Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what justification is being applied to changes to the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, where individuals who suffered long-term health harms of interferon treatment are to receive an uplift in compensation from 2017 onwards rather than from when their treatment began.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The Inquiry recommended changes to the infection severity bands to give greater recognition for the suffering caused by interferon treatment. The Government agrees that changes are needed and we have consulted on our proposal to introduce a new infection severity band, referred to as Level 2B, which would increase people’s financial loss and care compensation awards where relevant, to recognise the short-term side-effects that many, but not all, people suffer due to interferon treatment.
The Government proposed that all infected people who have received treatment with interferon will qualify for the proposed Level 2B infection severity band. It will be part of their core compensation award and people will be eligible for it even if they were only able to tolerate interferon treatment for a very short period.
We recognise that some infected people have suffered and continue to suffer debilitating, long-term impacts on their ability to work. We have therefore consulted on a proposal to introduce a new Special Category Mechanism (SCM) Severe Health Condition award which would offer higher awards for financial loss and care based on the enduring impact that people have experienced in relation to their ability to work and their need for care.
The consultation closed on 22 January, and the Government will publish its response within 12 weeks of this closing date.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what considerations have been given to extending the cut-off date for eligibility for the Unethical Research Award in the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme beyond 1984, given the evidence in the Infected Blood Inquiry (Additional Report on Compensation) that experimentation on both adults and children continued beyond this date.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The Inquiry, in its Additional Report, made a set of recommendations about the Unethical Research awards. The Government has consulted on these recommendations, including on a proposal to expand eligibility for Unethical Research awards to all infected people who received treatment for a bleeding disorder in the UK before 1985. The Government is now carefully considering the range of responses it received on this issue before determining its final position on eligibility.
The consultation closed on 22 January, and the Government will publish its response within 12 weeks of this closing date.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what consideration is being given to altering the Hepatitis C Financial Loss Award to reflect people who received older and more harmful treatments; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
In its Additional Report, the Infected Blood Inquiry recommended changes to the infection severity bands to give greater recognition for the suffering caused particularly by interferon treatment. The Government agrees that changes are needed and has consulted on a proposal to introduce a new infection severity band, referred to as Level 2B, which would increase people’s financial loss and care compensation awards where relevant, to recognise the short-term side-effects that many people suffer due to interferon treatment.
The Government will publish its response to the consultation, which will set out its final decisions on the compensation scheme, within 12 weeks of the closing date. I therefore hope to update Parliament soon on the changes I intend to make to the compensation scheme as a result of the public consultation.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will publish the grounds of justification for the reduction in hepatitis C Financial Loss Awards from 2017 due to the introduction of new effective treatments; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
The compensation scheme assumes that the introduction of effective treatments in 2016 improved most infected people’s ability to effectively manage their infection. This assumption is applied when calculating financial loss for living infected people.
The Government recognises that some people did not receive effective treatment for their particular infection in the year it was introduced, and not everyone was able to continue working for a range of reasons including continued illness, or due to the length of time out of the workforce.
In line with the recommendation made in the Inquiry’s Additional Report, the Compensation Scheme now offers a route through which infected people can show that they were unable to return to work, or unable to work at the assumed level, even after the introduction of effective treatments. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme (Amendment) Regulations 2025 do this by removing the earnings floor on the supplementary route Exceptional Loss award for Financial Loss, to ensure that a route is available for infected people to present evidence on their actual earnings loss.
This change offers people the ability to demonstrate they had continued financial loss, even after the introduction of effective treatments, so they can be compensated fairly for this under the compensation scheme.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether she plans to establish a pathway to (a) settled status and (b) Indefinite Leave to Remain for Ukrainians who wish to remain in the UK.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The Ukraine Permission Extension scheme (UPE) reflects a generous and meaningful commitment to support those displaced by the conflict.
On 24 February, the Government confirmed in Parliament that the UPE scheme would be extended for an additional 24 months to enable those eligible to obtain a further period of permission. The Government also announced that anyone applying for permission under UPE will be able do so within the final 90 days of their current permission rather than the current 28-day period. This will provide greater flexibility and assurance, allowing applicants to secure their future in the UK with confidence and ease.
The UK Government has always been clear that our offer of temporary sanctuary under the Ukraine Schemes is not a pathway to settled status and does not lead to indefinite leave to remain in the UK. This respects the Ukrainian Government’s strong desire for the future return of its citizens when it is safe to do so. However, the Government recognises the importance of providing long-term certainty for Ukrainians living in the UK. We are committed to setting out the future arrangements clearly, and a further statement outlining the long-term position will be issued later this year.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what transitional arrangements will be available for Ukrainian families with children approaching the age threshold for private life applications.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
Ukrainian families with children who are in the United Kingdom under any of the Ukraine schemes can apply to switch onto another immigration route within the Immigration Rules, including the Private Life route.
Applicants must ensure that they meet the requirements of the immigration category to which they intend to switch.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what guidance will be issued to local authorities, employers, universities and support organisations on the 24 month extension of the Ukraine Permission Extension scheme.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The Government will update the relevant GOV.UK pages to reflect the 24‑month extension of the Ukraine Permission Extension (UPE) scheme once the necessary changes to the Immigration Rules are in force. GOV.UK will remain the single authoritative source of information for applicants and stakeholders and updates will be published ahead of the first cohort of UPE permissions expiring.
These updates will ensure that local authorities, employers, education providers and support organisations have access to the latest information on eligibility, the extended 90‑day application window, and evidencing rights. We will keep Local authorities up to date through the existing Homes for Ukraine and Ukraine Schemes communication channels.
Individuals granted permission under the extended UPE scheme will continue to have the same entitlements to work, benefits, healthcare and education as under the existing Ukraine schemes.
The Department for Education has confirmed that students with permission under the Ukraine Schemes - including those who receive an extension under the UPE arrangements remain eligible for home‑fee status and student support where they meet the standard residence requirements.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what progress she has made on her Department’s plans to move asylum seekers into military barracks in Scotland; and what discussions she has had with the Scottish Government on that subject.
Answered by Alex Norris - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Home Office has engaged with Scottish Government, as well as other local stakeholders including Highland Council, the Police, NHS, Scottish Fire & Rescue Service and others since plans were announced in October 2025. The department will continue to engage regularly with all statutory partners as plans are progressed. Key information about the plans discussed with local partners can be found on the factsheet Cameron Barracks, Inverness: factsheet - GOV.UK, which will be updated as further information becomes available.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many families and children are directly restricted by No Recourse to Public Funds.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) condition applies to the vast majority of adult temporary migrants in the UK and those without legal status, many of whom may not be in touch with the Home Office.
Data on the children within migrant families is not routinely collected. However, the Home Office regularly engages with stakeholders via the NRPF forum which provides a platform to raise concerns and share experiences of those affected by the policy.
Data on the number of applications from those wishing to have their NRPF condition lifted is published.
The Home Office has committed to working with the Department for Work and Pensions to develop questions on No Recourse to Public Funds for inclusion in the Family Resources survey 2026/2027, a household survey undertaken annually to explore living standards in the UK.
Asked by: Pete Wishart (Scottish National Party - Perth and Kinross-shire)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether his Department has consulted local authorities on forthcoming guidance on No Recourse to Public Funds (NRPF) families; and whether the guidance will include measures to monitor and report how it will reduce child poverty among NRPF families, improve access to essential services, and deliver measurable improvements in children’s welfare, education, and health outcomes.
Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
The new guidance being produced by the Home Office is designed to assist local authorities in supporting families with NRPF, as set out in the Child Poverty Strategy. Local authorities will be consulted prior to publication. The guidance will provide clarity around statutory duties and key safeguards for local authorities, ensuring a clear and consistent approach.
The guidance does not alter the eligibility criteria for any current schemes or benefits. While the guidance is for local authorities in England, Home Office officials meet regularly with the Scottish government to discuss NRPF and other topics relating to the wider immigration system and will discuss the guidance as part of its development to draw in wider expertise and interests.