Trust in IBCA

Still making their mind up

While a third (29%) think IBCA is trustworthy (either very or fairly trustworthy), nearly two thirds (62%) didn't express an opinion (either choosing neither trustworthy or untrustworthy or saying they don't know).

By date: April vs December

This table compares trustworthiness of IBCA between April 2025 and December 2025. In December 2025: 6% very trustworthy, 23% fairly trustworthy, 24% neither, 6% fairly untrustworthy, 3% very untrustworthy, 38% don't know, 29% net trust, and 9% net distrust.

By awareness and understanding: December

This table shows trustworthiness of IBCA by awareness and understanding in December 2025. Those who know a lot or a fair amount about IBCA are more likely to find it trustworthy (62%), compared to 29% of all respondents.

This table compares trustworthiness of IBCA, the NHS, the Department of Health and Social Care, and the UK government in December 2025. The NHS has the highest net trust at 68%, while the UK government has 51% net distrust.

This table shows agreement that the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme will bring compensation to each and every one who is entitled to it, without exception. In December 2025: 8% strongly agree, 27% tend to agree, 23% neither, 16% tend to disagree, 3% strongly disagree, 23% don't know, and 34% net agree.

Responses were very similar to the previous survey, with just under half not expressing an opinion on IBCA being able to fulfil its aim – 23% say they don't know and 23% neither agree nor disagree. More than a third (34%) agree that IBCA will fulfil its aims, however, almost one in five (19%) disagree.

This table shows agreement that IBCA will fulfil its aims, broken down by awareness and understanding groups. Those who know a lot or a fair amount about IBCA are most likely to agree (61%), while those who are untrustworthy are more likely to disagree (44%).

This table shows reasons why respondents agreed that IBCA will fulfil its aims. Top reasons were accountability (31%) and responsibility to victims (29%).

Comments from respondents included:

• “The details are already well known by the NHS and hopefully, they will take accountability to ensure each person affected gets compensated.”
• “It is an official body so would hope that it would be honest and transparent and do what it was set up to do.”
• “The system is designed to be fair and ensure eligible people are compensated.”
• “They have a moral duty and responsibility to deliver this for all victims.”
• “I feel like no matter what, someone will be missed as it is just human error and to say ‘without exception’ is building it up to be bigger than what the authority is capable of.”
• “I feel like they will say people aren't eligible, or will require proof which cannot be given. Also, some people have already died.”
• “I've read too much about the lack of progress and proper background work taking too long.”
• “I don't know the extent of the number of victims, but I feel like these sorts of compensation efforts either don't reach all the victims or it takes a long amount of time.”
• “I think a lot of people affected won't know about the scheme or how to apply.”
• “Don't trust government administrative capability to get to everyone.”

This table shows reasons why respondents disagreed that IBCA will fulfil its aims. Top reasons were how compensation is delivered (51%) and distrust in IBCA or government (26%).

Comments from respondents included:

• “Their track record so far of delivery is unimpressive.”
• “It seems to me that they are dragging their collective feet again, the longer they wait the more people die, so less to pay out, this scandal should be done and dusted years ago.”
• “Government will always try to wangle out of paying people anyway they can, regardless of how much pain or stress they cause.”
• “It's highly unlikely that the Blood Compensation Authority will compensate everyone. As an example, the Post Office workers have been waiting years for compensation and this does not look as though it will happen.”
• “This country does not seem to be very good at managing these type of schemes, such as the Post Office compensation.”
• “People will be missed as they are unaware that they could claim. People have died due to the lengthy process.”
• “A lot of people still carry a stigma and won't come forward. I feel that a lot is hidden.”
• “I think that any such public body (or any body, for that matter) invariably fails to deliver upon its promises completely, whether that is due to an administrative error, misalignment of goals and capacity, or failure of those eligible to identify themselves.”
• “I feel there may be some controversy or differing of opinion as to who should be entitled to compensation. I also feel that compensation payments are never rolled out as smoothly as expected or desired.”

This table shows reasons why respondents neither agreed nor disagreed that IBCA will fulfil its aims. Top reasons were lack of information (17%) and difficulty locating victims (12%).

Comments from respondents included:

• “I don't know enough about the authority to be able to expect it to achieve its goals. I've never heard of it before today.”
• “I don't know enough about this topic to have an informed opinion.”
• “I'm hopeful they will but there's always an excuse with these people not to pay out.”
• “It is hard to predict, and I've heard lately that some victims of the Post Office scandal are still awaiting their compensation.”
• “There are always losers in compensation, it's not always fair.”

Please rate your level of trust, if any, in the Infected Blood Compensation Authority to deliver the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme in the following ways? (1 = do not trust at all and 10 = completely trust)

This table shows trust ratings for IBCA to deliver the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme in various ways. Respondents scored trust from 1 (do not trust at all) to 10 (completely trust). Trust is highest for delivering respectfully and safely (20%), while trust is lowest for delivering quickly (10%), which also has the highest distrust rating (24%).