Written questions by George.

What steps his Department is taking to introduce statutory turnaround times for consents teams handling compulsory purchase and necessary wayleave applications, to reduce end-to-end project timelines.

The government is assessing how it can streamline land access, rights and consent processes to speed up electricity network deployment and published a consultation which ran from 8 July to 2 September 2025. The consultation proposed a raft of changes to these processes. We expect to publish our response in the coming quarter, setting out the direction of travel in this area.

What estimate he has made of the additional costs and delays to customers resulting from the current statutory processes for acquiring land and rights for electricity network upgrades.

DESNZ has worked closely with stakeholders to understand the extent to which current land access, rights and consents processes delay and add costs to rollout of electricity network infrastructure required for delivering clean power by 2030 and accelerating the UK’s transition to Net zero. This has included looking at where there might be opportunities to learn from approaches to other utilities. Government’s assessment was set out in a consultation in Summer 2025 on proposed reforms to these processes. We expect to publish the response in the coming quarter.

What assessment has been made of the potential impact of current land rights processes on the UK's ability to meet its Clean power 2030 targets.

DESNZ has worked closely with stakeholders to understand the extent to which current land access, rights and consents processes delay and add costs to rollout of electricity network infrastructure required for delivering clean power by 2030 and accelerating the UK’s transition to Net zero. This has included looking at where there might be opportunities to learn from approaches to other utilities. Government’s assessment was set out in a consultation in Summer 2025 on proposed reforms to these processes. We expect to publish the response in the coming quarter.

What consideration has been given to aligning the statutory powers available to electricity network operators for land access with those available to water and telecoms utilities, to ensure timely and cost-effective delivery of network upgrades.

DESNZ has worked closely with stakeholders to understand the extent to which current land access, rights and consents processes delay and add costs to rollout of electricity network infrastructure required for delivering clean power by 2030 and accelerating the UK’s transition to Net zero. This has included looking at where there might be opportunities to learn from approaches to other utilities. Government’s assessment was set out in a consultation in Summer 2025 on proposed reforms to these processes. We expect to publish the response in the coming quarter.

If his Department will commit to developing new statutory mechanisms which provide electricity network operators with outcome-certain, timely, and cost-effective land access, while maintaining strong relationships with landowners.

DESNZ has worked closely with stakeholders to understand the extent to which current land access, rights and consents processes delay and add costs to rollout of electricity network infrastructure required for delivering clean power by 2030 and accelerating the UK’s transition to Net zero. This has included looking at where there might be opportunities to learn from approaches to other utilities. Government’s assessment was set out in a consultation in Summer 2025 on proposed reforms to these processes. We expect to publish the response in the coming quarter.

If his Department will engage with industry and landowner representatives to develop innovative, respectful statutory land access powers to support the delivery of Clean Power 2030.

The government regularly engages with industry and landowner representatives to explore opportunities for streamlining the land access, rights and consents processes. This work recently culminated in the publication of a consultation in summer 2025, which provided a formal opportunity for stakeholders to respond to a set of proposed reforms to these processes. Prior to the consultation, the government established a Working Group to generate and appraise ideas to improve land access, rights and consenting processes, many of which were included in the consultation. The Working Group met six times between April 2024 and May 2025.

What steps are in place to allow land rights negotiations and Section 37 applications to proceed in parallel.

Consent is required under section 37 of the Electricity Act 1989 to install or keep installed certain overhead electric lines. Land rights negotiations and section 37 applications can proceed in parallel. The Secretary of State would normally expect land rights to be in place before granting a section 37 consent, although as set out in the Guidance, in some circumstances he may consent ahead of this on condition that the work must not proceed until the relevant agreements with landowners and/or occupiers are in place.

What steps his Department is taking to ensure that reforms to planning permission are matched by improvements to the processes for acquiring land and rights over land, so that grid connection projects are not delayed by unresolved land rights issues.

DESNZ has worked closely with stakeholders to understand the extent to which current land access, rights and consents processes delay and add costs to rollout of electricity network infrastructure required for delivering clean power by 2030 and accelerating the UK’s transition to Net zero. This has included looking at where there might be opportunities to learn from approaches to other utilities. Government’s assessment was set out in a consultation in Summer 2025 on proposed reforms to these processes. We expect to publish the response in the coming quarter.

With reference to the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 and the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme Regulations 2025, to what extent his Department considered the duties and rights of the (a) Administration of Estates Act 1925, (b) Fatal Accidents Act 1976, and (c) Law Reform (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1934 in the development of the infected blood compensation scheme for infected and affected people.

Compensation tariffs for infected and affected people under the Scheme have been informed, but not limited, by current practice in UK courts and tribunals. The Infected Blood Inquiry Response Expert Group Final Report provides detail on how the Fatal Accidents Act 1976 was considered when developing the tariffs under the Scheme. This can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/infected-blood-inquiry-response-expert-group-summary-report/infected-blood-inquiry-response-expert-group-final-report#foreword-by-the-minister-for-the-cabinet-office.

Whether an equality impact assessment has been undertaken of the eligibility criteria for the proposed Special Category Mechanism.

The Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme on 30 October 2025 that ran for the standard 12 weeks and closed on 22 January. This consultation adhered to the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles and was open to the public, with responses particularly encouraged from those in the infected blood community. 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. An Equality Impact Assessment is not required to be carried out for public consultations, but the Government will provide one alongside any legislation arising from the implementation of the consultation’s outcome.In its Additional Report, the Inquiry recommended that the Government reconsider how the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides compensation to those currently receiving Special Category Mechanism (SCM) payments or its equivalents. The Government accepted this recommendation.The public consultation proposed that anyone currently receiving SCM or equivalent payments through the Infected Blood Support Schemes would be automatically eligible for a Severe Health Condition award. The Government has also consulted on how eligibility should be established for people who are not registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme (IBSS) but who experience the same impact on their day-to-day life for the same reasons.The Technical Expert Group (TEG) is convening a series of roundtables with key organisations and charity representatives to discuss aspects of the Infected Blood Inquiry Additional Report recommendations for the compensation scheme, to inform their advice to the Government. This targeted engagement is separate to the Government’s consultation. The TEG held roundtables on 15 and 17 December 2025, which focused on establishing the eligibility criteria for living infected people who are not currently registered with an IBSS, in relation to the award to recognise impacts associated with SCM, and its equivalents. The attendee list was informed by the key representatives in the infected blood community that the Government regularly engages with. To ensure transparency, the minutes of meetings of the TEG are published on GOV.UK. The minutes of these roundtable meetings were published on 29 January 2026.The TEG invited further written responses from the representatives to supplement the discussion of the roundtables. The TEG therefore received written responses after the initial roundtables on SCM had been held. The TEG have, since then, reviewed these written responses and will be making sure they too are properly reflected in a summary document which will be published on GOV.UK.

Whether the Infected Blood Compensation Authority will accept a range of evidence for assessing injuries suffered by deceased victims - including medical, social care, police, employment and family records, and partial or fragmentary documentation - in light of findings by the Infected Blood Inquiry on the historic destruction of patient records.

Given the historic nature of the infected blood scandal, the Government recognises that not all medical records will still be available. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme has been designed to minimise as far as possible the burden on those applying, and as set out in the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme Regulations 2024, eligibility for the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme will be determined based on the balance of probabilities. The Infected Blood Compensation Authority will provide assistance to those who believe their medical records have been lost or destroyed. Work has taken place across Government and the Infected Blood Compensation Authority to understand steps that can be taken to reduce as many barriers as possible to support the processing of claims. On 3 July 2025, the Permanent Secretary of the Cabinet Office wrote to the Chairs of the PAC and PACAC Committees to set out the measures being taken to prioritise faster payments to victims of the infected blood scandal. One of these measures is to use the powers in the Victims and Prisoners Act to get records from the Infected Blood Inquiry, and using testimony to contribute to the assessment of proof of infection.

What assessment he has made of the potential impact of the Government’s proposed Special Category Mechanism on access to enhanced awards and appeals for infected and affected people, including individuals who were unable to enrol in post‑2017 support schemes due to their death prior to those schemes’ introduction.

The Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme on 30 October 2025 that ran for the standard 12 weeks and closed on 22 January. This consultation adhered to the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles and was open to the public, with responses particularly encouraged from those in the infected blood community. 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. An Equality Impact Assessment is not required to be carried out for public consultations, but the Government will provide one alongside any legislation arising from the implementation of the consultation’s outcome.In its Additional Report, the Inquiry recommended that the Government reconsider how the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides compensation to those currently receiving Special Category Mechanism (SCM) payments or its equivalents. The Government accepted this recommendation.The public consultation proposed that anyone currently receiving SCM or equivalent payments through the Infected Blood Support Schemes would be automatically eligible for a Severe Health Condition award. The Government has also consulted on how eligibility should be established for people who are not registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme (IBSS) but who experience the same impact on their day-to-day life for the same reasons.The Technical Expert Group (TEG) is convening a series of roundtables with key organisations and charity representatives to discuss aspects of the Infected Blood Inquiry Additional Report recommendations for the compensation scheme, to inform their advice to the Government. This targeted engagement is separate to the Government’s consultation. The TEG held roundtables on 15 and 17 December 2025, which focused on establishing the eligibility criteria for living infected people who are not currently registered with an IBSS, in relation to the award to recognise impacts associated with SCM, and its equivalents. The attendee list was informed by the key representatives in the infected blood community that the Government regularly engages with. To ensure transparency, the minutes of meetings of the TEG are published on GOV.UK. The minutes of these roundtable meetings were published on 29 January 2026.The TEG invited further written responses from the representatives to supplement the discussion of the roundtables. The TEG therefore received written responses after the initial roundtables on SCM had been held. The TEG have, since then, reviewed these written responses and will be making sure they too are properly reflected in a summary document which will be published on GOV.UK.

What steps his Department has taken to help facilitate the participation of bereaved families and representatives of deceased victims in the Technical Expert Group consultation on the Special Category Mechanism; and for what reasons written submissions from bereaved representatives were not summarised in the published consultation materials.

The Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme on 30 October 2025 that ran for the standard 12 weeks and closed on 22 January. This consultation adhered to the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles and was open to the public, with responses particularly encouraged from those in the infected blood community. 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. An Equality Impact Assessment is not required to be carried out for public consultations, but the Government will provide one alongside any legislation arising from the implementation of the consultation’s outcome.In its Additional Report, the Inquiry recommended that the Government reconsider how the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides compensation to those currently receiving Special Category Mechanism (SCM) payments or its equivalents. The Government accepted this recommendation.The public consultation proposed that anyone currently receiving SCM or equivalent payments through the Infected Blood Support Schemes would be automatically eligible for a Severe Health Condition award. The Government has also consulted on how eligibility should be established for people who are not registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme (IBSS) but who experience the same impact on their day-to-day life for the same reasons.The Technical Expert Group (TEG) is convening a series of roundtables with key organisations and charity representatives to discuss aspects of the Infected Blood Inquiry Additional Report recommendations for the compensation scheme, to inform their advice to the Government. This targeted engagement is separate to the Government’s consultation. The TEG held roundtables on 15 and 17 December 2025, which focused on establishing the eligibility criteria for living infected people who are not currently registered with an IBSS, in relation to the award to recognise impacts associated with SCM, and its equivalents. The attendee list was informed by the key representatives in the infected blood community that the Government regularly engages with. To ensure transparency, the minutes of meetings of the TEG are published on GOV.UK. The minutes of these roundtable meetings were published on 29 January 2026.The TEG invited further written responses from the representatives to supplement the discussion of the roundtables. The TEG therefore received written responses after the initial roundtables on SCM had been held. The TEG have, since then, reviewed these written responses and will be making sure they too are properly reflected in a summary document which will be published on GOV.UK.

What assessment he has made of the consistency of the proposed Special Category Mechanism with the recommendations of the Infected Blood Inquiry.

The Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme on 30 October 2025 that ran for the standard 12 weeks and closed on 22 January. This consultation adhered to the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles and was open to the public, with responses particularly encouraged from those in the infected blood community. 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. An Equality Impact Assessment is not required to be carried out for public consultations, but the Government will provide one alongside any legislation arising from the implementation of the consultation’s outcome.In its Additional Report, the Inquiry recommended that the Government reconsider how the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides compensation to those currently receiving Special Category Mechanism (SCM) payments or its equivalents. The Government accepted this recommendation.The public consultation proposed that anyone currently receiving SCM or equivalent payments through the Infected Blood Support Schemes would be automatically eligible for a Severe Health Condition award. The Government has also consulted on how eligibility should be established for people who are not registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme (IBSS) but who experience the same impact on their day-to-day life for the same reasons.The Technical Expert Group (TEG) is convening a series of roundtables with key organisations and charity representatives to discuss aspects of the Infected Blood Inquiry Additional Report recommendations for the compensation scheme, to inform their advice to the Government. This targeted engagement is separate to the Government’s consultation. The TEG held roundtables on 15 and 17 December 2025, which focused on establishing the eligibility criteria for living infected people who are not currently registered with an IBSS, in relation to the award to recognise impacts associated with SCM, and its equivalents. The attendee list was informed by the key representatives in the infected blood community that the Government regularly engages with. To ensure transparency, the minutes of meetings of the TEG are published on GOV.UK. The minutes of these roundtable meetings were published on 29 January 2026.The TEG invited further written responses from the representatives to supplement the discussion of the roundtables. The TEG therefore received written responses after the initial roundtables on SCM had been held. The TEG have, since then, reviewed these written responses and will be making sure they too are properly reflected in a summary document which will be published on GOV.UK.

Whether the consultation undertaken on the proposed Special Category Mechanism was assessed against (a) the Gunning Principles and (b) the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles, including requirements relating to adequate time, consultation at a formative stage, and inclusion of all groups materially affected by the policy.

The Government launched a public consultation on proposed changes to the infected blood compensation scheme on 30 October 2025 that ran for the standard 12 weeks and closed on 22 January. This consultation adhered to the Cabinet Office Consultation Principles and was open to the public, with responses particularly encouraged from those in the infected blood community. 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. An Equality Impact Assessment is not required to be carried out for public consultations, but the Government will provide one alongside any legislation arising from the implementation of the consultation’s outcome.In its Additional Report, the Inquiry recommended that the Government reconsider how the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme provides compensation to those currently receiving Special Category Mechanism (SCM) payments or its equivalents. The Government accepted this recommendation.The public consultation proposed that anyone currently receiving SCM or equivalent payments through the Infected Blood Support Schemes would be automatically eligible for a Severe Health Condition award. The Government has also consulted on how eligibility should be established for people who are not registered with an Infected Blood Support Scheme (IBSS) but who experience the same impact on their day-to-day life for the same reasons.The Technical Expert Group (TEG) is convening a series of roundtables with key organisations and charity representatives to discuss aspects of the Infected Blood Inquiry Additional Report recommendations for the compensation scheme, to inform their advice to the Government. This targeted engagement is separate to the Government’s consultation. The TEG held roundtables on 15 and 17 December 2025, which focused on establishing the eligibility criteria for living infected people who are not currently registered with an IBSS, in relation to the award to recognise impacts associated with SCM, and its equivalents. The attendee list was informed by the key representatives in the infected blood community that the Government regularly engages with. To ensure transparency, the minutes of meetings of the TEG are published on GOV.UK. The minutes of these roundtable meetings were published on 29 January 2026.The TEG invited further written responses from the representatives to supplement the discussion of the roundtables. The TEG therefore received written responses after the initial roundtables on SCM had been held. The TEG have, since then, reviewed these written responses and will be making sure they too are properly reflected in a summary document which will be published on GOV.UK.

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.

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.

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.

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.

What steps she is taking to help ensure the affordability of essential transport services to the Isles of Scilly.

Air and sea services to and from the islands are commercially operated without public subsidy. The department recently awarded £750,000 through our Clean Maritime Demonstration Competition Fund towards a feasibility study, exploring whether new low-carbon technology provides a viable solution for a future passenger service to the Isles of Scilly from the mainland.

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.

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.

Innovation and Technology, what estimate her Department has made of the cost per customer per year of different mobile network resilience options.

Residents in rural areas, as well as other areas of the country, rightly expect to have reliable mobile connectivity to participate in the modern digital economy. The Government recognises that events like storms and power outages can have a particular impact on rural communities.Mobile network operators have legal obligations to put in place appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure the resilience of their networks and services. This is overseen by the independent regulator Ofcom, who have powers to monitor compliance, conduct investigations, issue penalties and enforce remedial actions.Ofcom have completed a public consultation on power back-up for mobile services across the UK, which gained input from wide range of interested parties including mobile network operators, other industry bodies, local authorities, and members of the public. They published an update on their work in February 2025, setting out the results of their analysis of the resilience of mobile networks, and estimated that the cost of upgrading mobile networks to ensure almost everyone can maintain access to the emergency services for up to 4 hours would be £1 billion. Ofcom also announced they are completing further analysis to determine the appropriate and proportionate measures required to ensure adequate resilience for consumers. The Government looks forward to the rapid conclusion of that work.The Government is also supporting collaboration between the electricity and telecommunications sectors to deliver measures so that when power cuts occur the likelihood of disruption to telecommunications services is as low as possible, and where disruption does occur it should affect as few people for the shortest possible time.