The supplementary autonomy award for victims of unethical research is only available for infected people. This includes claims from living infected people or estates of deceased infected people.

As part of the public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme, the Government sought views 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.

It was clear from the consultation that respondents felt some specific groups had suffered significant harms and losses, and deserved more compensation in recognition of this. Many suggested parents who sadly lost their child to infected blood where the child was under 18. Respondents thought the emotional toll of providing care and supporting their child through a traumatic period should be specifically recognised, in addition to the financial losses they may have faced as a result of missing work to provide care, or when they were prevented from working due to grief.

The new 50% uplift to the core Injury award for parents of children that passed away under 18 is therefore intended to recognise the very specific, additional trauma associated with the loss of a child during their formative years. By using a clear age-based threshold the Government can provide this extra compensation, honouring the clear preference expressed in the consultation for an award that avoids intrusive individual assessments or the requirement for new clinical evidence.

The decisions made on this award were based directly on what the Government heard in the consultation.

Yes, deceased infected people will be eligible. As set out in the Government’s response to the consultation, every eligible infected person treated for a bleeding disorder within a specific time period will receive an unethical research award. Additionally, people who were treated for a bleeding disorder in childhood will receive a higher Unethical Research award than those who were treated in adulthood. The amounts available through these awards do not change based on whether the infected person is living or has died.

The delivery of compensation is a matter for the independent Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA).

IBCA publishes updated statistics every fortnight on its website. As of 19 May 2026, a total of 3,272 people have had their compensation paid. This includes:

• 3,198 living infected people registered with an existing support scheme;

• 21 living infected people who have never been compensated;

• 23 people acting on behalf of a deceased infected person;

• 30 affected people.

The latest update can be found here: https://ibca.org.uk/statistics/registration-and-compensation-progress-update-21-may-2026/.

Yes, deceased infected people will be eligible. As set out in the Government’s response to the consultation, the Government will introduce a Level 2B banding to recognise the harms caused by treatment with interferon. Anyone who can evidence treatment with interferon (with or without other drugs, such as ribavirin) will automatically qualify for Level 2B, without having to prove the duration of their treatment, side effects, financial loss or care needs. This includes the estates of deceased infected people.

The Financial Loss award is designed to compensate for past and future financial losses suffered as a result of infection. For people infected with HIV or chronic Hepatitis infections, this is calculated based on the average anticipated loss of earnings they would have suffered as a result of their infection and subsequent treatment.

In some exceptional cases, infected people will have suffered greater financial losses as a result of their infection than they will be compensated for as part of their core route award. This might be, for example, where they had particularly high earnings prior to their infection. Infected people in this situation can apply for an Exceptional Loss award through the Scheme’s supplementary route, and if eligible, receive additional financial loss compensation to reflect their circumstances.

The Inquiry’s Additional Report included a recommendation to consult on whether these evidence requirements mean that some people who ought to be eligible for the award are prevented from accessing it, and whether there are ways to address this.

The consultation asked respondents to consider forms of evidence for loss of earnings, fairness for applicants to the Scheme, and the types of evidence the Infected Blood Compensation Authority could take into account when someone no longer has documentary evidence to prove they earned beyond what is provided for under the core route. The consultation closed on 22 January. The Minister for the Cabinet Office hopes to update Parliament soon on the changes the Government intends to make to the compensation scheme, as a result of the public consultation.

On 30 October, the Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme. The Government particularly welcomes responses from those in the infected blood community, including estate representatives, and family members who sadly have lost a loved one due to the use of infected blood, or infected blood products.

Some of the proposals set out in the consultation will have an impact on claims made by estate representatives, on behalf of a deceased infected person. The consultation focused on the areas recommended by the Infected Blood Inquiry in its Additional Report. It also asked whether a respondent would like to raise other issues around the compensation scheme that may not have been addressed in the Additional Report.

The Government is carefully considering responses to the consultation, which closed on 22 January. The Minister for the Cabinet Office hopes to update Parliament soon on the changes the Government intends to make to the compensation scheme, as a result of the public consultation.

On 30 October, the Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme. In that consultation document, the Government explained that it welcomed responses from all those with an interest in the changes, and especially those in the infected blood community. This consultation has been an important step toward ensuring those impacted are involved in the decision-making process, and I am grateful to all those who took the time to respond. The core purpose of the consultation is to gather views on how the Government intends to implement the Inquiry’s recommendations. Every response to this consultation is being considered carefully and with the seriousness the issue deserves.

The consultation closed on 22 January. The Minister for the Cabinet Office hopes Parliament soon on the changes the Government intends to make to the compensation scheme, as a result of the public consultation.

The Infected Blood Inquiry recommended that a compensation scheme be set up as soon as possible, and by centrally funding the scheme, the Government has been able quickly allocate the money necessary.

The Government firmly believes that access to redress is fundamental in upholding justice and fairness in our society. People must have avenues to seek recourse when they have been wronged or harmed. We hope the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides some closure to those who have been wronged under some of those most devastating circumstances.

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. Under 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 for the core route, and to apply for the supplementary route.

The Government has recently consulted on the expansion of eligibility for a Severe Health Condition award for infected people who meet the criteria for the Special Category Mechanism (SCM) or equivalent payments. It also proposes that severe mental health issues not covered in the core route or by the existing Severe Health Condition award are compensated for by this new route. The Government has not proposed that estates of deceased infected people, unless they were receiving SCM or equivalent payments at the time of death, are eligible for this award. The Minister for the Cabinet Office hopes to update Parliament soon on the changes the Government intends to make to the compensation scheme, as a result of the public consultation.

An infected person’s compensation (while living or as an estate) is calculated in line with five Categories of Award to recognise and compensate for the impacts of the infected blood scandal in different areas of a person’s life - these are an Injury Award, Social Impact Award, Autonomy Award, Care Award and Financial Loss Award. For the first three (Injury, Social Impact and Autonomy) the award amounts are the same whether someone applies to the scheme for compensation whilst they are still alive, or whether a personal representative of their estate makes an application.

Where an infected person has passed away before they have applied to the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA), the estate will be able to make a claim on the infected person’s behalf. In that claim, financial loss from the point of infection to the point of the infected person’s death will be paid to the estate. This recognises the loss of earnings that a person likely suffered because of their illness. Financial loss is not paid to the estate for any years after the year of that person’s death. This is because the person cannot have had reduced earnings after they passed away. Instead, those who were financially dependent on them at the point of their death will have suffered from the reduced earnings caused by their death.

The Cabinet Office has carried out analysis under the Public Sector Equality Duty for all regulations made to establish the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme. The most recent analysis was published in October.

Additional Autonomy awards are available through the compensation scheme’s supplementary route to recognise the suffering of victims subjected to unethical research practices.

The current values of both Unethical Research awards are in line with the recommendations Sir Robert Francis KC made to the Government in August 2024. The Inquiry, in its Additional Report, made a set of recommendations about the Unethical Research awards, including that the Minister for the Cabinet Office consider whether the award values be increased.

In the consultation, we sought views on what approach the Government could take to determine an appropriate value of the Unethical Research award. The consultation closed on 22nd January, and the Government will respond within 12 weeks of the closing date.

The Care award is provided to people making a claim as an infected person or as their estate representative. A living infected person receiving compensation can take a decision on whether all or some of this award should be passed to an affected person. Care awards paid to infected people can therefore be paid directly to affected people on the request of an infected person.

An executor of a deceased infected person's estate will be responsible for administering the estate as per the wishes of the infected person.

The Cabinet Office has carried out analysis under the Public Sector Equality Duty for all regulations made to establish the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme. The most recent analysis was published in October and can be viewed here: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukdsi/2025/9780348276077/pdfs/ukdsipes_9780348276077_en_001.pdf.

The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme compensates for the cost of care incurred by someone’s infection in two ways.

A Care award is paid to the infected person as part of their overall compensation claim. A living infected person receiving this compensation can take a decision on whether all or some of this award should be passed to an affected person. An executor of a deceased infected person's estate will be responsible for administering the estate as per the wishes of the infected person.

If someone provided care to an infected person, and is not otherwise eligible for compensation in relation to that person (for example, as their sibling or parent), they may be eligible for compensation as an affected carer. They will need to show that they provided an infected person with care, without reward or remuneration, where the provision of care averaged at least 16.5 hours of care per week over a time period of at least 6 months, after the infection. They will be eligible to receive an injury award and a social impact award.

Whether someone receives part or all of an infected person’s care award, as per the wishes of the infected person, does not affect whether they can apply for the award as a carer, or as any other affected person. The two are not linked, and have no bearing on each other.

The earned settlement model, proposed in ‘A Fairer Pathway to Settlement’, is currently subject to a public consultation, which remains open until 12 February 2026.

The consultation seeks views on whether there should be transitional arrangements for those already on a pathway to settlement, in order to ease the impact of changes for particular groups or preserve already afforded permissions by the previous system. No transitional arrangements have been decided upon yet.

Details of the earned settlement model, including any transitional arrangements for those already in the UK, will be finalised following that consultation. The principles of administrative fairness will be considered in the formulation of the final policy with the aid of the consultation findings. The final model will also be subject to economic and equality impact assessments, which we have committed to publish in due course.

The earned settlement model, proposed in ‘A Fairer Pathway to Settlement’, is currently subject to a public consultation, running until 12 February 2026.

The consultation seeks views on whether there should be transitional arrangements for those already on a pathway to settlement. Transitional arrangements refer to temporary measures or rules put in place to manage the shift from one system, or policy framework, to another. Details of the earned settlement model, including any transitional arrangements for those already in the UK, will be finalised following that consultation.

The final model will also be subject to economic and equality impact assessments, which we have committed to publish in due course.

The roll out of the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme is an operational decision for the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) as an independent body.

IBCA are contacting an average of 100 people to start their claim every week and expect to have brought in to claim all those who are infected and registered with a support scheme this calendar year. On fast-tracking for specific claimants, IBCA have announced how they are prioritising claims for infected people nearing the end of their lives. IBCA have also committed to starting other groups as soon as they can, and the Government expects IBCA to begin payments to people who are affected by the end of this year.

The Government fully supports IBCA’s commitment to moving forward as swiftly as possible and the Cabinet Office will assist IBCA to speed up the payments in any way we can.

IBCA does not conduct medical checks on people who are claiming compensation. IBCA will request medical information to assess what severity band they sit within, and therefore, what compensation they are due. This is done by a person’s dedicated Claim Manager, and where needed, supported by a Clinical Adviser. This is critical to ensure that a person receives the compensation they are entitled to under the tariff-based compensation Scheme.

My Lords, I do not think it is for me as a Minister to opine on potential criminal liability. All I can say at this early stage is that the Government will make all relevant information available to those conducting any future criminal investigation.

One of the principles we set out in our AI White Paper is transparency. That principle—repeated across the OECD and in the EU’s AI Act—will go a long way towards doing what the

noble Baroness asks. There are, though, a number of technical difficulties in implementing transparency—not legally, from our side, but rather, the computer science problems associated with processing the very large quantities of data required to generate true transparency.