Written questions by Glen.

When he expects the financial report for the Infected Blood Inquiry for the financial year 2025-2026 to be published.

We expect the Inquiry, which has now formally completed its work, to publish its final financial report soon

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what assessment she has made of the state of freedom of religion or belief in Somalia; and whether this issue is systematically raised in the UK’s engagement with the Government of Somalia.

I refer the Hon Member to the answer given on 6 August 2025 to Question 68009.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether her Department has established benchmarks for measuring improvements in freedom of religion or belief in Venezuela, including for religious and humanitarian actors and indigenous communities.

We continue to assess on an ongoing basis the restrictions in place on freedom of religion or belief in Venezuela, and other countries around the world, as well as the progress of efforts to remove them. Freedom of religion or belief is a fundamental human right, and we should never accept anything short of full freedom as an acceptable outcome.

When she expects the Office for Budget Responsibility to publish its first set of areas of research interest, as stated in the Economic and Fiscal Outlook - November 2025, published on 26 November 2025.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) has full discretion over the timing of its own publication programme.

What assessment he has made of the potential impact of reclassifying medicines from prescription-only to over-the-counter on costs to the NHS.

The Government supports the reclassification of prescription only medicines (POMs) to over the counter (OTC) medicines, including for cost savings to the National Health Service, where it is safe and appropriate to do so, as this can improve patient access and support selfcare while maintaining high standards of public health protection.Decisions on whether POMs can be safely reclassified for OTC sale are taken by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency following an assessment of the safety, quality, and efficacy of the medicine and whether it can be appropriately used without the direct supervision of a prescriber.

What progress has been made by his Department in encouraging more reclassification applications to the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA); whether reclassification applications will form part of the MHRA's forthcoming strategy; and what assessment he has made of the potential impact of reclassification applications on (a) the NHS, (b) patients and (c) the Exchequer.

The Government supports the reclassification of medicines where it is safe and appropriate to do so, as this can improve patient access and support selfcare while maintaining high standards of public health protection. The Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) actively engages with industry to encourage well evidenced reclassification applications and has updated its guidance and processes to provide greater clarity and efficiency.Reclassification forms part of the MHRA’s wider strategic work to support proportionate regulation and improve access to medicines, including through closer engagement with industry and the use of scientific advice to support high quality applications.Where successful, reclassification can benefit the National Health Service by reducing pressure on primary care services, enable patients to access appropriate treatments more conveniently through pharmacies or over the counter supply, and deliver wider economic benefits by supporting selfcare and reducing unnecessary healthcare utilisation. Each application is assessed on its individual merits to ensure that any reclassification maintains patient safety and delivers overall public benefit.However, reclassification is not appropriate in all circumstances. In particular, where the need for ongoing clinical oversight remains important, or where cost or ability to pay could create barriers to equitable access for some patients, prescription supply through the NHS may remain the most appropriate route. Consideration of patient affordability and health inequalities forms part of the overall assessment of whether reclassification is in the public interest.

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of the availability of diagnostic and treatment pathways for Spinal Cord Injury across Integrated Care Boards.

While no formal assessment has been made of the adequacy of the availability of diagnostic and treatment pathways for spinal cord injury across integrated care boards (ICBs), NHS England Specialised Commissioning has a Clinical Reference Group (CRG) for rehabilitation and complex disability and spinal cord injury services. Specialist services for spinal cord injuries are commissioned in line with the service specification published by the CRG. In March 2025, NHS England published the Spinal Services Clinical Network Specification, which establishes expectations for spinal clinical networks to standardise pathways and reduce variation, with the aim of improving access to care for patients. The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programme for spinal services is also driving service improvements and better care for patients with spinal cord injuries. GIRFT has worked with National Health Service trusts to showcase examples of best practice which other services can then learn from. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) also has guidance on the assessment and early management of spinal cord injuries, which is available at the following link: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng41 Additionally, last year, NICE published new guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders, which includes rehabilitation for spinal cord injury. While NICE guidelines are not mandatory, the Government expects ICB commissioners to take them fully into account in designing services that meet the needs of their local population and to work towards their implementation over time.

Whether he has made progress on improving spinal cord injury services following the 2016 service review.

While no formal assessment has been made of the potential merits of commissioning local spinal cord injury services, specialist services for spinal cord injury are currently commissioned by NHS England Specialised Commissioning, in line with the service specification published by the Clinical Reference Group.Progress has been made on improving spinal cord injury services following the 2016 review, through, for example, the development of the Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programme for spinal services, which is driving service improvements and better care for patients with spinal cord injuries. GIRFT has worked with National Health Service trusts to showcase examples of best practice which other services can then learn from.Additionally, in March 2025, NHS England published the Spinal Services Clinical Network Specification, which establishes expectations for spinal clinical networks to standardise pathways and reduce variation, with the aim of improving access to care for patients.More recently, in October 2025, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published new guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders, which includes rehabilitation for spinal cord injury.Our 10-Year Health Plan also sets out a vision for a health and care system that delivers more personalised, integrated, and proactive care for people with long-term and complex conditions, including spinal cord injury. More tests and scans are delivered in the community, better, joined-up working between services, and greater use of technology will all support people in the management of their spinal cord injuries.

What assessment he has made of the potential merits of commissioning specialist local spinal cord injury services.

While no formal assessment has been made of the potential merits of commissioning local spinal cord injury services, specialist services for spinal cord injury are currently commissioned by NHS England Specialised Commissioning, in line with the service specification published by the Clinical Reference Group.Progress has been made on improving spinal cord injury services following the 2016 review, through, for example, the development of the Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programme for spinal services, which is driving service improvements and better care for patients with spinal cord injuries. GIRFT has worked with National Health Service trusts to showcase examples of best practice which other services can then learn from.Additionally, in March 2025, NHS England published the Spinal Services Clinical Network Specification, which establishes expectations for spinal clinical networks to standardise pathways and reduce variation, with the aim of improving access to care for patients.More recently, in October 2025, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence published new guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders, which includes rehabilitation for spinal cord injury.Our 10-Year Health Plan also sets out a vision for a health and care system that delivers more personalised, integrated, and proactive care for people with long-term and complex conditions, including spinal cord injury. More tests and scans are delivered in the community, better, joined-up working between services, and greater use of technology will all support people in the management of their spinal cord injuries.

What steps he has taken to ensure that providers of spinal cord injury services are (a) guided by national care pathways, (b) subject to national care standards and (c) report on national outcome measures.

While no formal assessment has been made of the adequacy of the availability of diagnostic and treatment pathways for spinal cord injury across integrated care boards (ICBs), NHS England Specialised Commissioning has a Clinical Reference Group (CRG) for rehabilitation and complex disability and spinal cord injury services. Specialist services for spinal cord injuries are commissioned in line with the service specification published by the CRG. In March 2025, NHS England published the Spinal Services Clinical Network Specification, which establishes expectations for spinal clinical networks to standardise pathways and reduce variation, with the aim of improving access to care for patients. The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programme for spinal services is also driving service improvements and better care for patients with spinal cord injuries. GIRFT has worked with National Health Service trusts to showcase examples of best practice which other services can then learn from. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) also has guidance on the assessment and early management of spinal cord injuries, which is available at the following link: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng41 Additionally, last year, NICE published new guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders, which includes rehabilitation for spinal cord injury. While NICE guidelines are not mandatory, the Government expects ICB commissioners to take them fully into account in designing services that meet the needs of their local population and to work towards their implementation over time.

What steps his Department is taking to ensure that expert commissioning knowledge is maintained within the Offices for Pan-ICB Commissioning; and what steps he has taken to prevent a loss of specialist expertise during the staff transfer process.

NHS England is responsible for the design and operation of offices for pan-integrated care board commissioning and for managing associated workforce changes. In implementing these arrangements, NHS England has sought to retain experienced commissioning staff and specialist knowledge to support consistent, high‑quality commissioning across systems. Staff transfers have been managed in line with established employment and transfer arrangements, with a focus on continuity and skills retention. The Department continues to engage with NHS England on the implementation of commissioning reforms.

What guidance he has issued to ICBs on commissioning pathways on access to spinal cord injury services for patients with a spinal cord injury.

While no formal assessment has been made of the adequacy of the availability of diagnostic and treatment pathways for spinal cord injury across integrated care boards (ICBs), NHS England Specialised Commissioning has a Clinical Reference Group (CRG) for rehabilitation and complex disability and spinal cord injury services. Specialist services for spinal cord injuries are commissioned in line with the service specification published by the CRG. In March 2025, NHS England published the Spinal Services Clinical Network Specification, which establishes expectations for spinal clinical networks to standardise pathways and reduce variation, with the aim of improving access to care for patients. The Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) Programme for spinal services is also driving service improvements and better care for patients with spinal cord injuries. GIRFT has worked with National Health Service trusts to showcase examples of best practice which other services can then learn from. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) also has guidance on the assessment and early management of spinal cord injuries, which is available at the following link: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng41 Additionally, last year, NICE published new guidance on rehabilitation for chronic neurological disorders, which includes rehabilitation for spinal cord injury. While NICE guidelines are not mandatory, the Government expects ICB commissioners to take them fully into account in designing services that meet the needs of their local population and to work towards their implementation over time.

What assessment her Department has made of whether the approval process for parenting interventions outside the Best Start Family Hubs approved menu enables local authorities to commission programmes delivered by voluntary, faith-based and community organisations; and what steps her Department is taking to support a wider range of parenting interventions reflecting local community needs.

The department is clear that local authorities should commission parenting programmes with a strong and credible evidence base, ensuring families receive support that improves outcomes and increases the proportion of children achieving a good level of development nationally. To support this, the Best Start in Life programme provides an approved menu of evidence‑based parenting interventions, giving local areas confidence that commissioned programmes are effective and represent value for money.The department has also ensured appropriate flexibility, so that where a local authority can demonstrate that a programme outside the approved menu has a robust evidence base and meets local need, it has been considered.Evidence‑based parenting programmes are one part of a wider offer of high-quality support to families. Also included are stay‑and‑play opportunities, low‑intensity parenting, peer‑support activities, and strong outreach. The department encourages local authorities to work with voluntary, community and faith organisations, while ensuring that any programmes they deliver, meet clear evidence standards.

What assessment her Department has made of whether evidentiary requirements attached to parenting interventions in the Best Start Family Hubs programme affect the ability of local authorities to commission parenting programmes that are not included in the approved menu of interventions.

The department is clear that local authorities should commission parenting programmes with a strong and credible evidence base, ensuring families receive support that improves outcomes and increases the proportion of children achieving a good level of development nationally. To support this, the Best Start in Life programme provides an approved menu of evidence‑based parenting interventions, giving local areas confidence that commissioned programmes are effective and represent value for money.The department has also ensured appropriate flexibility, so that where a local authority can demonstrate that a programme outside the approved menu has a robust evidence base and meets local need, it has been considered.Evidence‑based parenting programmes are one part of a wider offer of high-quality support to families. Also included are stay‑and‑play opportunities, low‑intensity parenting, peer‑support activities, and strong outreach. The department encourages local authorities to work with voluntary, community and faith organisations, while ensuring that any programmes they deliver, meet clear evidence standards.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 3 October 2025 to Question 75586, whether safeguards, oversight mechanisms and conditions apply to UK assistance to Bangladesh to help ensure that such funding does not contribute to discrimination or persecution of Hindu minority communities.

All UK official development assistance (ODA) funded programmes operate under the Foreign, Commonwealth, and Development Office's Programme Operating Framework, which requires robust controls, mandatory oversight, and compliance with cross‑government project delivery standards, alongside strengthened safeguarding due‑diligence measures and transparency obligations to ensure accountable, safe, and effective use of public funds.

What discussions he has had with Ministers in the devolved nations regarding establishing a UK wide sodium valproate redress scheme.

Though the Patient Safety Commissioner’s report covered England-only, we recognise that any response by the Government to the recommendations of the Hughes Report in England will likely have implications for the devolved administrations and their constituents.Government officials are therefore working closely with officials across the United Kingdom in considering the recommendations in the Hughes Report. I recently met with my counterparts across the four nations and will continue productive engagement as we progress work in this area.The Department continues to take forward work to explore redress for those affected by pelvic mesh and sodium valproate, which includes recommendations made by the Patient Safety Commissioner in the Hughes Report.We recognise the importance of these issues for all those affected. This remains a cross-Government policy area involving multiple organisations, and given the complexity of the issues involved, it is important we get this right.I also met with the Patient Safety Commissioner in December 2025, to discuss progress following the Hughes Report and have made clear the Department’s expectation of continued, proactive engagement with the Patient Safety Commissioner and key stakeholders.

What steps his Department is taking to help improve coordination between health, education, and social care services for families affected by sodium valproate.

Everyone who has been harmed from sodium valproate has our deepest sympathies.The Independent Medicines and Medical Devices Safety Review, First Do No Harm, identified significant shortcomings in National Health Service care pathways for people harmed by sodium valproate. NHS England has acknowledged variation in the availability and adequacy of care pathways, the impact of delayed diagnosis and misdiagnosis on long-term outcomes, and the need for improved care coordination for those requiring lifelong support, including co-ordination with non-health care services.In response, NHS England has commissioned a Fetal Exposure to Medicines Services Pilot, being delivered by the NHS in Newcastle and Manchester. The pilot provides multidisciplinary diagnostic assessment and is informing the development of improved care pathways, better coordination of care, and reduced reliance on emergency care. Findings from the pilot will inform future decisions on the commissioning of services, subject to funding.In addition, we work closely with the Department for Education and across the Government to ensure co-ordination between health, education, and social care services for children and their families. The Health and Opportunity Missions of the Government highlight the importance of joined up working and integrated delivery.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has had discussions with her Egyptian counterpart on the detention of Saeid Mansour Abdulraziq.

The UK champions freedom of religion or belief for all and, where appropriate, will raise these issues with the Egyptian authorities.

Commonwealth and Development Affairs, whether she has had discussions with her counterpart in Venezuela on the (a) vandalism of the Cuasia Church and (b) death threats issued towards Fr. Juan Manuel León.

Protecting the Freedom of Religion or Belief is an important objective for the UK all over the world. As part of our efforts to press for a peaceful, democratic transition in Venezuela, we will reinforce the importance of ensuring that the rights of all Venezuelans are upheld, including members of the church.

With reference to the Chancellor's written statement of 5 January 2026, UIN HCWS1219, whether the government's response to the Office for Budget Responsibility's Spring forecast will be an oral or written statement to Parliament.

As set out in a written statement to Parliament last week, the Chancellor has asked the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to prepare an economic and fiscal forecast for publication on 3 March 2026. The Chancellor will deliver an oral statement to the House in response.