Question to the Cabinet Office:

To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of requiring the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme to distinguish between people subjected to deliberate, non-consensual trials and other people.

The Infected Blood Inquiry Report highlights many ethical failings that happened as part of the Infected Blood Scandal. The impact of these ethical failings on infected people has been recognised in the compensation scheme's core autonomy award.

In his summer 2024 report Sir Robert Francis recommended that an additional autonomy award be made available specifically to infected people subjected to unethical research. The Government accepted this recommendation, which led to the development of the Unethical Research Practices award as part of the Compensation Scheme's supplementary route. The award focuses specifically on research that has failed to meet established ethical standards.

Specifically, the eligibility for the award is determined by the presence of documented unethical research. This includes a lack of informed consent, inadequate oversight, and other breaches of ethical obligations in research settings.

In December last year, the Government engaged with key representatives and organisations in the community on the particular eligibility criteria for the Unethical Research Practices Award. The Government was grateful for the submissions and feedback it received from key stakeholders and considered the evidence provided in each one carefully. The Regulations which became law on 31 March 2025, detailed, specifically the criteria and centres that will be covered as part of this award. The Government is able, through further secondary legislation, to add additional centres or studies to the list if new evidence is presented. The Government wants to ensure that those who were subject to unethical research are provided with the additional autonomy award.