Asked by: John Grady (Labour - Glasgow East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people in Glasgow received awards under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme in each of the last five years; and what the value of those awards was.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below provides the number of compensation awards paid in each of the last five financial years to applicants living in Glasgow.
Number of compensation awards paid to applicants living in Glasgow* **
Financial Year | Number of awards paid | Total value of those awards |
2020-21 | 349 | £3,584,374 |
2021-22 | 306 | £2,535,552 |
2022-23 | 245 | £2,723,991 |
2023-24 | 367 | £3,592,648 |
2024-25 | 323 | £2,703,553 |
* The above table includes all awards where the applicant named Glasgow as the city in their home address in their application.
**The table does not include archived bereavement applications because the address of the applicant is not retained. In most cases, applications are archived three years after the case has been closed.
Asked by: Tom Morrison (Liberal Democrat - Cheadle)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to improve standards in relation to bailiffs.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to strengthening the regulation of the private enforcement (bailiff) sector and establishing an independent regulatory framework as soon as parliamentary time allows. Last year, we consulted on how to do so in a way that ensures that regulation is targeted, proportionate, as well as ensuring fair treatment for everyone, including people in vulnerable circumstances. This will build on the excellent work that the Enforcement Conduct Board (ECB) is already doing on a voluntary basis to improve standards in the sector. This includes the recent publication in March 2026 of Vulnerability and Ability to Pay Standards, strengthening expectations on the identification of vulnerability, affordability assessments and the use of sustainable repayment arrangements.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will include anti-SLAPP legislation in the King's Speech in May 2026.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPPs) have a chilling effect on public participation and freedom of expression, posing a threat to our legal system and democracy. The Government is committed to tackling SLAPPs and is considering all options for reform to address this issue.
The legislative programme for the second session will be set out in the King’s Speech on 13 May 2026.
Asked by: Robbie Moore (Conservative - Keighley and Ilkley)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what criteria HMCTS applies when determining whether to approve or refuse bulk or systematic access to court transcripts following notification by a transcription provider; and who within HMCTS is responsible for making such decisions.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
HMCTS applies clear contractual and governance criteria when considering whether to approve or refuse bulk or systematic access to court transcripts.
Under HMCTS transcription contracts, suppliers must not provide transcripts or grant access to transcripts to third parties on a bulk or standing or systematic basis without the prior approval of HMCTS.
Responsibility for these decisions lies with HMCTS, acting through its designated contract management and operational teams with specialist advice sought as necessary. Approval of requests are based on the following:
Legal compliance
Security and information assurance requirements
Operational and reputational risk
Lawful, proportionate and consistent with the original purpose
Asked by: Tom Morrison (Liberal Democrat - Cheadle)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will consider the potential merits of introducing a national duty of care for bailiffs.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to strengthening the regulation of the private enforcement (bailiff) sector and establishing an independent regulatory framework as soon as parliamentary time allows. Last year, we consulted on how to do so in a way that ensures that regulation is targeted, proportionate, as well as ensuring fair treatment for everyone, including people in vulnerable circumstances. This will build on the excellent work that the Enforcement Conduct Board (ECB) is already doing on a voluntary basis to improve standards in the sector. This includes the recent publication in March 2026 of Vulnerability and Ability to Pay Standards, strengthening expectations on the identification of vulnerability, affordability assessments and the use of sustainable repayment arrangements.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many instances of delayed hearings and trials were caused by breakdowns in infrastructure including a) power cuts, b) lack of water supply for drinking and flushing toilets, c) broken lifts and d) water ingress from the roof in each of the last 3 years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The questions have been interpreted as asking for data for all Magistrates’ and Crown Courts in the last 3 full calendar years (2023, 2024 and 2025).
The specific information requested is not held. However, data on trials that have been ineffective or vacated due to Accommodation / equipment failure generally, 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.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many instances of delayed hearings and trials were caused by technical problems with the a) Crown Court Digital Case System and b) Common Platform in each of the last 3 years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The questions have been interpreted as asking for data for all Magistrates’ and Crown Courts in the last 3 full calendar years (2023, 2024 and 2025).
The specific information requested is not held. However, data on trials that have been ineffective or vacated due to Accommodation / equipment failure generally, 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.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many instances of delayed hearings and trials were caused by the defendant not being produced from prison as required in each of the last three years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The figures below show the total number of reported delays to hearings and trials over the last three years where the defendant was not produced from prison as required on time. The figures reflect overall reported incidents rather than being attributed solely to the PECS supplier.
2023 = 1072
2024 = 1272
2025 = 1297
Evidence from recent performance reporting shows consistent sustained levels of PECS supplier delivery to court, with supplier-attributable delays remaining low relative to overall court production volumes. In 2025, overall criminal justice system delivery to court was timely in 98.19% of cases; PECS suppliers met contractual expectations by delivering prisoners to court on time in 99.91% of cases.
We recognise the problems we inherited in prisoner transfer with delays occurring at prisons, en route between prison and court and at courts themselves in bringing prisoners to the dock. The Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending and I have launched a new oversight body established to review prisoner transfer from end to end. This will monitor and drive performance improvements in prisoner transfer across the country.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many instances of delayed hearings and trials were caused by the court having failed to book an interpreter in each of the last three years.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
An ineffective trial is defined as a trial that does not proceed on the scheduled trial date and therefore requires a further listing. This may arise due to action or inaction by the prosecution, the defence, the court, or a combination of these factors.
The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on the number of delayed hearings or trials specifically attributable to the court failing to book an interpreter. While published data includes ineffective trials recorded under the reason “no interpreter available”, this category covers a range of circumstances. These include situations where the supplier was unable to fulfil a booking, or where a booked interpreter cancelled at short notice and there was insufficient time to secure a replacement, as well as the court having failed to book an interpreter. The data cannot be disaggregated further to distinguish between a failure to make a booking and other interpreter related issues that may have caused the delay.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the quality and timeliness of services provided to victims of crime by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 (the 2012 Scheme) does not prescribe a time limit for applications to be decided.
Most applications are decided within 12 months. Each case must be considered on its own facts. In most cases, CICA requires information from third parties such as the police and medical authorities in order to decide a claim.
Some applications will by necessity take longer to decide. This could be where information is not available due to ongoing court proceedings, where CICA needs time to assess the long-term impact of complex injuries (e.g. brain injuries), or where there is an application for loss of earnings (which requires at least 28 weeks of loss).
CICA understands the importance of its role in giving recognition, redress and closure to its applicants. It works closely with a range of victims’ organisations including those that are members of its biannual Stakeholder Engagement Forum. This continues to provide valuable insights which help to inform how it can further improve its service.
On 4 August 2025 I visited CICA staff at their offices in Glasgow to see for myself and better understand the work that they do, both to process applications and to make future improvements to their service. I hope it will reassure you that throughout my visit, it was very clear to me that staff are committed to making the compensation application process as straightforward as possible and to minimise its potential for re-traumatisation of victims. Clear and sensitive communication is a clear priority. I was struck on my visit by the organisation’s clear dedication to supporting victims through their application journey.