Ministry of Justice

On 16 July, the Government published the consultation ‘Tying the Knot: Reforming weddings law in England and Wales alongside an impact assessment of the proposed reforms. The impact assessment estimates that the reforms could lead to a 3% increase in the overall number of weddings.

In relation to demand for approved wedding venues, allowing couples to marry in a wider range of locations could change patterns of demand, although the estimated increase in the overall number of weddings may also create additional opportunities for existing venues. We will consider evidence from venues and other businesses submitted through the consultation.

The Government has not yet made a final assessment of the financial impact on local authority registration services. We are continuing to work closely with the General Register Office (GRO) and local authorities on the potential implications.

One of the main four principles underpinning the consultation is to protect against forced, predatory and sham marriages. This Government wants to strengthen safeguards and ensure marriages are not used to gain unfair advantage. We are proposing a more effective system of checks and greater transparency to ensure marriages are entered into freely, with informed consent. The consultation asks questions in order to identify how protections against sham marriage can be enhanced, with improved signposting for couples and training for officiants, for example.

The Government has committed to introduce legislation to reform marriage law when parliamentary time allows.

On 16 July, the Government published the consultation ‘Tying the Knot: Reforming weddings law in England and Wales alongside an impact assessment of the proposed reforms. The impact assessment estimates that the reforms could lead to a 3% increase in the overall number of weddings.

In relation to demand for approved wedding venues, allowing couples to marry in a wider range of locations could change patterns of demand, although the estimated increase in the overall number of weddings may also create additional opportunities for existing venues. We will consider evidence from venues and other businesses submitted through the consultation.

The Government has not yet made a final assessment of the financial impact on local authority registration services. We are continuing to work closely with the General Register Office (GRO) and local authorities on the potential implications.

One of the main four principles underpinning the consultation is to protect against forced, predatory and sham marriages. This Government wants to strengthen safeguards and ensure marriages are not used to gain unfair advantage. We are proposing a more effective system of checks and greater transparency to ensure marriages are entered into freely, with informed consent. The consultation asks questions in order to identify how protections against sham marriage can be enhanced, with improved signposting for couples and training for officiants, for example.

The Government has committed to introduce legislation to reform marriage law when parliamentary time allows.

On 16 July, the Government published the consultation ‘Tying the Knot: Reforming weddings law in England and Wales alongside an impact assessment of the proposed reforms. The impact assessment estimates that the reforms could lead to a 3% increase in the overall number of weddings.

In relation to demand for approved wedding venues, allowing couples to marry in a wider range of locations could change patterns of demand, although the estimated increase in the overall number of weddings may also create additional opportunities for existing venues. We will consider evidence from venues and other businesses submitted through the consultation.

The Government has not yet made a final assessment of the financial impact on local authority registration services. We are continuing to work closely with the General Register Office (GRO) and local authorities on the potential implications.

One of the main four principles underpinning the consultation is to protect against forced, predatory and sham marriages. This Government wants to strengthen safeguards and ensure marriages are not used to gain unfair advantage. We are proposing a more effective system of checks and greater transparency to ensure marriages are entered into freely, with informed consent. The consultation asks questions in order to identify how protections against sham marriage can be enhanced, with improved signposting for couples and training for officiants, for example.

The Government has committed to introduce legislation to reform marriage law when parliamentary time allows.

On 16 July, the Government published the consultation ‘Tying the Knot: Reforming weddings law in England and Wales alongside an impact assessment of the proposed reforms. The impact assessment estimates that the reforms could lead to a 3% increase in the overall number of weddings.

In relation to demand for approved wedding venues, allowing couples to marry in a wider range of locations could change patterns of demand, although the estimated increase in the overall number of weddings may also create additional opportunities for existing venues. We will consider evidence from venues and other businesses submitted through the consultation.

The Government has not yet made a final assessment of the financial impact on local authority registration services. We are continuing to work closely with the General Register Office (GRO) and local authorities on the potential implications.

One of the main four principles underpinning the consultation is to protect against forced, predatory and sham marriages. This Government wants to strengthen safeguards and ensure marriages are not used to gain unfair advantage. We are proposing a more effective system of checks and greater transparency to ensure marriages are entered into freely, with informed consent. The consultation asks questions in order to identify how protections against sham marriage can be enhanced, with improved signposting for couples and training for officiants, for example.

The Government has committed to introduce legislation to reform marriage law when parliamentary time allows.

The Government has not undertaken a specific review of international evidence on shared parenting arrangements.

Decisions about whom a child is to live with or spend time with are based on the child’s best interests and the individual circumstances of each case. The court must have particular regard to the factors set in the ‘welfare checklist’ in the Children Act 1989, such as the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned, the impact on the child of any change in circumstances, and how capable each parent is of meeting the child’s needs. Where the facts of the specific case suggest a shared parenting arrangement is in the best interests of the child, this will likely be supported by the court.

The safest way to determine parenting arrangements that meet a child's needs is to ensure that decisions are based on the individual circumstances of the case. This enables the court to consider all relevant factors specific to that child to ensure a safe decision is made in their best interests. A prescriptive approach to shared parenting arrangements cannot safely reflect the unique circumstances and welfare considerations of every child. The Government continues to consider relevant evidence, including research, stakeholder engagement and findings from relevant reviews to ensure that the family justice system delivers for children and families.

The Government recognises the important role that both parents play in a child’s life where that involvement is safe, meaningful and positive.

The Government is committed to supporting separating families through measures that encourage parents to resolve disputes and decide child arrangements away from court in the way that best suits them, where appropriate. The Family Mediation Voucher Scheme provides up to £500 to eligible families to cover the costs of mediation to resolve child arrangement matters outside of court.

Where court proceedings are necessary, the child’s welfare must be the court’s paramount consideration when making decisions about parental involvement in a child’s life. Where parental involvement is safe and in the best interests of the child, maintaining the child’s relationship with both parents will likely be supported by the family courts.

Where contact needs to be supervised Supported Child Contact Centres provide safe, neutral settings for contact. Since 2013 the Ministry of Justice has provided grant funding to support National Association of Child Contact Centres (NACCC) accredited centres, through the Supported Child Contact Centre Grant.

The Government has not undertaken a specific assessment of the potential relationship between family separation, family court proceedings and mental health outcomes. We are aware of the impact that involvement in family court proceedings can have on the mental health of children, parents and other parties.

The Government is committed to rolling out Child Focused Courts nationally by March 2029. This represents significant reform to private law children’s proceedings and will improve the experience and participation of children and families in the family courts.

In the Child Focussed Courts model, families benefit from a streamlined, problem-solving approach which brings forward a holistic assessment of needs and risks and enables the court to make safe decisions without delay. This approach increases the evidence available to judges earlier in the case, and reduces the number of cases returning to court, protecting children and families from further trauma.

HMCTS training materials highlight resources staff can signpost where they are concerned about a party’s mental health. Cafcass' Child Impact Assessment Framework brings together guidance, practice aids and resources for practitioners relating to mental health, trauma-informed practice and working with adults, children and young people with additional needs.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators, operates independently of Government. The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for setting the regulatory requirements for qualification as a solicitor, with oversight from the Legal Services Board (LSB).

The Ministry of Justice regularly engages with the SRA and the LSB on a variety of issues relating to the effective operation of the legal services regulatory framework. There is ongoing engagement with the SRA in relation to solicitor training and qualification. In future, we can raise the specific issue of solicitors impacted by the transition to the Solicitors Qualifying Examination (SQE).

The SRA publishes guidance for prospective solicitors affected by the transition to the SQE: SRA | Becoming a solicitor with the Legal Practice Course (transitional requirements) | Solicitors Regulation Authority.

The Ministry of Justice recognises the value of linking family court data with other government datasets, including mortality datasets, to improve understanding of the longer-term outcomes of children and families involved in family justice proceedings. Through the Data First programme, family court datasets, including data from HMCTS family courts, Cafcass, Cafcass Cymru and Welsh children’s social care have been linked (and personal identifiers then removed). These are made available to accredited researchers through the SAIL Databank.

The Ministry of Justice is working with partners, including the Department for Education, Cafcass and Cafcass Cymru to explore how data linkage can be improved and become more routine and sustainable across the family justice system, whilst ensuring data protection safeguards are in place.

The Ministry of Justice recognises the value of linking family court data with other government datasets, including mortality datasets, to improve understanding of the longer-term outcomes of children and families involved in family justice proceedings. Through the Data First programme, family court datasets, including data from HMCTS family courts, Cafcass, Cafcass Cymru and Welsh children’s social care have been linked (and personal identifiers then removed). These are made available to accredited researchers through the SAIL Databank.

The Ministry of Justice is working with partners, including the Department for Education, Cafcass and Cafcass Cymru to explore how data linkage can be improved and become more routine and sustainable across the family justice system, whilst ensuring data protection safeguards are in place.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice publishes regular data on probate timeliness and open caseload in the quarterly Family Court Statistics bulletin, available at Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

Published statistics include a range of breakdowns which enable timeliness and open caseload to be viewed by application type, application channel (paper or digital) and whether an application was stopped because further information or clarification was required from the applicant.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) does not classify probate applications as "specialist" or "non-specialist", nor is there a dedicated Lost Wills Team. Consequently, HMCTS does not routinely hold or publish the information requested on waiting times, staffing levels or caseloads for such categories.

Caseworkers receive ongoing training across all aspects of probate work and are deployed flexibly across workstreams to respond to operational demand and ensure resources are directed where they are needed most.

HMCTS is particularly focused on reducing waiting times for paper applications for letters of administration with a will annexed. Timeliness measures for these applications include the time taken for applicants to respond to requests for further information, which can be longer where correspondence takes place by post.

To improve waiting times, HMCTS has invested in additional staff in 2026, alongside system and process improvements and a programme of upskilling. These measures are intended to improve processing times and prevent growth in the outstanding caseload.

The Ministry of Justice is providing £550 million of funding for victim support services in England and Wales over three years (26/27 to 28/29 inclusive). The majority of this is routed annually through Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) who commission local support services based on an assessment of need. Victims can access services in their local area at any time, regardless of when or where the crime happened – this includes victims of crime who have moved to England and Wales since the crime occurred. Information about what support is available can be found on the Victim and Witness Information website. Victims in England and Wales are entitled to provisions in the Victims’ Code, which includes the Right to be offered a referral to specialist support services.

Victim support funding and commissioning is devolved in Scotland and is therefore the responsibility of the Scottish Government.

The Ministry of Justice already publishes Family Court Statistics with regional breakdowns. The Family Court Statistics Quarterly releases include CSV datasets containing regional-level information for a range of family justice measures across England and Wales, including volumes, open caseload and timeliness metrics. They are available here: Family Court Statistics Quarterly - GOV.UK.

The Department will continue to keep its statistical releases under review to ensure it meets user needs.

As set out in the White Paper Cutting Youth Crime, Changing Young Lives, the Government is developing a Youth Custody Transformation Plan as part of the wider programme of youth justice reform.

The Plan will set out how the youth custody estate can best protect the public, support rehabilitation and improve outcomes for children in custody, consistent with the White Paper’s vision for a more preventive, evidence-led youth justice system. Publication will be the starting point of a long-term transformative programme of work, setting out fundamental plans to improve current provision as well as decade-long ambitions.

Work is being informed through continuing engagement across the system, drawing on operational and policy expertise, as well as that of delivery partners. The Ministry of Justice recognises the value of engagement with a wide range of stakeholders, and is now engaging sector bodies, youth justice services and others with relevant expertise and experience as part of the development process. We also recognise the importance of understanding the views and experiences of children and young people.

The Youth Custody Transformation Plan will be informed by these exercises and will be published later this year.

This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe. Without the changes this Government made, courts would have had to halt trials and the police cancel arrests, undermining public safety.

Whilst measures like the SDS40 change provided the intended medium-term relief to the system, this was only ever a temporary change as a bridge to a more sustainable solution. That is why the Sentencing Act has been passed, to deliver a more sustainable solution to the prison capacity crisis we inherited.

Following a review, the Prime Minister and Lord Chanceller have decided that rape and certain child sex offences will be excluded from the progression model and these sentences will retain their current release points. This is in addition to the 18,000 offenders who are already ineligible for earlier release under the model given they have either been found by a court to be the most dangerous or are serving a life sentence.

This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe. Without the changes this Government made, courts would have had to halt trials and the police cancel arrests, undermining public safety.

Whilst measures like the SDS40 change provided the intended medium-term relief to the system, this was only ever a temporary change as a bridge to a more sustainable solution. That is why the Sentencing Act has been passed, to deliver a more sustainable solution to the prison capacity crisis we inherited.

Following a review, the Prime Minister and Lord Chanceller have decided that rape and certain child sex offences will be excluded from the progression model and these sentences will retain their current release points. This is in addition to the 18,000 offenders who are already ineligible for earlier release under the model given they have either been found by a court to be the most dangerous or are serving a life sentence.

The published Impact Assessment for the Courts and Tribunals Bill shows that the structural reform package in the Bill is expected to reduce incoming demand on Crown Court time by almost 20%. The Impact Assessment can be found here: (Courts and Tribunals Bill (Structural Criminal Court) Impact Assessment).

The Government has worked closely with the UK Intelligence Community and with the Intelligence and Security Committee to assess the impact of any measures on the functions of the intelligence and security services.

The Bill includes measures designed to ensure that sensitive information is handled securely and can be protected from inappropriate disclosure. This includes information related to the functions of the intelligence and security services.

As for all public authorities, there will be some limited costs for the intelligence and security services in preparing for the application of the duty and in adapting existing practice to meet its requirements. The Bill’s impact assessment sets out that the extent of ‘new’ costs in the support of these investigative processes is likely to be low.

The Government will continue to review the impact assessment of the Bill as the Bill is amended.

Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for the independent judiciary. They must sentence within the legislative framework set by Parliament, and in line with the relevant Sentencing Council guidelines, unless not in the interest of justice to do so.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 establishes a comprehensive framework of serious offences with robust maximum penalties. These penalties reflect the gravity with which such offending is treated.

The Government keeps criminal offences and the associated penalties under review to ensure that the legislative framework remains effective, proportionate and responsive to the seriousness of offending. The legislation has recently been further strengthened through the creation of specific sexual offences against children under 16, which carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. This demonstrates the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the law provides the highest level of protection for children and reflects the seriousness of these crimes.

The evidence shows that those given a community order or suspended sentence reoffend less than similar offenders given a short prison sentence. Short prison sentences can exacerbate issues with employment, housing, and maintaining family ties, without allowing sufficient time to provide effective rehabilitative services.

In line with this evidence, and recommendations made by the Independent Sentencing Review, the Sentencing Act 2026 introduced a presumption for the courts to suspend sentences of immediate custody, of 12 months or less. The courts will always have the power to send offenders to prison where they have breached a court order, an individual is at significant risk of physical or psychological harm, or in exceptional circumstances.

Limiting the use of short sentences will help offenders to break the cycle of re-offending, reduce crime and lead to fewer victims and safer communities.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators and the Office for Legal Complaints (OLC), operates independently of government. Legal services providers handle complaints about their services in the first instance. The OLC administers the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) scheme, which considers service complaints that have not been resolved by providers, while the legal services regulators consider concerns about professional conduct. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the legal services regulators and the OLC.

The Government has not undertaken a specific assessment of the impact of AI-generated complaints. However, through its regular engagement with these bodies, the Ministry of Justice is aware that AI can help consumers articulate and pursue complaints but may also increase demand and place additional pressure on complaints-handling services.

For example, the LeO has reported a record 37% increase in new complaints in 2025–26. It has identified increased use of AI as a driver of this demand and also as a factor increasing the complexity of the complaints it receives. The OLC is responding through operational improvements and a longer-term transformation programme, using technology and AI.

The recently published independent review of the LSB also recognises the importance of maintaining effective consumer redress and ensuring the legal services regulatory framework is equipped to respond to emerging risks, including those associated with technology and AI. The Government is considering the review's recommendations and will set out its response in due course.

The level of fire risk associated with prisoner possession of vape devices is continuously monitored through the national fire reporting system. Data gathered through this process has supported the introduction of a redesigned, lower-risk vape device, which has contributed to a 43% reduction in overall fire incidents

Other ignition sources are continuously monitored through the national fire reporting system. Analysis of incident data informs both behavioural and infrastructure-based interventions designed to reduce opportunities for fire-setting and mitigate associated risks. This includes preventative and protective measures across the estate, such as Arc Fault Detection Devices (AFDDs), safer kettles, and the use of non-combustible furnishings, all of which are intended to reduce the likelihood of fire occurring and limit fire growth where incidents do occur.

The Prison Service has established a national working group to consider future policy options relating to vaping in prisons. This work remains at an early stage of development, and no decisions have been made. Several prisons in the north of England are also considering the practical implications of vape removal.

The Prison Service is considering the practical implications of vape removal. There are currently no active trials to prevent prisoners accessing vapes in prisons in the north of England.

Upon arrival, all prisoners receive a comprehensive fire safety induction covering the actions to take in the event of a fire and the risks and consequences associated with fire-setting behaviour. The quality and effectiveness of the induction process are subject to quarterly audits to ensure compliance and consistency across the prison estate.

All prisons have an adequate level of fire suppression. In the closed prison estate, 11 prisons are equipped with both fixed automatic and manual water misting systems: four of these have automatic systems in all cells, and seven have automatic systems installed in some cells, with manual provision in the remainder. The other 101 closed prisons are equipped with manual water misting systems.

H M Prison & Probation Service’s technical standards require all new closed prisons and secure accommodation blocks to be fitted with fixed automatic water misting systems in prison cells.

Upon arrival, all prisoners receive a comprehensive fire safety induction covering the actions to take in the event of a fire and the risks and consequences associated with fire-setting behaviour. The quality and effectiveness of the induction process are subject to quarterly audits to ensure compliance and consistency across the prison estate.

All prisons have an adequate level of fire suppression. In the closed prison estate, 11 prisons are equipped with both fixed automatic and manual water misting systems: four of these have automatic systems in all cells, and seven have automatic systems installed in some cells, with manual provision in the remainder. The other 101 closed prisons are equipped with manual water misting systems.

H M Prison & Probation Service’s technical standards require all new closed prisons and secure accommodation blocks to be fitted with fixed automatic water misting systems in prison cells.

We remain committed to fulfilling our manifesto commitment to introduce specialist rape courts. We are working with criminal justice partners and external stakeholders to develop plans for what form such courts should take. This includes a consideration of case timelines and progression, victim experience, the use of special measures and the effective operation of the courts.

The Government is already taking decisive action to revive our criminal court system and address long-standing issues that impact all victims, particularly those of rape and other serious sexual offences.

The uncapping of Crown Court sitting days in the 26/27 financial year means that more rape and other sexual offence cases can be heard more promptly. Judges will continue to prioritise cases involving vulnerable victims and witnesses, including rape and other sexual offences. Under the judiciary's new National Listing Framework published in July 2026, RASSO cases will be prioritised in listing and, crucially, the practice of floating these cases will end.

Lengthy delays can be particularly difficult for victims of rape and sexual violence and so we are taking forward a range of measures to improve the experience of these victims through the criminal justice system. This includes introducing independent legal advisors for adult rape victims, rolling out trauma-informed training to all court staff, and delivering legislative reforms to protect victims, particularly victims of sexual offences, from unnecessary and intrusive cross-examination about their personal lives at court.

This Government recognises the vital work of Community Care lawyers in supporting those who are vulnerable, and the importance legal aid can have in helping vulnerable people access justice.

The Government recognises the pressures facing civil legal aid and is investing in the sector. We have secured additional funding of over £200 million over the Spending Review period for legal aid transformation, recovery from the cyber-attack, and for moving our legacy systems to a modern and secure technology platform. The transformation programme aims to support sustainability for all providers – including those undertaking community care legal aid work – by ensuring new digital systems streamline processes and reduce administrative burdens.

In preparation for the 2028 Standard Civil Contract, the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) will engage with stakeholders to gather views on how best to support the sustainability of the market. These insights will inform LAA’s approach and help shape future contracts that support providers in delivering high-quality legal aid services.

The Government is making significant investments in legal aid. We are delivering the first major fee uplifts for civil legal aid since 1996, increasing spend on immigration and housing work by £20 million per annum once fully implemented. Whilst these investments are not targeted at community care legal aid specifically, they are important steps towards improving services and sustainability across the civil legal aid system.

This Government understands the pressure that is currently on the court system. The Crown Court backlog currently stands at over 80,000 cases and over 22,000 of those cases have been open for over a year. Behind each of those cases is someone awaiting justice – defendants seeking to clear their name and victims putting their lives on hold. The Crown Court caseload means that thousands of victims and witnesses are waiting years for their day in court. This cannot be acceptable. The justice system exists to serve the public, and this Government is committed to building a stronger justice system in which the public can have confidence.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and will have report stage in the House of Commons when parliamentary time allows.

This Government understands the pressure that is currently on the court system. The Crown Court backlog currently stands at over 80,000 cases and over 22,000 of those cases have been open for over a year. Behind each of those cases is someone awaiting justice – defendants seeking to clear their name and victims putting their lives on hold. The Crown Court caseload means that thousands of victims and witnesses are waiting years for their day in court. This cannot be acceptable. The justice system exists to serve the public, and this Government is committed to building a stronger justice system in which the public can have confidence.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and will have report stage in the House of Commons when parliamentary time allows.

The Government keeps the effectiveness of the criminal law under review, including the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. The 2007 Act created a specific offence to ensure that organisations can be held criminally accountable where serious management failures leading to a gross breach of a duty of care result in death. The offence has been used to secure convictions and substantial fines where the evidential test has been met. The Government has not undertaken a recent formal review of the Act but continues to monitor its operation through relevant criminal justice agencies and enforcement authorities.

The Ministry of Justice works with a range of influencers and content creators to help us reach audiences who are less likely to engage with traditional government channels. Wherever possible we do this on a low / no cost basis to secure maximum value to the taxpayer.

On occasion and in line with Government Communications Service best practice, we use paid influencers to help deliver campaigns covering key departmental priorities and operationally critical campaigns – for example in the recruitment of frontline staff. This can often provide a more effective and cost-efficient way of reaching audiences than traditional advertising.

The Department considers that disclosing the identities of individual influencers and content creators engaged to support campaigns would be likely to prejudice its commercial interests. The Department works with content creators on a campaign-by-campaign basis, with arrangements varying depending on campaign objectives, audience, content requirements and commercial terms. Disclosure of the identities of paid creators could undermine the Department's ability to negotiate favourable terms, including securing pro bono or reduced-cost support where appropriate, thereby reducing its ability to achieve value for money for the taxpayer in future campaigns.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) is a statutory obligation that applies across the public sector. As a procedural duty to have "due regard" to equality considerations, compliance is an on-going responsibility rather than a one-off task. It is integrated into the day-to-day development and delivery of all policies and services; as such, it is a core responsibility of all civil servants across government, rather than being restricted to dedicated personnel.

Because it is a continuous, procedural duty applicable to all civil servants, it is impossible to disaggregate the specific fraction of time or cost dedicated solely to Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED) compliance versus general policy and operational work. Attempting to calculate an FTE or cost figure would incur disproportionate cost and still be highly inaccurate.

The information requested is not held centrally. Under the Ministry of Justice Staff Groups and Networks Policy 2026, staff network leaders may agree a time allocation, which should not generally exceed 10% of contracted hours (pro-rated).

The UK fully supports the operation of international treaties for the reciprocal (cross border) enforcement of maintenance orders (REMO). Children have the right to care and support and parents have a responsibility to provide it, including when the paying parent and the child are living in different countries. The Government encourages suitable countries to become party to REMO treaties, in particular the 2007 Hague Convention on International Child Support and Family Maintenance.

While the enforcement of orders is a matter for the country of enforcement, the UK raises systemic issues on Hague Conventions at the Hague Conference on Private International Law. Officials regularly discuss individual cases and the country-to-country operation of REMO treaties bilaterally.

The Ministry of Justice publishes quarterly Mortgage and landlord possession statistics - Mortgage and landlord possession statistics - GOV.UK - which details the number of claims and the average time (mean/median) from claim to possession.

In 2025, the median average wait between claim and repossession by County Court bailiffs was 27 weeks and approximately 31% of the claims submitted required enforcement by County Court bailiffs.

Most possession claims do not require bailiff enforcement, as tenants vacate the property at various stages of the process and only a minority lead on to bailiff enforcement.

The timeliness of the enforcement of an order, where this is required, can be influenced by the actions of users and court. HMCTS is taking forward work to explore further improvements to bailiff recruitment and retention practices and to reduce administrative tasks for bailiffs to improve communications and efficiency.