Drones could deliver NHS supplies under UK regulation changes
Drones could be used for NHS-related missions in remote areas, inspecting offshore wind turbines and supplying oil rigs by 2026 as part of a new regulatory regime in the UK.
David Willetts, the head of a new government unit helping to deploy new technologies in Britain, said there were obvious situations where drones could be used if the changes go ahead next year.
Ministers announced plans this month to allow drones to fly long distances without their operators seeing them. Drones cannot be flown 'beyond visual line of sight' under current regulations, making their use for lengthy journeys impossible.
In an interview with the Guardian, Lord Willetts, chair of the Regulatory Innovation Office (RIO), said the changes could come as soon as 2026, but that they would apply in 'atypical' aviation environments at first, which would mean remote areas and over open water.
Referring to the NHS, Willetts said there was potentially a huge market for drone operators. 'It's great for drone operators commercially, but it's also great for services like the NHS,' he said.
Drones could be used to deliver drugs to GPs and patients in remote locations, and to take blood samples to hospitals for testing, he said.
The Scottish Highlands and islands could be one area of the UK to benefit, as could farming as a sector, he added. Regulatory changes could enable the use of drones under the government's safer streets fund, which supports measures against neighbourhood crime and antisocial behaviour.
'You could imagine that, for the safer streets initiative, they might be used by the police in circumstances where they might be trying to ensure public safety,' he said.
Willetts also indicated that the definition of an 'atypical' air environment could be broadened, which could enable greater use of drones over long distances. The definition could 'cover a lot of airspace', he said.
For drones to operate in busier airspace, however, there would need to be progress on technology and standards that alert aircraft to their presence.
Citing deliveries to oil rigs and the maintenance of offshore wind turbines as another example of potential use by 2026, Willetts said that 'strictly speaking' using a drone to check on a turbine involved a line-of-sight requirement.
Sign up to TechScape
A weekly dive in to how technology is shaping our lives
after newsletter promotion
As part of last month's announcement, the government revealed it was giving £16.5m to the Civil Aviation Authority to deliver a regulatory framework that would allow beyond-line-of-sight drone use. Willetts said regulations had become disproportionate.
The NHS already delivers urgent pathology items such as blood samples via drones as part of a trial in central London. It involves moving samples between Guy's hospital and a lab at St Thomas' hospital in partnership with the drone companies Apian – a UK startup co-founded by NHS doctors – and Wing, which is owned by Google's parent company Alphabet. A similar trial has also taken place in Northumberland.
The UK technology secretary, Peter Kyle, said the regulatory changes would help the UK 'lead the world in new technologies'.
'These are exactly the kinds of barriers we're determined to break down through the Regulatory Innovation Office,' he said. 'Cutting red tape so drones can safely deliver supplies or inspect offshore wind turbines without costly workarounds like putting someone in a boat.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
South Wales Argus
16 minutes ago
- South Wales Argus
Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments. But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'. They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it. 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. 'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe. 'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.' Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'. 'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said. 'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.' He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.' But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour. The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote. 'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. 'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.' Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying. Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill. People with terminal illnesses, surrounded by loved ones, display their dying wishes on tags outside the Palace of Westminster in London to urge MPs to support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Jas Lehal/PA) Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down. While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
Leader Live
19 minutes ago
- Leader Live
Cooper still in last-minute talks with Treasury over spending review
Rachel Reeves is expected to announce above-inflation increases in the policing budget when she sets out her spending plans for the next three years on Wednesday. But Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is yet to agree a final settlement with the Chancellor, with reports suggesting greater police spending will mean a squeeze on other areas of her department's budget. Downing Street is now understood to be involved in the talks, with Ms Cooper the last minister still to reach a deal with the Treasury. The spending review is expected to see funding increases for the NHS, schools and defence along with a number of infrastructure projects as the Chancellor shares out some £113 billion freed up by looser borrowing rules. But other areas could face cuts as she seeks to balance manifesto commitments with more recent pledges, such as a hike in defence spending, while meeting her fiscal rules that promise to match day-to-day spending with revenues. On Monday morning, technology minister Sir Chris Bryant insisted that the spending review would not see a return to austerity, telling Times Radio that period was 'over'. But he acknowledged that some parts of the budget would be 'much more stretched' and 'difficult'. One of those areas could be London, where Sir Sadiq Khan's office is concerned the spending review will include no new projects or funding for the capital. The mayor had been seeking extensions to the Docklands Light Railway and Bakerloo Underground line, along with powers to introduce a tourist levy and a substantial increase in funding for the Metropolitan Police, but his office now expects none of these will be approved. A source close to the Mayor said ministers 'must not return to the damaging, anti-London approach of the last government', adding this would harm both London's public services and 'jobs and growth across the country'. They said: 'Sadiq will always stand up for London and has been clear it would be unacceptable if there are no major infrastructure projects for London announced in the spending review and the Met doesn't get the funding it needs. 'We need backing for London as a global city that's pro-business, safe and well-connected.' For too long, communities across the country have been locked out of the investment they deserve. That's why on Wednesday, we announced funding worth £15.6bn, helping to drive cities, towns, and communities forward. — HM Treasury (@hmtreasury) June 6, 2025 Last week, Ms Reeves acknowledged she had been forced to turn down requests for funding for projects she would have wanted to back, in a sign of the behind-the-scenes wrangling over her spending review. The Department of Health is set to be the biggest winner, with the NHS expected to receive a boost of up to £30 billion at the expense of other public services. Meanwhile, day-to-day funding for schools is expected to increase by £4.5 billion by 2028-9 compared with the 2025-6 core budget, which was published in the spring statement. Elsewhere, the Government has committed to spend 2.5% of gross domestic product on defence from April 2027, with a goal of increasing that to 3% over the next parliament – a timetable which could stretch to 2034. Ms Reeves' plans will also include an £86 billion package for science and technology research and development.
Western Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
Around 1,000 doctors urge MPs to vote against ‘unsafe' assisted dying Bill
The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill will return to the House of Commons for debate on Friday, with MPs expected to consider further amendments. But in a letter, published this week, doctors from across the NHS have urged lawmakers to listen to those 'who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill'. They warn the Bill 'poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce'. In its current form the proposed legislation, which applies only to England and Wales, would mean terminally ill adults with only six months left to live could apply for assistance to end their lives, subject to the approval of two doctors and an expert panel. Last month, MPs approved a change in the Bill to ensure no medics would be obliged to take part in assisted dying. Doctors already had an opt-out but the new clause extends that to anyone, including pharmacists and social care workers. Encouraging or assisting suicide is currently against the law in England and Wales, with a maximum jail sentence of 14 years. The letter to MPs said: 'As experienced medical professionals who regularly work with dying patients and who have reviewed the worldwide evidence on assisted dying, it is our opinion that this Bill poses a real threat to both patients and the medical workforce, and we urge you to vote against it. 'We are concerned that the private member's Bill process has not facilitated a balanced approach to the collection of evidence and input from key stakeholders including doctors, people with disabilities and other marginalised groups. 'This Bill will widen inequalities, it provides inadequate safeguards and, in our collective view, is simply not safe. 'This is the most important piece of healthcare legislation for 60 years and we urge you to listen to the doctors who would have to deliver the consequences of this deeply flawed Bill.' Sir Ed Davey welcomed the letter on Monday, telling Sky News he had 'real concerns'. 'I have voted against this assisted dying legislation, as I did on previous occasions,' the Liberal Democrat leader said. 'I have real concerns about the pressure on individuals, that they will put on themselves, if they think they are a burden on their family, so I welcome this letter.' He added: 'I hope, as time has gone on, as the arguments have been better exposed, that MPs will switch sides and join the side that I and many MPs are on.' But Sir Chris Bryant said he would be voting in favour. The technology minister told Sky News: 'The Government doesn't have a formal position at all and individual members are free to choose how they vote. 'I'm not going to hide my own personal preference. I abstained on the first time round, I decided I wasn't going to vote because I wanted to hear the debate. 'I have listened to a lot of the debate. Of course, I don't want anybody to feel that they are a burden on society and that should lead them towards taking their own life, but I also have heard the cries of people who are absolutely miserable, and that's why I will be voting for the Bill.' Some of the Bill's opponents have urged MPs to focus on improving end-of-life care rather than legislating for assisted dying. Ahead of last month's Commons debate on the Bill, two royal medical colleges raised concerns over the proposed legislation. The Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said it believes there are 'concerning deficiencies', while the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) said it has 'serious concerns' and cannot support the Bill. People with terminal illnesses, surrounded by loved ones, display their dying wishes on tags outside the Palace of Westminster in London to urge MPs to support the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill (Jas Lehal/PA) Opinions among members of the medical profession remain varied, with TV doctor Hilary Jones describing assisted dying for the terminally ill as 'kind and compassionate', adding that he would help a patient to end their life if the law was changed. The GP, often seen on ITV's Good Morning Britain and the Lorraine show, told the PA news agency he believes medicine will go 'back to the Dark Ages' if proposed legislation being considered at Westminster is voted down. While Friday is expected to see debate on further amendments to the Bill, it is thought a vote on the overall legislation might not take place until the following Friday, June 20.
