Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential for a role for the voluntary sector in helping support the Probation Service during the period after release.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

We recognise the valuable role played by the thousands of voluntary sector organisations that work in partnership with prisons and the Probation Service to provide vital support to people serving their sentences in prison and on returning to the community.

We welcome the Independent Sentencing Review’s recommendations on how we can better harness the value the Third Sector can add to probation work, building even stronger partnerships to enable better targeting of resources and improve outcomes for offenders.

The Ministry of Justice and H M Prison and Probation Service are continuing to work with voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations to define the role that they can play in the Probation Service of the future.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of increasing the participation of the voluntary sector to assist with the probation service.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

We recognise the valuable role played by the thousands of voluntary sector organisations that work in partnership with prisons and the Probation Service to provide vital support to people serving their sentences in prison and on returning to the community.

We welcome the Independent Sentencing Review’s recommendations on how we can better harness the value the Third Sector can add to probation work, building even stronger partnerships to enable better targeting of resources and improve outcomes for offenders.

The Ministry of Justice and H M Prison and Probation Service are continuing to work with voluntary, community and social enterprise organisations to define the role that they can play in the Probation Service of the future.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the reoffending rate is for foreign national offenders convicted of sexual or violent offences against women in Great Yarmouth, compared with UK nationals convicted of comparable offences.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Ministry of Justice does not hold data which would enable us to identify sexual or violent offences committed against women in Great Yarmouth.

Foreign nationals who commit crime should be in no doubt that the law will be enforced. We refer all foreign national offenders (FNOs) in receipt of custodial sentences to the Home Office where they are considered for removal under the Early Removal Scheme (ERS). The ERS enables the removal of FNOs at an earlier point in their sentence than would otherwise be possible. It is the most effective mechanism for removing eligible FNOs as quickly as possible, freeing up prison spaces and saving taxpayer money.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many hours of unpaid work were (a) sentenced and (b) credited in each of the last five years.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

Between July 2021 and June 2025, a total of 24,341,125 hours of unpaid work were sentenced in England and Wales. In the same period, 17,614,065 hours of unpaid work were credited in England and Wales.

Periods marked with an asterisk (*) indicate incomplete performance years.

Hours sentenced are the number of hours that the offender is required to work as part of the sentence of the court.

Upon attendance of the unpaid work session, the time the offender spends working will be credited towards the number of hours they have been ordered to complete. This includes where a person attends a session and subsequently fails to comply with instructions or is sent home due to poor behaviour, or where service issues during the day cause a session to be cancelled.

Data from April 2022 to June 2025 sourced from the latest published statistics on unpaid work. A link can be found here - Unpaid work management information, update to June 2025 - GOV.UK

Data from July 2021 to March 2022 sourced from nDelius on 13/04/2026. While these data have been assured as much as practical, as with any large administrative dataset, the data should not be assumed to be accurate to the last value presented.

Data from the biannual Unpaid Work publication are rounded to the nearest five hours worked for data suppression purposes and yearly totals are calculated on the rounded values of each quarter. To be consistent with the publication, the same principle has been applied to data between July 2021 and March 2022.

The next publication is due on 14 May 2026.

Data are provided from July 2021, the month following the reunification of the Probation Service.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of jurors completed jury service lasting (a) one week or less from their first day of service, (b) more than one week but not more than two weeks, (c) more than two weeks but not more than three weeks, (d) more than three weeks but not more than four weeks, (e) more than four weeks but not more than five weeks, (f) more than five weeks but not more than six weeks, and (g) more than six weeks in the last two years.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

When jurors are summoned, they are advised that Jury service usually lasts up to 10 working days, although some trials may extend beyond this period and jurors will be advised of this in advance. Jurors may also sit on more than one case during their service.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times (a) hearings and (b) trials have delayed as a result of the the Witness Care Unit not informing witnesses of the trial date in each of the last three years.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The specific information requested regarding delays to hearings and trials is not held. However, data on trials that have been ineffective or vacated is published in the Criminal Courts Accredited Official Statistics. The latest available data including reasons for trial outcomes can be found in the ‘Trial Effectiveness at the Criminal Courts tool’ here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: October to December 2025 - GOV.UK.

Police Witness Care Units (WCUs) are integral to the criminal justice system which is reflected in their statutory obligations under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (the Victims’ Code). The Victims’ Code is clear that WCUs must inform victims of the time, date and location of any hearing. Right 8.1 sets out that WCUs must do this within 1 working day of them receiving the information from the court.

The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 created a framework to monitor criminal justice agencies' compliance with the Victims' Code, including legislative duties for agencies to collect and share information on Code compliance. Alongside this, we are exploring digital and data improvements to strengthen data sharing cross the criminal justice system in order to streamline and improve victim experience.

This Government is committed to ensuring victims and witnesses have the information and support they need to navigate court proceedings. That is why we are consulting on a new Victims’ Code to ensure we get the foundations right for victims.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total annual cost of administering the Community Payback scheme was in each of the last five years; and what the average cost per (a) sentence and (b) completed hour of unpaid work was in each of those years.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

In terms of what the total cost covers, it is things such as staffing costs, fleet (vans) and tools.

We do not hold information on average cost per sentence in the format requested.

The average cost per hour of Unpaid Work credited was £17.15 (2022/23), £19.14 (2023/24) and £21.24 (2024/25). Data are not provided for the performance year 2021/22 as this is only a partial year of data following the reunification of the Probation Service.

The average cost per hour credited is calculated by dividing the total spend by the number of hours credited in each year.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of face-to-face civil legal aid provision for the residents of Norwich South constituency; when the provision was last reviewed; and what steps his Department is taking to improve local access to justice.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

Legal aid is a vital part of the justice system and underpins our plans to build a justice system that works fairly for all parties.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) continuously assesses the available supply of legal aid services throughout England and Wales across all categories of law. Details about volumes of contracted legal aid providers are published in the LAA’s official statistics (Tables 9.1–9.9). These figures help the LAA monitor the availability of services. Additionally, the LAA’s network of regional contract managers in England and Wales provide intelligence-led information regarding provision of legal aid based on contact with legal aid service providers. The LAA takes operational action, where it can, to respond to market pressures that may arise.

For civil contracts, the LAA commissions legal aid services across larger geographic areas called procurement areas, rather than by local authority or parliamentary constituency. The relevant procurement area serving the Norwich South constituency varies depending on the type of civil law.

Constituents in Norwich South can access face to face services across all civil categories of law for which legal aid is available. All procurement areas serving Norwich South exceed the minimum required number of legal aid providers. The LAA is satisfied there is adequate provision of legal aid services in Norwich South.

We are committed to sustaining the long-term future of the legal aid sector and ensuring access to justice. That is why we are uplifting immigration and housing legal aid fees, areas identified by the Review of Civil Legal Aid as facing particularly acute challenges. This is a significant investment of £20 million a year once fully implemented – the first major increase since 1996.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has received reports regarding the treatment of disabled or seriously ill prisoners in Montserrat.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Secretary of State does not routinely receive formal reports specifically on the treatment of disabled or seriously ill prisoners in Overseas Territory prisons. However, he would be informed in cases where a prisoner is transferred to the United Kingdom for medical treatment.

Ministry of Justice officials have visited HMP Brades, the prison in Montserrat, on several occasions over the past five years to review prison operations, including healthcare provision. This has helped inform the overall management of the establishment by the Superintendent and Governor.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Timpson on 5 February (HL14147), what the deadline is to train and equip 500 prison-based staff to use taser devices.

Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

This capability is being implemented on a phased basis, reflecting the complexity of introducing Conducted Energy Devices (generally known as TASERs) safely into the prison environment. Initial enabling activity is under way, including development of policy and operating procedures, assurance processes, training design, and engagement with key stakeholders.

Training and equipping of staff will be delivered incrementally, with cohorts authorised to access the equipment in stages, once the necessary governance, infrastructure and safeguards are in place.

In view of the need to prioritise safety, operational readiness and learning from early phases of implementation, it would not be appropriate at this stage to set a deadline for completion. Progress will continue to be monitored closely to ensure progress is maintained.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many sniffer dogs there are in England and Wales's prisons; and what plans they have to increase that number.

Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

His Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) currently deploys 492 licensed search dogs across prisons in England and Wales. These dogs form a key part of the Department’s approach to tackling the supply of illicit items, including drugs, mobile telephones and other contraband, and are used proactively across the estate.

Decisions on deployment, and any increase in search dog capacity, are made at local and regional level, enabling prisons to respond flexibly to their specific security risks and operational challenges. This includes the ability to scale up provision where intelligence or demand indicates a need.

HMPPS keeps this capability under regular review as part of its wider security strategy and will continue to assess whether additional resources are required to meet any emerging threats.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many job vacancies there currently are in HM Prison and Probation Service.

Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) holds required staffing levels which are subject to regular amendment and managed at a local and regional level. As a result of this discretion, HMPPS does not present vacancy data due to variability in required staffing levels.

We do, however, publish indicative vacancies in the HMPPS Workforce and the most recently published figures can be found via the following link: HM Prison & Probation Service workforce quarterly: December 2025 - GOV.UK.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many crown courts and magistrates’ courts there are in each of the boroughs in West Midlands County; and what is the case backlog in each of those courts.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

Table 1 - Crown Court open cases in West Midlands by court (December 2025)

Table 2 - Magistrates’ courts open cases in West Midlands by court (December 2025)

notes

1) Open cases are those without a final result record. At the Crown Court this excludes cases where one or more defendants is absent and have a live bench warrant.
2) Court location relates to where a case was first received.

3) * signifies magistrates’ courts which have permanently closed. Open cases for these courts will have been transferred to other courts but workload will continue to be reported under the initial location.

The Crown Court backlog currently stands at over 80,000 cases and, without decisive action, would rise to 100,000 by 2028. Behind each of those cases is someone awaiting justice – defendants seeking to clear their name and victims putting their lives on hold. The record and rising Crown Court caseload means that thousands of victims and witnesses are waiting years for their day in court. Justice delayed is justice denied and the status quo is unacceptable.

That is why we asked Sir Brian Leveson, one of our most distinguished judges, to conduct an independent review of the criminal justice system and make recommendations for the modernisation of the system and ways to tackle the backlog. His expert panel gathered evidence over many months. They concluded that reform is essential alongside additional investment in sitting days and the workforce, and a programme of efficiencies. Part 1 of the Review set out a blueprint for pragmatic structural reform in our criminal courts and made clear that action across all aspects of the criminal justice process is needed. Reform, investment and modernisation are all necessary to ensure that our courts deliver justice effectively and efficiently.

The Government has already invested significantly in the system – in record sitting days (increasing judicial capacity), court buildings and technology, and in legal professionals with significant investment in legal aid. However, these investments in growing the workforce, whilst vital, will take years to take effect.

The Government is committed to doing whatever is necessary to deliver swifter justice for victims. Only by pulling every lever we have – investment, efficiency and reform – can we turn the tide on the backlog and begin to deliver faster and fairer justice.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answers by Baroness Levitt on 26 March (HL15521) and 12 March (HL14912), what assessment they have made of the article “Are judicial reviews in the Planning Court taking too long?”, published by the UK Constitutional Law Association on 23 March, having regard to that article being based upon statistical analysis unlike the Written Answers.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

The Written Answers on 26 March (HL15521) and 12 March (HL14912) were based on the professional knowledge and experience of the Planning Liaison Judge, rather than statistical data, drawing on his role managing claims in the Planning Court. The Planning Court Users Group provides a mechanism for users to raise any specific concerns regarding the timely progress of cases. The Court has confirmed that there is no backlog of cases in the Planning Court relating to challenges to planning permissions granted under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Significant Planning Court claims are managed in line with the targets set out in the relevant Practice Direction, while other cases follow the arrangements applicable to the Administrative Court. Overall oversight by the Planning Liaison Judge ensures that claims are progressed efficiently.

HMCTS is committed to improving efficiency, responsiveness and overall quality of service provided. Through collaborative working with the well-established Planning Court Users Group, HMCTS will discuss and consider any further administrative improvements.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure that coronial complaints procedures are independent and transparent; and what assessment he has made of the adequacy of measures in place to prevent conflicts of interest within that process.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Coroners are independent judges, but operational responsibility for coroner services lies with the lead local authorities which fund and administer of each of the 74 coroner areas in England and Wales. Whist the framework of accountability in the coronial jurisdiction is therefore complex, it is nevertheless robust and transparent.

Complaints about the standard of service provided in the context of a coroner’s investigation should be raised in the first instance with the coroner’s office and/or with the funding local authority. If the complainant remains dissatisfied, the matter can be reported to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (https://www.lgo.org.uk/make-a-complaint), which aims to provide a remedy to complaints through impartial and fair investigation.

The Ombudsman cannot investigate a coroner’s decisions as an independent judge. However, these can be challenged through the judicial review process or, in some circumstances, by applying to the Attorney General for leave to apply to the High Court for a fresh inquest.

Complaints about the personal conduct of coroners should be made to the independent Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (https://www.complaints.judicialconduct.gov.uk/).

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether there has been an impact assessment of clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill on fathers in prison who are trying to retain parental responsibility.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

Clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill will repeal the statutory presumption of parental involvement from section 1 of the Children Act 1989. The aim of repealing this measure is better to protect children from harm, including harm which might result from contact with abusive parents or resulting from decisions made by abusive parents.

The Government has thoroughly assessed the impact of repealing the statutory presumption of parental involvement. The impact assessment for Clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill does not look at fathers who are prisoners as a distinct group.

The impact assessment for this measure can be found here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0389/Non-IRCC_impact_assessment.pdf

The equalities statement for this measure can be found here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/699dfa26db2401de164d6c90/courts-tribunals-bill-equalities-statement.pdf

Both documents have also been attached for ease.

Repealing the statutory presumption does not diminish the importance of a parent being involved in their child’s life – through contact or through holding or exercising parental responsibility - where it is safe and beneficial. Rather, it ensures that the child’s welfare continues to be placed first in every decision.

Repealing the presumption means that courts, when making decisions, including applications related to parental responsibility, will adopt an openminded enquiry as to what is in a child’s best interests rather than starting from an assumption about parental involvement. Courts will continue to use the provisions set out in the Children Act 1989. In making decisions about the exercise of parental responsibility, the court will continue to be guided by the welfare checklist in order to ensure a thorough assessment of each child's circumstances.

Courts will continue to make orders for a parent (including a parent who is a prisoner) to be involved in a child's life, where that is safe and in the child’s best interests. HMPPS will continue to provide a range of services to maintain family contact and are updating the Strengthening Family Ties Policy Framework to reaffirm this, setting out clear expectations for how prisons should support people in custody to develop and sustain positive family relationships.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they have carried out an assessment of the impact of clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill on the ongoing implementation of the 2017 and 2019 Farmer Reviews on the importance of maintaining male prisoners' and female offenders' family ties to prevent reoffending and intergenerational crime.

Answered by Baroness Levitt - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)

Clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill will repeal the statutory presumption of parental involvement from section 1 of the Children Act 1989. The aim of repealing this measure is to better to protect children from harm, including from harm which might be caused by contact with abusive parents

The Government has thoroughly assessed the impact of repealing the statutory presumption of parental involvement. The impact assessment for Clause 17 of the Courts and Tribunals Bill does not look at prisoners as a distinct group.

The impact assessment for this measure can be found here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/cbill/59-01/0389/Non-IRCC_impact_assessment.pdf

The equalities statement for this measure can be found here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/699dfa26db2401de164d6c90/courts-tribunals-bill-equalities-statement.pdf

Both documents have also been attached for ease.

Repealing the statutory presumption does not diminish the importance of parental involvement and contact where it is safe and beneficial. Rather, it ensures that the child’s welfare continues to be placed first in every decision.

Repealing the presumption means that courts will adopt an openminded inquiry enquiry into what is in a child’s best interests, rather than starting from an assumption about parental involvement. Courts will continue to use the provisions set out in the Children Act 1989 when making decisions, guided by the welfare checklist, in order to ensure a thorough assessment of each child's circumstances.

Courts will continue to make orders for a parent (including a parent who is a prisoner) to be involved in a child's life where that is safe and in the child’s best interests. HMPPS will continue to provide a range of services to maintain family contact and are updating the Strengthening Family Ties Policy Framework to reaffirm this, setting out clear expectations for how prisons should support people in custody to develop and sustain positive family relationships.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to improve the fitting quality of electronic monitoring tags.

Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The field and monitoring service contract, with the provider Serco, has clear contractual requirements governing the delivery of the Electronic Monitoring service, including the fitting of electronic monitoring tags. The latest performance data from Serco evidenced continued improved performance with all contractual KPIs met.

The relevant contract can be found on contract finder via the following links, and have also been attached for ease: Electronic Monitoring Field and Monitoring Service (FMS) - Contracts Finder and Electronic Monitoring - MDSS contract - Contracts Finder.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of trends in the level of delayed payments to people who have won employment tribunals.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The Ministry of Justice does not collect or publish data on delays to awards, whether or not awards have been paid, or data on the outcomes of Employment Tribunal enforcement actions. The Department of Business and Trade will collect additional updated data on payment outcomes through the Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications later this year.

Workers should receive the payments they are entitled to in a timely manner. As part of the Government’s Plan for Change, we will look at ways of strengthening enforcement options and will work closely across Government to do this as effectively as possible, including through the newly established Fair Work Agency (FWA). The FWA will work closely with HMRC, the Insolvency Service and other relevant enforcement bodies to strengthen enforcement options. The proposed powers of the FWA are set out in the Employment Rights Act, and we are committed to ensuring that it has the appropriate resources to discharge its responsibilities.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans his Department has to publish an advertisement for the position of HM Chief Inspector of Prisons once it becomes vacant in October 2026.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

Following consultation with the Justice Select Committee (JSC) about campaign plans to recruit to this position, we plan to advertise the role shortly. We will update the JSC on the timetable in due course.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many Parental Orders were issued in 2025, 2024 and 2023.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on parental orders in our quarterly Family Court statistics bulletin: Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 April 2026 to Question 123531 on Prisons: Meat, what the annual cost of meat served in prisons has been in each year since 2020, broken down by individual prison.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.

All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, to publish a list of all external organisations, including women’s, men’s, and specialist advocacy groups, that received funding, consultancy fees, or formal engagement contracts during the development of revised domestic‑abuse guidance and safeguarding processes in private‑law children cases; and to set out the total expenditure associated with this work.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Under this Government the Ministry of Justice has not provided funding, paid consultancy fees, or entered into formal engagement contracts with external organisations in developing revised domestic abuse guidance or safeguarding processes in private law children cases.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the proven reoffending rate is for the adult cohort convicted of shoplifting offences who had been given a suspended sentence or any other non-custodial sentence within the last five years.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.

The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the proven reoffending rate is for the adult cohort convicted of shoplifting offences who had been sentenced to immediate custody within the last five years.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.

The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the proven reoffending rate is for the adult cohort convicted of shoplifting offences within the last five years.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.

The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to help reduce violent reoffending among young people who are on bail.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Government recognises the importance of reducing offending, including violent reoffending, among children who are on bail through close supervision and high levels of support by skilled staff. We are investing £5 million over the next three years in strengthening the bail packages available for children, so that courts have access to more robust community-based options that both support children to make positive changes and help manage the risk of offending. We are also reforming the annual youth remand funding arrangements to further support greater local authority investment in high-quality community alternatives to custodial remand, including suitable community placements (specialist fostering and accommodation), family support and enhanced Bail Intensive Supervision and Support services. This builds on the Greater Manchester Youth Remand Funding pilot, which has demonstrated promising early findings in improving their bail and community remand offer regionally, to keep children and communities safe. We are now offering multi-year funding to local authorities to scale up this regional model, encouraging areas to collaborate in developing a broader range of bail support options to meet the needs of children and protect the public.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what contracts, grants, or commissioned research projects were issued by his Department or by Cafcass in connection with the revision of domestic‑abuse practice frameworks since 2016; what the value of each contract was; and which external advocacy, stakeholder, or specialist organisations were recipients.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Over the last two years as Cafcass has been developing its domestic abuse policy and updating its guidance, it has worked with key partners, including fathers’ groups.

In addition to this, Cafcass works with external organisations to support the development of its domestic abuse policy and the child impact and assessment framework. This includes engagement through the Domestic Abuse Practice Reference Group. This group, established in November 2023, includes specialist domestic abuse expertise and individuals with lived experience. The group is co‑chaired by the Family Justice Young People’s Board and the domestic abuse charity SafeLives. SafeLives is a charity focused on survivors of domestic abuse regardless of the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator.

Cafcass works in partnership with SafeLives, including through seconded specialist advisers, to inform ongoing practice improvement. The Government has not undertaken an assessment of the adequacy of the balance of Cafcass’ stakeholder representation.

Senior leaders engage regularly with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her team.  As part of its commitment to learning from practice, Cafcass managers and leaders will meet with adults and children in proceedings if it is considered appropriate. This could include as part of complaints resolution, audit feedback and/or in response to an incident where the quality of practice is considered to have been less than good.

Neither Cafcass nor the Ministry of Justice has entered into any contracts, awarded grants, or commissioned research projects in connection with the revision of domestic abuse practice frameworks since 2016.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which men’s or fathers’ organisations Cafcass has consulted in the development of its domestic‑abuse guidance, safeguarding practice, and private‑law policy frameworks; and what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the balance of stakeholder representation in that engagement.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Over the last two years as Cafcass has been developing its domestic abuse policy and updating its guidance, it has worked with key partners, including fathers’ groups.

In addition to this, Cafcass works with external organisations to support the development of its domestic abuse policy and the child impact and assessment framework. This includes engagement through the Domestic Abuse Practice Reference Group. This group, established in November 2023, includes specialist domestic abuse expertise and individuals with lived experience. The group is co‑chaired by the Family Justice Young People’s Board and the domestic abuse charity SafeLives. SafeLives is a charity focused on survivors of domestic abuse regardless of the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator.

Cafcass works in partnership with SafeLives, including through seconded specialist advisers, to inform ongoing practice improvement. The Government has not undertaken an assessment of the adequacy of the balance of Cafcass’ stakeholder representation.

Senior leaders engage regularly with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her team.  As part of its commitment to learning from practice, Cafcass managers and leaders will meet with adults and children in proceedings if it is considered appropriate. This could include as part of complaints resolution, audit feedback and/or in response to an incident where the quality of practice is considered to have been less than good.

Neither Cafcass nor the Ministry of Justice has entered into any contracts, awarded grants, or commissioned research projects in connection with the revision of domestic abuse practice frameworks since 2016.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which external organisations Cafcass engages with in the development of its domestic‑abuse guidance and practice frameworks; and whether this includes any women’s advocacy groups or specialist women’s services.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Over the last two years as Cafcass has been developing its domestic abuse policy and updating its guidance, it has worked with key partners, including fathers’ groups.

In addition to this, Cafcass works with external organisations to support the development of its domestic abuse policy and the child impact and assessment framework. This includes engagement through the Domestic Abuse Practice Reference Group. This group, established in November 2023, includes specialist domestic abuse expertise and individuals with lived experience. The group is co‑chaired by the Family Justice Young People’s Board and the domestic abuse charity SafeLives. SafeLives is a charity focused on survivors of domestic abuse regardless of the gender of either the victim or the perpetrator.

Cafcass works in partnership with SafeLives, including through seconded specialist advisers, to inform ongoing practice improvement. The Government has not undertaken an assessment of the adequacy of the balance of Cafcass’ stakeholder representation.

Senior leaders engage regularly with the Domestic Abuse Commissioner and her team.  As part of its commitment to learning from practice, Cafcass managers and leaders will meet with adults and children in proceedings if it is considered appropriate. This could include as part of complaints resolution, audit feedback and/or in response to an incident where the quality of practice is considered to have been less than good.

Neither Cafcass nor the Ministry of Justice has entered into any contracts, awarded grants, or commissioned research projects in connection with the revision of domestic abuse practice frameworks since 2016.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions his Department has had with fathers’ advocacy groups on the practices of CAFCASS.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

This Government engages with a wide range of stakeholders across the family justice sector to inform policy development.

Further information on meetings between Ministers, senior officials and external organisations is published in the Department’s quarterly transparency returns, in accordance with the Government’s transparency requirements. These are available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/moj-gifts-hospitality-travel-and-meetings.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to commission an independent review into the practices of CAFCASS to assess whether fathers are treated equitably in family court proceedings.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Government does not have plans to commission an independent review of the work of Cafcass.

Cafcass operates independently and is subject to robust oversight and assurance arrangements, in line with the Arms-Length Body Code of Practice and its Framework Document with the Ministry of Justice.

Cafcass is also regularly inspected by Ofsted and was rated “outstanding” at its most recent full inspection in January 2024. The key findings of the Ofsted report are available here. Ofsted has also undertaken more recent focused work, including on private law cases involving domestic abuse, with findings published in October 2025, which are published here.

The Government expects Cafcass to ensure that all children and families are treated fairly and impartially, and that recommendations to the courts are based on the best interests of the child.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of private‑law children cases in the last five years involved Cafcass recommending a temporary pause or restriction on a father’s contact with his child following an allegation of domestic abuse before the completion of any investigative fact‑finding process.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Cafcass does not record structured data in its case management system to enable the identification of the proportion of private-law children's cases in which a recommendation was made to pause or restrict a father’s contact following an allegation of domestic abuse prior to the completion of fact-finding proceedings. This information is not recorded centrally, and the data would only be available from individual case file review at a disproportionate cost.

The Cafcass safeguarding and domestic abuse policies are clear that where existing contact arrangements are considered unsafe for children, advice will be given to the court that the contact ceases whilst an assessment of harm and risk of further harm is considered as part of the safeguarding and/or work after the first hearing.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of cases involving CAFCASS resulted in recommendations for primary residence with (a) mothers and (b) fathers in the most recent year for which data is available.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has assessed trends in the level of regional variations in recommendations made by CAFCASS including differing outcomes for fathers.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what comparative assessment he has made of the adequacy of case outcomes involving the Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service for (a) fathers and (b) mothers.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The requested information is not held centrally by the Department or Cafcass. It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would require an analysis of individual case files at a disproportionate cost.

We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system delivers safe outcomes that support children to succeed and thrive. The welfare checklist ensures that courts consider, among other things, the quality of the child’s relationship with each parent when making decisions about who a child should live or otherwise spend time with, irrespective of the gender of the parent. Family Courts will continue to support children having a relationship with both of their parents where such involvement is safe, meaningful and positive for the child.

Found: DWP, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Home Office and Ministry of Justice have

Found: Transfer to Cabinet Office for Civil Service Live 2026-0.18=C22+D22(Section A) Transfer to Ministry of Justice

Found: of the reform programme in Technical & Vocational Qualification 0.0 (2.0) (2.0) 0.0 Ministry of Justice

Found: educational needs (income from the DfE) ▪ Inspection of education and training in prisons (income from MoJ

Found: sustainability of children’s care homes HC 1233 60th DWP follow-up: Autumn 2025 HC 1447 59th Ministry of Justice

Found: T +4420 3334 3555 F +44870 761 7753 E https://contact-moj.service.justice.gov.uk/ www.gov.uk/moj

Found: of the first legally binding international AI treaty on 5 September 2024 is a key step.105 Ministry of Justice

Found: Ministry of Justice NIO Northern Ireland Office OFCOM Office of Communications OfS Office for Students

Found: T +4420 3334 3555 F +44870 761 7753 E https://contact-moj.service.justice.gov.uk/ www.gov.uk/moj

Found: England) Regulations 2026 Instruments not reported 4 Annex 4 Appendix 1: Memorandum from the Ministry of Justice

Found: from the Government’s Actuary Department, the Office of the Children’s Commissioner and the Ministry of Justice

Found: of Jury, Berggruen Institute for ‘Transformative Ideas’, California24 2010: Member of the Ministry of Justice

Found: Government (MHCLG), Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC), Department for Education (DfE) and Ministry of Justice

Found: unequivocal in stating that, while some organisations will be asked for their input, ‘this does not include MoJ

Found: We have been greatly supported by the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice

Found: than all other young people to be NEET - with recent figures indicating a NEET rate of 38%;7 • Ministry of Justice

Found: sustainability of children’s care homes HC 1233 60th DWP follow-up: Autumn 2025 HC 1447 59th Ministry of Justice

Found: Given that courts come directly under the oversight of the Ministry of Justice, do you think that that

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what discussions he has had with Cabinet colleagues on the (a) Ministry of Justice, (b) Department for Education and (c) Government Equalities Office including in their workstreams into the work of the Men's Health Strategy Stakeholder Group.

Answered by Sharon Hodgson - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Men’s Health Stakeholder Group is an advisory group that provides advice to the Department on the implementation of the Men’s Health Strategy. It reports to the Men’s Health Project Board. The project board coordinates delivery across the Department and works with other relevant Government departments that are responsible for actions in the strategy. The project board reports to the Minister responsible for men’s health.

Information relating to the Men’s Health Stakeholder Group, including membership and meeting minutes, is available at the following link:

https://www.gov.uk/government/groups/mens-health-strategy-governance

The Department is closely engaged with the work of the Deputy Prime Minister, who is leading a cross-Government agenda on improving outcomes for men and boys. The Deputy Prime Minister is convening departments and partners to deliver coordinated action, focusing on three core themes: education and employment; health and wellbeing; and masculinities and connection. The Deputy Prime Minister recently chaired the first Inter-Ministerial Group on this issue, to which the Department of Health and Social Care heavily contributed and a minister attended.

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to item 105 of the letter sent from Lord Strathclyde, Chair of the Constitution Committee to Stephen Doughty MP, Minister of State for Europe, North America and Overseas Territories regarding the UK-Overseas Joint Declaration, published 17 April 2026, which Ministers have (a) designated responsibility for Overseas Territories matters and (b) attend the cross-governmental Ministerial group on the Territories by Department.

Answered by Stephen Doughty - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

Ministers who currently hold designated responsibility for Overseas Territories matters are: the Cabinet Office Minister of State; Economic Secretary to the Treasury; Ministry of Justice Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Sentencing, Youth Justice and International; Home Office Minister of State (House of Lords); Department for Energy Security and Net Zero Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for Climate); Ministry of Defence Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for the Armed Forces); Department of Business and Trade Minister of State (Minister for Trade); Department for Culture Media and Sport Minister of State (Minister for Creative Industries, Media and Arts); Department for Science, Innovation and Technology Minister of State (Minister for Science, Innovation, Research and Nuclear); Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for Nature); Department of Health and Social Care Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health Innovation and Safety; Department for Transport Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Minister for Aviation, Maritime and Decarbonisation); Solicitor General; Department for Education Minister of State (Minister for Skills); Secretary of State for Scotland and one of the Wales Office Parliamentary Under-Secretaries of State.

All these Ministers are invited to attend the cross-governmental Ministerial Group on the Overseas Territories.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether the number of deaths from anorexia nervosa recorded by the Office of National Statistics is in line with the mortality rates suggested by clinical prevalence data; and, if there is a disparity between the two, what assessment they have made of the reasons why.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

The Office for National Statistics’ mortality data comes from the information collected at death registration on death certificates and would be the most accurate source for the information. For this reason, the Department has not made an assessment of the number of deaths from anorexia nervosa.

However, the Government shares concerns about the accurate recording of deaths, including when eating disorders may have been a contributing factor. The statutory medical examiner and coroner systems provide a clear framework to ensure deaths are appropriately investigated and recorded, so that lessons are identified and patient safety is strengthened.

Ultimately, the Ministry of Justice owns coroner policy, and it is for the coroner, exercising independent judicial discretion, to determine what is recorded on the medical cause of death.

Accurate recording does matter, and we will continue to work with partners, including colleagues at the Ministry of Justice, to ensure that learning is captured and reflected in improvements to care.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that families and carers of patients affected by changes to services at St Andrew’s Hospital in Northampton are involved in decisions about alternative care arrangements.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed

The failings exposed at St Andrew’s Hospital in Northampton site are completely unacceptable. The accounts of poor care, patient harm, and sustained risks to vulnerable people are deeply distressing, and the safety and wellbeing of patients remains our foremost priority throughout this process.

NHS England has required commissioners to begin identifying alternative inpatient placements for patients at St Andrew’s Hospital in Northampton following ongoing concerns about patient safety. Transfers are being managed carefully and in phases, based on individual clinical assessments, and patients will only move when a suitable alternative placement has been identified that can safely meet their needs. Enhanced clinical oversight has been put in place at the site, and NHS England is working closely with placing commissioners and provider networks to ensure transfers prioritise patient safety, continuity of care and compliance with the Mental Health Act where applicable.

We recognise that many patients at St Andrew’s will have limited capacity to advocate for themselves. Their voices, and those of their families and representatives, must be central to this process. Enhanced advocacy provision is already in place, and patient communications including accessible and Easy Read formats are being developed to support understanding and reduce anxiety.

After discussing with the NHS, a patient’s placing commissioner will talk with them to explain the options being considered for the best place for them to go next. They will listen to each patient’s preferences and feed these back to the NHS so they can be taken into account when making plans. Advanced advocacy support for patients is also in place. However, the final decision will also depend on the care needs of each patient and what services are available.

Where a patient is receiving care in an adult secure service, decisions will also need to consider risk and any requirements from the Ministry of Justice that may apply. These factors help the team decide the most appropriate place for ongoing care.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that patients affected by changes to services at St Andrew’s Hospital in Northampton are transferred safely to appropriate alternative mental health provision.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed

The failings exposed at St Andrew’s Hospital in Northampton site are completely unacceptable. The accounts of poor care, patient harm, and sustained risks to vulnerable people are deeply distressing, and the safety and wellbeing of patients remains our foremost priority throughout this process.

NHS England has required commissioners to begin identifying alternative inpatient placements for patients at St Andrew’s Hospital in Northampton following ongoing concerns about patient safety. Transfers are being managed carefully and in phases, based on individual clinical assessments, and patients will only move when a suitable alternative placement has been identified that can safely meet their needs. Enhanced clinical oversight has been put in place at the site, and NHS England is working closely with placing commissioners and provider networks to ensure transfers prioritise patient safety, continuity of care and compliance with the Mental Health Act where applicable.

We recognise that many patients at St Andrew’s will have limited capacity to advocate for themselves. Their voices, and those of their families and representatives, must be central to this process. Enhanced advocacy provision is already in place, and patient communications including accessible and Easy Read formats are being developed to support understanding and reduce anxiety.

After discussing with the NHS, a patient’s placing commissioner will talk with them to explain the options being considered for the best place for them to go next. They will listen to each patient’s preferences and feed these back to the NHS so they can be taken into account when making plans. Advanced advocacy support for patients is also in place. However, the final decision will also depend on the care needs of each patient and what services are available.

Where a patient is receiving care in an adult secure service, decisions will also need to consider risk and any requirements from the Ministry of Justice that may apply. These factors help the team decide the most appropriate place for ongoing care.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of mental health crisis and inpatient provision in Northamptonshire following changes to services at St Andrew’s Hospital.

Answered by Zubir Ahmed

St Andrew’s site in Northampton provides care for a complex mix of patients on both an inpatient and outpatient basis. The decision by NHS England relates to inpatients at St Andrew’s Northampton site only. It is important to note that Care Quality Commission enforcement against St Andrew’s meant that no new patients have been admitted to the inpatient unit at Northampton for some time.

Of the inpatients at St Andrew’s Northampton site, the majority are adult secure commissioned patients. Many of these patients are subject to Ministry of Justice restrictions. The decision will mean limitation upon the number of available adult secure beds in Northamptonshire, however alternative placements are being sought for patients in the region as well as in surrounding areas. The majority of other patients in St Andrew’s, Northamptonshire are patients placed by integrated care boards (ICB) into other core mental health services provided by St Andrew’s.

NHS England is working with all placing commissioners, including Northamptonshire ICB, the East Midlands provider collaboratives and local providers, asking them to identify and transfer patients to alternative placements (within the community, other health or detained settings) in line with clinical need and informed by patient and family wishes. This approach is being informed by available capacity, impact across services and enabling the identification of specific additional requirements. This is a live situation; therefore, the assessment and response are evolving. An Ethics Framework has been used to guide decision making recognising that there are a range of risks which need to be carefully balanced. Recognising the wider health and economic context for the county, Northamptonshire ICB have also convened a local system response forum to ensure that local partners are informed and engaged.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government, from the allocations of gambling levy funds already announced, how many allocations have been given to projects targeted at prisoners or people on probation; and what is the total amount of those allocations.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

In April 2025, the statutory levy on gambling operators came into effect to fund the research, prevention, and treatment of gambling-related harm in Great Britain. As part of the transition to the new levy system, commissioners are working collaboratively on the development of their programmes, drawing on expertise from across the system.

The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) and NHS England ran separate voluntary, community, and social enterprise (VCSE) prevention and treatment grants, commissioning various projects to support people at risk of, or experiencing, gambling-related harms, and affected others.

On 7 April, OHID published a list of 33 organisations provisionally awarded over £25.4 million of funding for 2026 to 2028 through the prevention grant. Funding has been provided to organisations supporting a range of population groups, including those working with prisoners and people on probation. This will support OHID’s 'test and learn' approach to better understanding which interventions are most effective in preventing gambling harm.

NHS England has also made provisional grant funding offers to 19 VCSE organisations providing a range of treatment and support services across England.

Whilst work to finalise grant agreements is underway, it is not possible to confirm the number of levy allocations or a total funding amount targeting specific groups, including prisoners or people on probation.

The Government remains committed to tackling gambling-related harms and will continue to work with partners across the Government, including the Ministry of Justice, HM Prison and Probation Service, and the sector to identify priority populations and settings where levy-funded action may have the greatest impact. OHID is also separately distributing £12 million to upper-tier local councils for 2026 to 2027 to help them prevent and reduce gambling-related harms.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to commission non-NHS community-based programmes or peer support programmes to reduce gambling and gambling-related harms among prisoners and those on probation using gambling levy funds.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

In April 2025, the statutory levy on gambling operators came into effect to fund the research, prevention, and treatment of gambling-related harm in Great Britain. As part of the transition to the new levy system, commissioners are working collaboratively on the development of their programmes, drawing on expertise from across the system.

The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) and NHS England ran separate voluntary, community, and social enterprise (VCSE) prevention and treatment grants, commissioning various projects to support people at risk of, or experiencing, gambling-related harms, and affected others.

On 7 April, OHID published a list of 33 organisations provisionally awarded over £25.4 million of funding for 2026 to 2028 through the prevention grant. Funding has been provided to organisations supporting a range of population groups, including those working with prisoners and people on probation. This will support OHID’s 'test and learn' approach to better understanding which interventions are most effective in preventing gambling harm.

NHS England has also made provisional grant funding offers to 19 VCSE organisations providing a range of treatment and support services across England.

Whilst work to finalise grant agreements is underway, it is not possible to confirm the number of levy allocations or a total funding amount targeting specific groups, including prisoners or people on probation.

The Government remains committed to tackling gambling-related harms and will continue to work with partners across the Government, including the Ministry of Justice, HM Prison and Probation Service, and the sector to identify priority populations and settings where levy-funded action may have the greatest impact. OHID is also separately distributing £12 million to upper-tier local councils for 2026 to 2027 to help them prevent and reduce gambling-related harms.

Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:

To ask His Majesty's Government what plans they have to use funds from the gambling levy for interventions for gambling disorders for prisoners and people on probation.

Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)

In April 2025, the statutory levy on gambling operators came into effect to fund the research, prevention, and treatment of gambling-related harm in Great Britain. As part of the transition to the new levy system, commissioners are working collaboratively on the development of their programmes, drawing on expertise from across the system.

The Office for Health Improvement and Disparities (OHID) and NHS England ran separate voluntary, community, and social enterprise (VCSE) prevention and treatment grants, commissioning various projects to support people at risk of, or experiencing, gambling-related harms, and affected others.

On 7 April, OHID published a list of 33 organisations provisionally awarded over £25.4 million of funding for 2026 to 2028 through the prevention grant. Funding has been provided to organisations supporting a range of population groups, including those working with prisoners and people on probation. This will support OHID’s 'test and learn' approach to better understanding which interventions are most effective in preventing gambling harm.

NHS England has also made provisional grant funding offers to 19 VCSE organisations providing a range of treatment and support services across England.

Whilst work to finalise grant agreements is underway, it is not possible to confirm the number of levy allocations or a total funding amount targeting specific groups, including prisoners or people on probation.

The Government remains committed to tackling gambling-related harms and will continue to work with partners across the Government, including the Ministry of Justice, HM Prison and Probation Service, and the sector to identify priority populations and settings where levy-funded action may have the greatest impact. OHID is also separately distributing £12 million to upper-tier local councils for 2026 to 2027 to help them prevent and reduce gambling-related harms.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, pursuant to the Answer of 26 November 2025 to Question 92754, on Rents: Appeals, whether (a) suitable arrangements for monitoring data relating to rent increase challenges in the Residential Property Tribunal and (b) all other necessary work to prepare the justice system has been or will be completed prior to implementation of the Renters' Rights Act 2025 on 1 May 2026.

Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)

My Department continues to work closely with the Ministry of Justice and HM Courts and Tribunal Service to ensure that the justice system is well prepared for the implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act, including the potential impact of the Act on the First-Tier Tribunal (Property Chamber).

This includes ensuring that suitable arrangements are in place for monitoring data relating to rent increase challenges in the Residential Property Tribunal.

The justice system will be supported with appropriate funding to ensure that the courts and tribunals have the resources and capacity they need to handle the workload that implementation of the Act will generate.

All other necessary work to prepare the justice system is expected to be completed by 1 May 2026.

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what additional resources have been allocated to Norfolk Constabulary specifically for the prevention of violence against women and girls in the Great Yarmouth area over the last five years.

Answered by Jess Phillips

The Home Office funded police forces who were yet to undertake the Domestic Abuse Matters training which provides specialist domestic abuse training to police. In 2024/ 2025 we provided £83,056 funding to Norfolk to deliver this training.

Support for victims and survivors of VAWG crimes at a local level is funded through local Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) rather than the Home Office. The Home Office invested over £20 million in 2025/26 to support victims of VAWG and raise awareness of these horrific crimes, including over £6 million for VAWG Helplines and over £2.6 million for the Flexible Fund, which offers direct cash payments for victims fleeing domestic abuse. These schemes are available for all victims across England and Wales.

Through the Domestic Abuse and Stalking Perpetrator Intervention Fund, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Norfolk has been allocated £1,082,500 across the financial years 2023-24 to 2026-27. This funding aims to improve the safety, and feeling of safety, of victims and their children, by reducing the risk posed by perpetrators through locally commissioned perpetrator interventions.

Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:

To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the risk of pre-emptive evictions of private rented sector tenants prior to the full commencement of the abolition of no-fault evictions; and what is their policy on ministerial engagement with individuals or companies undertaking such activity.

Answered by Baroness Taylor of Stevenage - Baroness in Waiting (HM Household) (Whip)

The Government is clear that there is no need for landlords to evict tenants ahead of the ban on no fault evictions on 1 May and landlords should give tenants the housing security they deserve. We will continue to engage across the sector ahead of 1 May to prevent unnecessary evictions and ensure smooth implementation of the new tenancy system.

Landlords will have robust grounds for possession where there is good reason to take their property back. As such, my Department does not expect a spike in section 21 evictions ahead of implementation of the Renters’ Rights Act on 1 May 2026. The latest Ministry of Justice official possession statistics (attached) show that there was a 17% decrease in section 21 accelerated possession claims in England in October to December 2025 when compared to the same quarter in the previous year.

The UK stands for justice and human rights, yet many life-sentence prisoners remain in custody for excessive periods despite clear evidence of rehabilitation and reform. We ask the Ministry of Justice to introduce a structured review process allowing tariff reductions, early parole or deportation.

Found: We ask the Ministry of Justice to introduce a structured review process allowing tariff reductions, early

Found: govuk-template--rebranded" lang="en">