing to allow for timely delivery of compensation within a tariff-based scheme. The Government is considering each response to the consultation with the seriousness the issue deserves, and will publish its response within 12 weeks of the consultation’s closing date.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the compensation proposals for the estates of infected individuals who died before the establishment of Infected Blood Support Schemes in 2017; and whether those estates will have equivalent routes to seek recognition of injuries, including psychological injury, to those available to estates whose claims were taken over by the schemes.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
Estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive compensation under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, regardless of whether the infected person was registered with the Infected Blood Support Schemes (IBSS) at any time. Whether an infected person was registered with the IBSS at the time of their death has no bearing on the calculation of their compensation package and they are compensated under the same awards (Injury, Social Impact, Autonomy, Financial Loss and Care) as an infected person who was registered with the IBSS.
The majority of victims of the infected blood scandal have suffered psychological harm. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme currently provides compensation for psychological harm through both the core and supplementary route, depending on the type and severity of harm. In the supplementary route, the Severe Health Condition award offers additional compensation where someone has been diagnosed with a severe psychiatric disorder that has caused suffering beyond what is recognised and compensated for as part of their core award. The estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive both of these awards.
The Government has consulted on a proposal that severe mental health issues not covered in the core route are compensated for by the expansion of eligibility for a Severe Health Condition award because they meet the criteria for the Special Category Mechanism (SCM) or equivalent payments. The Government has not proposed that estates of deceased infected people who were not receiving SCM or equivalent payments at the time of death are eligible to receive this award, as the infected person is not able to be assessed by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority against the same criteria. The Government is carefully considering all consultation responses, and will publish its response within 12 weeks of the consultation’s closing date.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether he will set out the evidential routes through which the estates of deceased infected individuals will be able to seek compensation for psychological injuries experienced before death, including in cases involving significant mental health deterioration or attempted suicide.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
Estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive compensation under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, regardless of whether the infected person was registered with the Infected Blood Support Schemes (IBSS) at any time. Whether an infected person was registered with the IBSS at the time of their death has no bearing on the calculation of their compensation package and they are compensated under the same awards (Injury, Social Impact, Autonomy, Financial Loss and Care) as an infected person who was registered with the IBSS.
The majority of victims of the infected blood scandal have suffered psychological harm. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme currently provides compensation for psychological harm through both the core and supplementary route, depending on the type and severity of harm. In the supplementary route, the Severe Health Condition award offers additional compensation where someone has been diagnosed with a severe psychiatric disorder that has caused suffering beyond what is recognised and compensated for as part of their core award. The estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive both of these awards.
The Government has consulted on a proposal that severe mental health issues not covered in the core route are compensated for by the expansion of eligibility for a Severe Health Condition award because they meet the criteria for the Special Category Mechanism (SCM) or equivalent payments. The Government has not proposed that estates of deceased infected people who were not receiving SCM or equivalent payments at the time of death are eligible to receive this award, as the infected person is not able to be assessed by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority against the same criteria. The Government is carefully considering all consultation responses, and will publish its response within 12 weeks of the consultation’s closing date.
Asked by: Wendy Morton (Conservative - Aldridge-Brownhills)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to HCWS1271, what metrics his Department uses to measure geographic inequalities in cancer diagnosis, treatment and survival; which regions perform worst on early diagnosis and cancer outcomes; whether he will bring forward interventions to targeted the worst performing areas; and how his Department monitors and reports steps it is taking to help reduce such geographic disparities.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Department monitors geographic inequalities in cancer diagnosis and treatment through the NHS Cancer Waiting Time Standards, for which data is published at integrated care board and provider level. The NHS England Acute Provider Table for all 134 providers supports this transparency.
Early diagnosis is monitored through NHS England’s annual publication of early diagnosis data in England, the Case-mix Adjusted Percentage of Cancers Diagnosed at Stages 1 and 2. Early diagnosis data is published for England as a whole and for the integrated care boards. Survival data is monitored through NHS England's annual publication of cancer survival data in England. Cancer survival data is published for England as a whole, for the National Health Service regions, integrated care boards, and Cancer Alliances for 21 selected cancers. The index of cancer survival for all cancers is published for England, integrated care boards, and Cancer Alliances.
The Department recognises that outcomes remain poorest in some deprived, rural and coastal areas, where rates of early diagnosis and cancer survival are lower. To support improvement, the Government has provided £200 million of ring‑fenced funding for Cancer Alliances in 2026/27 to help the lowest‑performing trusts strengthen diagnostic pathways and reduce delays.
The Department monitors progress through regular oversight with NHS England, tracking improvements in early diagnosis and treatment standards across regions. These measures underpin our commitment to reducing geographic disparities so that a patient’s chances of survival do not depend on where they live.
Asked by: Pippa Heylings (Liberal Democrat - South Cambridgeshire)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, if he will make an assessment of the provision of NHS treatment for Functional Neurological Disorder; and what steps he will take to resolve the disparities that currently exist between regions for the treatment of this condition.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
NHS England’s updated Specialised Neurology Service Specification, published in August 2025, includes specific reference to functional neurological disorder (FND). It states that all specialised neurology centres must include access to treatment services for FND. The updated Specialised Neurology Service Specification is available at the following link:
https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/specialised-neurology-services-adults/
There are a number of other national-level initiatives supporting service improvement and better care for patients with neurological conditions, including FND, such as the Getting It Right First Time Programme for Neurology and the Neurology Transformation Programme, which aim to improve care for people by reducing variation and delivering care more equitably across England.
Additionally, we have set up a UK Neuro Forum facilitating formal, which are twice-yearly meetings across the Department, NHS England, the devolved administrations and health services, and the Neurological Alliances of all four nations. The new forum brings key stakeholders together, to share learning across the system and to discuss challenges, best practice examples, and potential solutions for improving the care of people with neurological conditions, including FND.
Asked by: Clive Jones (Liberal Democrat - Wokingham)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, with reference to page 75 of the policy paper entitled A National Cancer Plan for England: delivering world class cancer care, whether it is his policy that patients with rare cancers should be offered targeted and personalised therapies where genomic testing identifies a suitable potential treatment.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Cancer Plan, published on 4 February 2026, sets out clear actions to expand diagnostic genomic testing and ensure that this is matched by access to targeted therapies. The plan confirms that every cancer patient who would benefit from genomic testing, including those with rare cancers, will receive it within a clinically relevant timeframe.
To support timely access to treatments identified through genomic testing, a new joint National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency process from April 2026 will accelerate licensing and appraisal so that National Health Service funding recommendations can be made more quickly. The expansion of the NHS Genomic Medicine Service will also help identify suitable targeted therapies, connect patients to clinical trials faster, and integrate genomic data into the Single Patient Record by 2028.
With reference to page 75 of the National Cancer Plan, it is Government policy that patients with rare cancers should benefit from personalised and targeted therapies where genomic testing identifies a suitable option. The plan also strengthens specialist multidisciplinary teams for rare cancers so that patients can access expertise from specialist centres and the most up‑to‑date evidence‑based treatments.
Asked by: Clive Jones (Liberal Democrat - Wokingham)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps he is taking to ensure that the expansion of diagnostic genomic testing for cancer is accompanied by timely NHS access to targeted therapies identified by that testing, including where such therapies are not routinely commissioned.
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The National Cancer Plan, published on 4 February 2026, sets out clear actions to expand diagnostic genomic testing and ensure that this is matched by access to targeted therapies. The plan confirms that every cancer patient who would benefit from genomic testing, including those with rare cancers, will receive it within a clinically relevant timeframe.
To support timely access to treatments identified through genomic testing, a new joint National Institute for Health and Care Excellence and Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency process from April 2026 will accelerate licensing and appraisal so that National Health Service funding recommendations can be made more quickly. The expansion of the NHS Genomic Medicine Service will also help identify suitable targeted therapies, connect patients to clinical trials faster, and integrate genomic data into the Single Patient Record by 2028.
With reference to page 75 of the National Cancer Plan, it is Government policy that patients with rare cancers should benefit from personalised and targeted therapies where genomic testing identifies a suitable option. The plan also strengthens specialist multidisciplinary teams for rare cancers so that patients can access expertise from specialist centres and the most up‑to‑date evidence‑based treatments.
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many mental capacity assessments have been carried out on patients in each of the last five years.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) is designed to protect and empower people who lack the mental capacity to make a decision themselves. It says that every person must be presumed to have capacity to make the decision in question unless it is established otherwise, and sets out a two-stage test to establish if a person can make specific decisions regarding their care and treatment. Capacity assessments are done locally, and data is not collated or held centrally on how many assessments are carried out.
The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) is a procedure prescribed in law under the MCA when a person who lacks mental capacity to consent to their care or treatment is being deprived of their liberty in a care home or hospital in order to keep them safe from harm. DoLS assessments data is collated and published, the most recent data available is for 2023/24.
In 2023/24 there were 323,870 DoLS applications completed, 145,945 fully assessed, 15,270 closed partially assessed, 162,655 closed without assessments, and 123,790 not completed at year end.
The MCA code of practice gives guidance to people who work with, or care for, people who can’t make decisions for themselves, including when a mental capacity assessment should be carried out, and by whom. Government is clear that professionals applying the MCA are expected to keep up to date with guidance and caselaw, and to correctly use the principles within the act.
In October 2025 we announced our intention to run a joint consultation with the Ministry of Justice to consult on Liberty Protection Safeguards and an updated draft of the Code of Practice in 2026.