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.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department collects data on the recommendations made by CAFCASS disaggregated by the gender of each parent.

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 his Department has assessed the potential impact of recent changes to planned core education hours in public sector prisons on its compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Department complies with the ongoing Public Sector Equality Duty to have due regard to the potential equality impacts of decisions to make changes to the provision of education in prisons at both a national and local level. Changes to planned core education hours vary across different prisons because the national funding formula for prison education has been refreshed, to ensure that allocations are a fair reflection of prison population, function and regional cost differences. Governors and Heads of Education, Skills and Work undertake needs analysis to understand the characteristics and needs of their local prison population, and commission education based on this information. New Core Education contracts also have strengthened requirements around Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Providers are required to adhere to the Public Sector Equality Duty, and must continuously maintain an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion action plan to ensure equity of access to learning.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many individuals were assessed or monitored by the Joint Extremism Unit in each calendar year from 2017 to 2025 inclusive, broken down by the extremism or risk classification category used internally by the Unit.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

Data on the number of people serving custodial sentences for terrorist offences are published by the Home Office as part of its quarterly statistical bulletin Operation of police powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 and subsequent legislation: Arrests, outcomes, and stop and search, Great Britain, which is available at: Operation of police powers under TACT 2000, to December 2025 - GOV.UK

Details of the risk classification are withheld on the grounds of national security.

The Joint Extremism Unit also monitors and assesses individuals who have not been convicted of terrorism or terrorism-connected offences, but nevertheless represent terrorist risk. Data regarding these individuals are also withheld on national security grounds.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, in each of the last 3 years, how many instances of delayed hearings and trials have been caused by the CPS giving insufficient time for the defence to consider evidence shared as part of disclosure.

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

The specific information requested is not held. However, data on trials that have been ineffective due to the prosecution failing to disclose unused evidence is published quarterly in the Criminal Courts Accredited Official Statistics. The latest available data can be found in the ‘Trial Effectiveness at the Criminal Courts tool’ here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: October to December 2025 - GOV.UK.

The Government is carefully considering the recommendations on the disclosure regime made by Sir Brian Leveson as part of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts, and by Jonathan Fisher KC in his Independent Review of Disclosure Offences.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the First-tier Tribunal in resolving park home disputes.

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

No specific assessment has been made of the effectiveness of the First-tier Tribunal Property Chamber in resolving park home disputes. However, the Ministry of Justice regularly considers the performance of tribunals more widely. Statistics are published on a quarterly basis and can be found at: htpps://www.gov.uk/government/collections/tribunals-statistics

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total value of court-imposed fines outstanding in England and Wales is.

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

Financial penalties imposed by the courts will often consist of multiple elements including, amongst others, compensation, victim surcharge, prosecutor’s costs and a fine. The imposition is enforced as a whole, and any receipts received are applied to the offender’s account in accordance with a strict legal hierarchy. This ensures that the victims receive any monies they are due first, with the fine element being the last to be collected. This can result in the fine element, which is the punitive element of an imposition taking longer to be paid.

The Government takes the recovery and enforcement of all financial impositions very seriously and remains committed to ensuring impositions are paid. The courts will do everything within their powers to trace those who do not pay and use a variety of sanctions to ensure the recovery of criminal fines and financial penalties. These sanctions can include deducting money from an individual offender’s earnings or benefits, if they are unemployed, or issuing warrants instructing approved enforcement agents to seize and sell goods belonging to the offender. If the offender does not pay as ordered and the money cannot be recovered by other means, then the court can take other actions which includes sending them to prison for non-payment of the financial penalty including a fine.

The value of outstanding fines is reported annually in the HMCTS Trust Statement, the information can be found on page 35 in table 4, using the link below, the outstanding value at 31 March 2025 was £1,139,192,851 We anticipate the data for the 31 March 2026 being published in July 2026.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service Trust Statement 2024-25

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people paid court fines in the (a) quarter ending in November 2025 and (b) other four most recent quarters for which data is available.

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

There is no central data available on the number of people who have paid court fines. It would be necessary to interrogate all records manually. This information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners with at least one life sentence have been granted (a) supervised, and (b) unsupervised Release on Temporary Licence in each year since 2020, broken down by offence.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

Release on Temporary Licence (ROTL) for prisoners serving life sentences is subject to particularly stringent risk assessment and senior decision making, and is granted only in limited circumstances, with public protection as the paramount consideration.

Data on prisoners serving life sentences who are released on ROTL are published regularly in the Offender Management Statistics Quarterly, which include information on the number of individuals serving life sentences released on ROTL, by year: https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/offender-management-statistics-quarterly.

Data on supervised ROTL is not included within centrally collated statistical data or published ROTL figures. As a result, a breakdown of life sentence prisoners released on ROTL by supervised / unsupervised ROTL and offence would only be possible to obtain at disproportionate cost.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether local police forces will be given additional (a) officers, (b) funding, and (c) logistical support when (i) a new prison opens and (ii) a new prison expansion is completed in their area.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Ministry of Justice works closely with other government departments and local services, including emergency services, throughout all phases of new prison builds and expansions.

Decisions regarding the allocation of police resources is a matter for Chief Constables and directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners, or their equivalents. They are best placed to make these decisions based on their knowledge of local need, experience, and in line with their existing budget.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to support the provision of the installation of additional (a) CCTV and (b) speed cameras in areas where (i) new prisons open and (ii) new prison expansions are completed.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

New prisons are designed with robust security measures, including full CCTV coverage. Expansion teams work with existing prisons to ensure full CCTV coverage of new buildings and associated spaces.

There are no plans for the Ministry of Justice to expand the provision of speed cameras near new prison or expansion sites; the installation and management of speed cameras is a matter for the relevant local authorities and the police.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 April 2026 to Question 123532, when his Department expects to equip up to 10,000 staff with protective body armour.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

HM Prison & Probation Service is committed to equipping up to 10,000 staff with protective body armour by March 2027. Work is continuing to support delivery against this commitment, ensuring it is implemented in a controlled and proportionate manner, with appropriate governance and oversight in place.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what discussions his Department has had with local police forces for areas where new prison spaces are being planned.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The Ministry of Justice works closely with emergency services throughout the planning, construction and mobilisation phases of all new prison builds and expansions.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what standards and safeguards apply to the treatment of prisoners in British Overseas Territories; and what assessment he has made of whether those standards are equivalent to those applied to prisoners in the UK.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

Prisons in the Overseas Territories are subject to the local laws and constitutions of each Territory. The Ministry of Justice works with the Overseas Territories to help align the treatment of prisoners with the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (the Nelson Mandela Rules).

The standards the Overseas Territories operate under are not directly equivalent to those applied to the UK because HM Inspectorate of Prisons (HMIP), England and Wales has no formal jurisdiction in the Overseas Territories and the UK is a signatory to relevant international obligations, such as the Optional Protocol to the United Nations Convention against Torture, which the Overseas Territories are not.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans he has to provide compensation or redress to applicants affected by long delays in the processing of probate applications.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Government recognises that probate applications are made at a difficult and emotional time for bereaved families and it is important that the service is delivered as efficiently as possible.

HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has significantly improved processing times, with most applications now processed within published service standards. While some cases take longer, this is often due to the complexity of the estate or where further information is required from personal representatives.

There are no current plans to introduce a general compensation scheme for delays. HMCTS keeps performance continually under review and has an established complaints process to consider any concerns on a case-by-case basis.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the (a) financial and (b) emotional impact of probate delays on bereaved families.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Government recognises that probate applications are made at a difficult and emotional time for bereaved families and it is important that the service is delivered as efficiently as possible.

HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) has significantly improved processing times, with most applications now processed within published service standards. While some cases take longer, this is often due to the complexity of the estate or where further information is required from personal representatives.

There are no current plans to introduce a general compensation scheme for delays. HMCTS keeps performance continually under review and has an established complaints process to consider any concerns on a case-by-case basis.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to Answer of 5 January 2026 to Question 101253, in which categories of private‑law children cases Cafcass or the family courts apply a domestic‑abuse‑first assessment as the initial step in their safeguarding or case‑analysis process; and what other circumstances automatically trigger domestic‑abuse screening as the primary explanatory framework.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Practice Direction 12J (PD12J) sets out what the court should do in any case in which domestic abuse is alleged or admitted or there is other reason to believe that a child or party has experienced abuse perpetrated by another party or that there is a risk of such abuse.

Cafcass’ Domestic Abuse Practice Policy sets out the actions that Cafcass practitioners and managers must undertake when working with children and adults who have or may have experienced domestic abuse and for whom, therefore, the requirements and definitions of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and its accompanying statutory guidance apply. It is informed by Practice Direction 12J and by our understanding of the impact of domestic abuse and harmful parenting on a child and the child’s primary and protective carers. The protection of children from harm or further harm is the central and fundamental purpose of this policy.

Cafcass’ Domestic Abuse Practice Pathway and Guidance supports practitioners in applying a structured, sensitive approach to assessing domestic abuse in Family Court proceedings. It reflects the statutory responsibilities outlined in the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and is aligned with the Cafcass Domestic Abuse Practice Policy (2025) and Practice Quality Standards.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department will publish the full list of case types, behavioural indicators, or presenting circumstances in which Cafcass or the family courts are instructed to prioritise domestic‑abuse considerations as the initial step in their assessment; and to specify the statutory or policy basis for each such trigger.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Practice Direction 12J (PD12J) sets out what the court should do in any case in which domestic abuse is alleged or admitted or there is other reason to believe that a child or party has experienced abuse perpetrated by another party or that there is a risk of such abuse.

Cafcass’ Domestic Abuse Practice Policy sets out the actions that Cafcass practitioners and managers must undertake when working with children and adults who have or may have experienced domestic abuse and for whom, therefore, the requirements and definitions of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and its accompanying statutory guidance apply. It is informed by Practice Direction 12J and by our understanding of the impact of domestic abuse and harmful parenting on a child and the child’s primary and protective carers. The protection of children from harm or further harm is the central and fundamental purpose of this policy.

Cafcass’ Domestic Abuse Practice Pathway and Guidance supports practitioners in applying a structured, sensitive approach to assessing domestic abuse in Family Court proceedings. It reflects the statutory responsibilities outlined in the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 and is aligned with the Cafcass Domestic Abuse Practice Policy (2025) and Practice Quality Standards.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the current average processing time is for probate applications; and how that compares to each of the last five years.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice publish regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in our quarterly family court statistics bulletin: Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service has invested in more staff in 2026, alongside system, process improvements and a programme of upskilling to improve the processing time for applications and maintain the low level of outstanding caseload.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to reduce the backlog of probate cases.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice publish regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in our quarterly family court statistics bulletin: Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service has invested in more staff in 2026, alongside system, process improvements and a programme of upskilling to improve the processing time for applications and maintain the low level of outstanding caseload.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information her Department holds on the number of marriages between uncle and niece legally contracted overseas by people now residing in England and Wales.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice does not collect data on overseas marriages.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what contracts, grants, or commissioned training programmes have been awarded to Women’s Aid by his Department, Cafcass, or the family courts in the last five years; and whether Women’s Aid undertakes work within the family justice system.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice will be investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment into victim support services to date. This includes funding for the 42 Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) across England and Wales to commission local practical, emotional and therapeutic support services for victims of all crime types. This includes:

• ‘Core’ funding, which is for PCCs to allocate at their discretion, based on their assessment of local need.

• Funding that is ringfenced for sexual violence and domestic abuse services.

PCCs are best placed to understand their local communities and providers, and to commission appropriate support to meet the need of victims in their area. Many PCCs across England and Wales provide funding to local Women’s Aid centres to deliver vital victim support services within their area.

We do not routinely publish the full Ministry of Jusice budget or details of grant agreements or contracts for victim and witness support services. The budgets for individual PCC areas are published on each area’s website. A breakdown of grant funding for the previous financial year is published on an annual basis on the Government Grants Information System.

Turning specifically to the Family Courts, since 13 January 2025, a process has operated that allows court staff to ensure the safe service of court documents to those who are residing at a refuge. This service ensures that courts can protect the individual’s safety (and that of everyone living in the refuge) while also supporting the right to a fair trial for all parties. Practice Direction 6D makes provision for this service.

The Ministry of Justice awarded a grant to Women's Aid Federation of England and Welsh Women's Aid to develop and deliver this service. Details of this will be published as part of the Government Grants publication which can be found here: Government grants data and statistics - GOV.UK. Routine funding is now provided to both organisations to continue its operation.

Cafcass does not hold any contracts, service agreements, training arrangements or other formal partnership arrangements with Women’s Aid.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department will publish details of any contracts, consultancy arrangements, training programmes, or formal partnerships between Women’s Aid and (a) Cafcass and (b) the family courts.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice will be investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment into victim support services to date. This includes funding for the 42 Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) across England and Wales to commission local practical, emotional and therapeutic support services for victims of all crime types. This includes:

• ‘Core’ funding, which is for PCCs to allocate at their discretion, based on their assessment of local need.

• Funding that is ringfenced for sexual violence and domestic abuse services.

PCCs are best placed to understand their local communities and providers, and to commission appropriate support to meet the need of victims in their area. Many PCCs across England and Wales provide funding to local Women’s Aid centres to deliver vital victim support services within their area.

We do not routinely publish the full Ministry of Jusice budget or details of grant agreements or contracts for victim and witness support services. The budgets for individual PCC areas are published on each area’s website. A breakdown of grant funding for the previous financial year is published on an annual basis on the Government Grants Information System.

Turning specifically to the Family Courts, since 13 January 2025, a process has operated that allows court staff to ensure the safe service of court documents to those who are residing at a refuge. This service ensures that courts can protect the individual’s safety (and that of everyone living in the refuge) while also supporting the right to a fair trial for all parties. Practice Direction 6D makes provision for this service.

The Ministry of Justice awarded a grant to Women's Aid Federation of England and Welsh Women's Aid to develop and deliver this service. Details of this will be published as part of the Government Grants publication which can be found here: Government grants data and statistics - GOV.UK. Routine funding is now provided to both organisations to continue its operation.

Cafcass does not hold any contracts, service agreements, training arrangements or other formal partnership arrangements with Women’s Aid.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether Cafcass or the family courts hold any contracts, service agreements, or training arrangements with Women’s Aid; and whether Women’s Aid currently undertakes any funded or formal work with the family justice system.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice will be investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment into victim support services to date. This includes funding for the 42 Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) across England and Wales to commission local practical, emotional and therapeutic support services for victims of all crime types. This includes:

• ‘Core’ funding, which is for PCCs to allocate at their discretion, based on their assessment of local need.

• Funding that is ringfenced for sexual violence and domestic abuse services.

PCCs are best placed to understand their local communities and providers, and to commission appropriate support to meet the need of victims in their area. Many PCCs across England and Wales provide funding to local Women’s Aid centres to deliver vital victim support services within their area.

We do not routinely publish the full Ministry of Jusice budget or details of grant agreements or contracts for victim and witness support services. The budgets for individual PCC areas are published on each area’s website. A breakdown of grant funding for the previous financial year is published on an annual basis on the Government Grants Information System.

Turning specifically to the Family Courts, since 13 January 2025, a process has operated that allows court staff to ensure the safe service of court documents to those who are residing at a refuge. This service ensures that courts can protect the individual’s safety (and that of everyone living in the refuge) while also supporting the right to a fair trial for all parties. Practice Direction 6D makes provision for this service.

The Ministry of Justice awarded a grant to Women's Aid Federation of England and Welsh Women's Aid to develop and deliver this service. Details of this will be published as part of the Government Grants publication which can be found here: Government grants data and statistics - GOV.UK. Routine funding is now provided to both organisations to continue its operation.

Cafcass does not hold any contracts, service agreements, training arrangements or other formal partnership arrangements with Women’s Aid.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when his Department plans to respond to the Law Commission's recommendations on the reclamation and reuse of graves.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Law Commission’s recommendations on burial were published on 18 March 2026 in its final report on the Burial and Cremation sub-project of a wider review of the legislative framework for burial, cremation and new funerary methods. Reports will also be published in due course in relation to New Funerary Methods and Rights and Obligations relating to Funerary Methods, Funerals and Remains.

The Government will consider the Law Commission’s recommendations carefully and will respond in due course.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department plans to designate a national body with statutory responsibility for ensuring the adequate provision of nationwide burial sites; and what steps he is taking to ensure there are an adequate number of burial sites in the absence of such a body.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Government does not have day-to-day operational responsibility for burial grounds, which are managed locally. There is no statutory duty on local authorities to make provision for burial, and it is a matter for each authority to allocate local resources in line with local priorities.

The Law Commission’s final report on its review of burial and cremation law was published on 18 March 2026. The report makes a number of recommendations on a future legislative framework for burial but does not propose the creation of a national body to oversee burial provision.

The Government will consider the Law Commission’s recommendations carefully and will respond in due course.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of victim support services for women in Great Yarmouth, including access to crisis accommodation, counselling, and legal advice, and whether any additional funding has been provided.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

The Ministry of Justice is investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment in victim support services to date. We will be increasing funding for victim support services year on year, from 2026 to 2029, recognising the need to meet the rising cost pressures of delivery.

In addition, £6 million will be invested over the next two years to deliver free, independent legal advice for victims and survivors of adult rape across England and Wales, to help them understand their legal rights.

The Ministry of Justice provides all Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) in England and Wales with core grant funding to commission support services, such as counselling, for victims of all crime types. In addition, they receive ring-fenced funding for domestic and sexual abuse services. PCCs are best placed to understand their local communities, and to commission appropriate support to meet the needs of victims in their area.

The Department’s Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Fund (RASASF) provide grants to over 60 specialist organisations. Funded activities provide holistic, trauma-informed support to victims within the Norfolk area.

Under Part 4 of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, Tier 1 local authorities in England are required to assess local need for, and commission, support for victims of domestic abuse and their children within relevant safe accommodation, for example, refuges. To support delivery of the duty, the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government has provided £499 million to local authorities over the next three years.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they plan to collect data on the average time for the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) to consider, process and rule upon rent appeal cases.

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

This Government is deeply committed to the principle of open justice and transparency, ensuring that our justice system is both accountable and accessible to the public.

In the context of the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), ahead of the commencement of Phase 1 of the Renters’ Rights Act 2025, His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) is currently undertaking the necessary preparations to ensure that robust data can be collected regarding open market rent applications. This includes monitoring the average timescales for the Tribunal to manage these applications from receipt to determination.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance is issued to Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service officers on ensuring neutrality between parents in family court proceedings.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.

As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.

Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.

In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what training is provided to staff of CAFCASS on unconscious bias, with particular reference to fathers in family court proceedings.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.

As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.

Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.

In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how CAFCASS ensures that safeguarding considerations are balanced with the rights of both parents to maintain meaningful relationships with children.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.

As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.

Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.

In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisoners with at least one life sentence have been transferred to open prison conditions in each year since 2020, broken down by offence.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

To answer the question would incur disproportionate cost as it would require a search of individual prisoner records. Centrally-collated data on prisoner transfers cover transfers between a predominant function closed prison and a predominant function open prison but does not distinguish instances of prisoner movements between a ‘closed’ wing and an ‘open’ wing where a prison has both types of function. Therefore, this would require a search of individual prisoner records.

Public protection remains the priority and prisoners will only be transferred to open conditions if it is assessed that it is safe to do so.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many officers in each prison are a) currently trained in Operation Tornado control and restraint procedures and b) what percentage of operational staff in each prison does this represent.

Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip

The number of officers trained in Operation Tornado control and restraint procedures, as of 31 March 2026, and the percentage of operational staff that these staff represent, are set out in the attached table.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many complaints have been made against CAFCASS in each of the last five years alleging (a) discrimination and (b) bias against fathers; and how many such complaints were upheld.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

Cafcass does not record structured data in its complaints case management system to enable reporting on how many complaints have been made against Cafcass in each of the last five years alleging (a) discrimination and (b) bias against fathers; and how many such complaints were upheld.

This information is not recorded centrally, and the data would only be available from individual case file review at a disproportionate cost.

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 sum his Department spent on providing multi-choice, pre-select menus for (a) lunchtime and (b) evening meals in prisons in each year since 2020.

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, when were prisons required to provide the option of a (a) vegan dish, (b) vegetarian dish, and (c) Halal dish for their lunch and evening meal menus.

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, when the outcomes of the pilot launched in October 2024 to provide free mental health support for jurors who hear distressing cases in Crown Courts across England and Wales will be published.

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

Jury service is an important civic duty. Whilst many people find it worthwhile, we recognise that some trials can be challenging. There is no formal process for keeping in touch with jurors following service, and if a juror is left distressed by any aspect of their service, they are encouraged to seek specialist support through their GP, the NHS 111 helpline which includes a dedicated mental health option, or the Samaritans.

The enhanced support for jurors pilot concluded in March 2025 and the evaluation is expected to be published soon. The Government recognises the important role jurors play and is considering how best to strengthen support in light of the pilot evaluation.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether HMCTS, the Ministry or another body has a formal process for keeping in contact with jurors hearing the most distressing cases after their jury service is complete.

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

Jury service is an important civic duty. Whilst many people find it worthwhile, we recognise that some trials can be challenging. There is no formal process for keeping in touch with jurors following service, and if a juror is left distressed by any aspect of their service, they are encouraged to seek specialist support through their GP, the NHS 111 helpline which includes a dedicated mental health option, or the Samaritans.

The enhanced support for jurors pilot concluded in March 2025 and the evaluation is expected to be published soon. The Government recognises the important role jurors play and is considering how best to strengthen support in light of the pilot evaluation.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what support mental health support is available to jurors in Crown Courts that were not part of the pilot launched in October 2024.

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

Jury service is an important civic duty. Whilst many people find it worthwhile, we recognise that some trials can be challenging. There is no formal process for keeping in touch with jurors following service, and if a juror is left distressed by any aspect of their service, they are encouraged to seek specialist support through their GP, the NHS 111 helpline which includes a dedicated mental health option, or the Samaritans.

The enhanced support for jurors pilot concluded in March 2025 and the evaluation is expected to be published soon. The Government recognises the important role jurors play and is considering how best to strengthen support in light of the pilot evaluation.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment she has made of the potential impact of distressing cases on the health of jurors who hear those cases.

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

Jury service is an important civic duty. Whilst many people find it worthwhile, we recognise that some trials can be challenging. There is no formal process for keeping in touch with jurors following service, and if a juror is left distressed by any aspect of their service, they are encouraged to seek specialist support through their GP, the NHS 111 helpline which includes a dedicated mental health option, or the Samaritans.

The enhanced support for jurors pilot concluded in March 2025 and the evaluation is expected to be published soon. The Government recognises the important role jurors play and is considering how best to strengthen support in light of the pilot evaluation.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he is taking steps to modernise the Inheritance Act to reflect a) common law partners and b) common law partners whose marriage plans were underway before one of those partners passed away.

Answered by Alex Davies-Jones

There is no legal status of “common law partners” in England and Wales. Under the Inheritance (Provision for Family and Dependants) Act 1975, cohabitants (where they were living together as if married or in a civil partnership for at least two years) may apply for reasonable financial provision from a deceased partner’s estate.

The Government recognises concerns about the current position and has committed to strengthening the rights of cohabitants. We will consult in due course on potential reforms, including enhancing inheritance rights for cohabitants.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether they expect a reduction in the average time it takes for a landlord to regain possession through the courts as a result of the Renters' Rights Act 2025; and if so, when.

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

The Ministry of Justice publishes quarterly possession statistics which monitor the volume and timeliness of possession claims in the County Court. The Civil Procedure Rules state that possession hearings should be listed between 4 and 8 weeks of a claim being issued. The latest possession statistics for October to December 2025, show a mean average of 7.3 weeks from claim to order, down from 8.0 weeks for the same period in 2024.

In the longer term, we expect the reforms to reduce the volume of possession claims as only those cases where there is a clear, well-evidenced ground for possession will be able to proceed. We are also developing a new digital possession service – doing away with outdated paper processes and reducing the chance of mistakes being made.

The timeliness of the court possession process is influenced by a number of factors including user behaviour.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government whether civil servants in the Ministry of Justice have been allowed or instructed to continue working on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill when this parliamentary session ends.

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

Once the current parliamentary session ends, civil servants will cease to work on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill. Any remaining activity is limited to the management of parliamentary business and correspondence. This may include tasks such as responding to Parliamentary Questions and maintaining appropriate records, in line with normal procedures.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government how many civil servants in the Ministry of Justice are working on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill.

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

The number of civil servants working on the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill has varied over time. As of 21 April 2026, there were 2.8 full-time equivalent (FTE) officials in the Ministry of Justice.

Where necessary, specialist input has also been provided by officials from other teams and Departments on specific issues. This input is drawn from existing resources and cannot be reliably quantified as a separate FTE figure.

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask His Majesty's Government, in the context of the Civil Justice Council's review of litigation funding and the Government's plans to regulate litigation funding, (1) what definition of litigation funding agreements they propose to adopt; (2) whether portfolio funding will be regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority as a form of loan in line with the Council's recommendation 28, or under any proposed litigation funding regulations; and (3) what steps they are taking to ensure that both forms of funding are subject to appropriate and distinct regulatory oversight.

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

The Government welcomes the Civil Justice Council’s (CJC) review and is carefully considering all its recommendations.

As announced on 17 December 2025, the Government’s priority is to accept the CJC’s two primary recommendations and legislate to clarify that Litigation Funding Agreements (LFAs) are not Damages-Based Agreements and introduce light-touch regulation of LFAs. As we determine the appropriate form of regulation, we will consider the most suitable definition of a LFA. We will continue to engage with stakeholders as we develop this policy to ensure that any future framework provides for proportionate and effective regulation.

Once this work has been completed, we will consider the CJC’s remaining recommendations, including those relating to portfolio funding, in more detail. We will provide further information in due course.

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">