Infected Blood Compensation Scheme (Amendment) Regulations 2026
(Limited Text - Ministerial Extracts only)
Read Full debate
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent
That the draft Regulations laid before the House on 18 June be approved.
Relevant document: 8th Report from the Secondary Legislation Scrutiny Committee (special attention drawn to the instrument)
The Parliamentary Secretary, Cabinet Office (Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent) (Lab)
My Lords, we must never lose sight of why we are here to debate these regulations. The infected blood scandal was a catastrophic failure of the state. It is a tragedy measured not only by the pain and suffering of its victims but by the decades it took for the suffering to be recognised. The victims in the scandal have suffered unspeakably, and the former Prime Minister, when leader of the Opposition, acknowledged the suffering caused by continued systemic failure. Our new Prime Minister has long supported the infected blood community and its fight for justice. I want to reassure noble Lords that the Government will not deprioritise this important work.
Before I move on to the substance of the SI, I will take a moment to reflect on the people behind the statistics, specifically the families of the infected, who have had not just to watch as their loved ones suffered in front of them but to fight for justice, in some cases for decades, putting their lives on hold and changing them irreversibly. We must recognise the sacrifice of the families, carers and campaigners.
When I first spoke at the Dispatch Box on the infected blood scandal in March last year, it was to discuss the second set of compensation regulations. I updated your Lordships’ House on the progress IBCA had made, specifically that 255 people had been asked to start their compensation claim, and £44 million-worth of offers had been made. A substantial amount of progress has been made since then. Indeed, as of 14 July, 5,404 people have been asked to start their claim, with over £2.7 billion of offers made. That is not to say that our work is done, which is why we are here today.
The regulations at hand are a direct product of what we heard in the consultation. I am sure noble Lords will appreciate that there is a diversity of views within the community, and the Government have done what they can to consolidate these views to ensure that the changes we are making reflect the thoughts and feelings of the majority. I will briefly summarise those changes.
Regulation 3 introduces a new level 2B award, as recommended by the inquiry, so that people who suffered from the side effects of interferon treatment receive an additional injury award, as well as further financial loss and care compensation, to reflect the impact it had on their lives. Following the consultation, the regulations also make sure that people who received more than one round of interferon will be properly compensated for each of those rounds of treatment. To be clear, the introduction of the level 2B banding is in line with the inquiry’s recommendations, which set out that the choice between creating this new banding or uplifting those who receive treatment with interferon to level 3 was for the Minister for the Cabinet Office to take.
Regulation 4 removes the 25% deduction applied to past care compensation for people who choose to receive support scheme payments for life. Following the consultation, the regulations make sure that people receive past financial loss compensation based on whichever of the two ways to calculate this award is most financially beneficial to them. The Government have chosen to do this to recognise that selecting only one way of calculating this award would mean that some people’s expected awards may reduce in size. By running both calculations and giving each person whichever is the highest amount in their personal circumstances, we ensure that everyone gets fair compensation for this award.
Regulation 5 makes provision for a 50% uplift to the core autonomy award for those infected under the age of 18, calculated based on the highest severity of infection they experienced during childhood.
Regulation 6 amends the eligibility criteria for the unethical research award so that everyone treated for a bleeding disorder before 1986 will receive an unethical research award. The regulations also introduce a new unethical research award for children. This means that people who were treated for a bleeding disorder in childhood will receive an uplifted award. The regulations also increase the amount of compensation that all eligible people receive for this award. It is one of the most shocking aspects of the scandal, and I am sure that noble Lords will agree that no amount of money could ever make up for the heinous experimentation that happened, particularly when that took place on children. We have listened to the feedback received through the consultation and, as a result, people who attended Treloar’s will receive £60,000, rather than the £25,000 proposed in the consultation. Other children will receive £45,000. Those treated in adulthood will receive £30,000, tripling the amount they currently receive.
Regulation 7 ensures that everyone who was eligible for the special category mechanism or an equivalent payment through the infected blood support schemes receives additional financial loss and care compensation. Following the consultation, these regulations ensure that everyone in this position has the award backdated to 2017, when the SCM award was first introduced, regardless of when they were assessed. Living people who were not assessed as eligible for SCM can now apply for it through IBCA, including those who were previously unsuccessful in their application to the IBSS.
Regulations 8 and 9 make changes to the exceptional loss award under the supplementary route. These regulations introduce a compensation uplift of £60,000 for people who had entered or had an offer to enter a career that generally would have paid 10% more than the gross national median average earnings as determined in 2024 at any point prior to retirement age but were unable to progress in this career due to their infection. This award will be made on top of their core route financial loss award.
We also heard in the consultation that some people are concerned that they will not be able to access the exceptional loss award if they do not have historic payslips. The Government will work with IBCA to ensure that all relevant evidence can be used to help someone show that they are eligible for the exceptional loss award so that that is not a barrier. The Government have been clear that we want the scheme to be as sympathetic and unburdensome to applicants as possible.
Regulation 10 introduces a 50% uplift to the core injury award for some affected people. This includes eligible bereaved partners, and children and siblings who themselves have been affected under 18 years of age. Eligible bereaved parents will also be able to receive this award in the tragic circumstances where their child passed away while under the age of 18. I assure noble Lords that, as with the rest of these regulations, the decisions we made on this award directly reflect what we heard through the consultation about the specific impacts of the scandal on children.
Regulations 11 and 12 are unrelated to the public consultation and relate to the transfer of responsibility for making support scheme payments from the infected blood support scheme to IBCA. To maintain consistency with the support schemes, the value of someone’s support scheme payments is uprated every year in April at the rate of CPI in the previous September. These regulations therefore account for the next CPI uplift taking place in April 2027, after IBCA takes responsibility for making support scheme payments for the infected blood support schemes.
The changes that I have set out are the result of this Government accounting for the variety of views that we heard in the consultation and balancing this with a tariff-based scheme that can be delivered as quickly as possible. Today’s debate, while focused on the regulations, is not about the Government’s work on this matter. It is about those people who have lived through some of the most tragic circumstances and doing what we can to bring them justice. I beg to move.
Baroness Anderson of Stoke-on-Trent (Lab)
My Lords, before I start, I put on record that I am in awe of the noble Baroness, Lady Davies, and her speech. I can only imagine how difficult it was for her to stand up and do that. She demonstrates what we have all listened to on many occasions: the pain and heartbreak, and why we are actually here, because behind each statistic that is so easy for us to talk about there is a family still grieving for their loved one. We are so grateful that she and the noble Baroness, Lady Featherstone —I will call her my noble friend—are here to remind us every day of the realities. I also put on record my personal thanks to the noble Baroness, Lady Campbell, who is not able to be with us today. She makes sure that, every day, she speaks truth to power on behalf of everybody who is suffering. I thank all of them for doing so.
Many points have been raised. I am really aware that this is the first time I have done a timed SI and that this is such an emotive issue, so I may not be able to answer every point. As ever, I will reflect on Hansard and write, but I want to put a couple of things on record. When we discuss the issues of infected blood, we know that people are listening to us to make sure of what the Government are saying and that we are sticking with what we have promised, so I want to make sure of that too. In answer to a very important point raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Finn, I want to make it clear that the £11.8 billion allocated by the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer is neither a target nor a cap. I would also make every guarantee on behalf of the new Chancellor of the Exchequer that the money will be found if it needs to be found, but this is neither a target nor a cap.
The noble Baronesses, Lady Davies and Lady Featherstone, raised a range of specific recommendations. I would like to facilitate two meetings, if noble Lords wish to attend. One would be with the leadership of IBCA to go through some of the recommendations, some of which are about humanity and how we engage. I think it would be helpful for it to hear those stories. Another, again, would be with my officials. There is always an open door with my officials on the specifics that we face.
I think every Member of your Lordships’ House reflected that we are still dealing with a matter of national shame. This is a black mark that we still have to tackle. I very much echo the words of the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay: this is taxpayers’ money in recognition of an appalling state failure, and we need to get this right. I personally have hope for the way we are doing this. We had an option, and the tariff-based scheme was recommended as the fastest way of getting the money out of the door, because all the people we are trying to support have varying lives that are complicated and challenging, but we can definitely help support the majority.
I turn to some of the specifics that have been raised. Forgive me, I will speak quickly because I want the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, to have as much time as possible at the end of the debate. IBCA’s prioritisation was raised by many Members of your Lordships’ House. IBCA prioritises claims based on recommendations from the Infected Blood Inquiry. Prioritisation lists differ slightly depending on the cohort, but I want to reassure noble Lords that those sadly nearing the end of life, aged 75 or over, are prioritised across the board, whether infected or affected.
Noble Lords will be aware that every affected claim has to be based on the assessment of an infected claim —a foundational claim to tie the two claims together. As per IBCA’s community update of 9 July, earlier this month, it has asked everyone registered as living infected, never compensated and nearing the end of their life to start their claim and is now contacting people with advanced liver disease. IBCA has asked everyone who has registered to make a deceased infected claim with a beneficiary of an estate who is nearing the end of their life to start their claim and is now contacting beneficiaries who are aged 75 or over. We are currently asking living affected people who are nearing the end of their life to start their claim and expect soon to have contacted everyone currently registered in this group. It will then contact people aged 75 or over to start the claim.
On IBCA’s staff training, raised by the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, IBCA’s claim managers do indeed receive an initial three-week training, which includes the background on the infected blood scandal and the inquiry’s work and recommendations, so that everyone in the organisation understands the human stories behind their work. Staff receive specific trauma-informed training from a clinical psychologist to ensure that they can provide the best support possible to each person coming to IBCA. Claim managers meet members of the community during their training to ensure that they understand not just what happened but how it has impacted lives, and this continues throughout their employment.
The noble Baroness raised the long-term effects of interferon. These regulations will introduce a new higher level of award for infected people who were treated with interferon. The new level 2B core compensation award will provide more financial loss and care compensation for the full two years after treatment to anyone treated with interferon who would otherwise be receiving a level 2 award. For those on the level 3 or level 4 infection severity banding, the inquiry made no recommendations in relation to recognising the impact of interferon treatment for people who are already eligible for those awards. The technical expert group supported the view that level 3 compensation awards already account for the types of harms that people may have suffered as a result of treatment with interferon.
The noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, raised the most heartbreaking thing, which is the historic evidence of suicide. The Government looked at how to make the severe health condition award for psychiatric disorders more accessible and have a less intrusive ask for evidence. We examined using types of evidence, such as suicide, to qualify for the award. Imposing such a retraumatising requirement would place an unconscionable and egregious burden on families who have already endured decades of profound mental suffering. When designing any compensation scheme, the Government must ensure that no mechanism or award criteria inadvertently creates a risk to potentially vulnerable people. That is why we are progressing in the way that we are, but I will put that in writing to all noble Lords.
On the recognition of carers, I have also met and heard from many of the people whom noble Lords have. The care award is provided to people making a claim as an infected person or as the representative of a deceased infected person’s estate. This award is intended to compensate specifically for financial loss caused by the hours and the nature of care needed, but I am aware of the impact that that has had on some people who would not necessarily have received that through the estate.
The unethical research award amount has been raised with me many times, both in your Lordships’ House and outside. The Government took a great deal of care in determining the award values and the qualifying criteria for the cohort of people who were or may have been subjected to unethical research. This included obtaining advice from legal experts and considering the responses to the consultation. The published response to the consultation provides an analysis of the responses received. This award is intended to compensate people for the specific distress caused by discovering that they may have been subject to unethical research practices. The core route awards, such as the injury and social impact award, already compensate for the long-term physical and mental impact caused by someone’s infections.
I am aware that if I speak for much longer, the noble Baroness, Lady Brinton, will not have much time, so I will write on every other point raised—apologies. I put on record my thanks to every Member of your Lordships’ House who has ensured that this issue continues to get the hearing it deserves. I thank my incredible team, both my private office and my civil servants, for making sure that I am well informed and engaged on such an emotive issue, and that we are trying our very best to make sure we support the victims of one of the most egregious scandals in living memory.