Asked by: Baroness Griffin of Princethorpe (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what measures they are taking to ensure that those in the criminal justice system benefit from the National Year of Reading 2026.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The National Year of Reading is a welcome opportunity to promote a wide range of activity to improve literacy and engagement with reading for people in custody and on probation.
As part of this work we have appointed the first ever Prison Reading Laureate, the author Lee Child. He will champion the transformative power of reading across the criminal justice system, continue expansion of his successful literacy pilot programme which has been running in a number of prisons since 2025 and will bring in more authors to work with prisons across the country, promoting the benefits of reading to rehabilitation.
Reading is a priority for HMPPS who work with many voluntary, community and social enterprise (VCSE) organisations such as the Reading Agency and National Literacy Trust. A programme of work is planned throughout this year to improve national access to books and facilitate workshops with authors. The Youth Custody Service is also launching its first ever Literacy Festival to inspire reading amongst some of the most complex children in our society.
Asked by: Lord Bradley (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many people in prison or a Young Offenders Institute self-describe their ethnicity as Romany.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
This information is published in Table 1_A_21 of the Offender Management Statistics ‘annual’ prison population tables.
As of 30 June 2025, the most recent date for which statistics are available, 79 of those in custody described their ethnicity as Roma.
To note, the ‘Roma’ ethnicity code is a recent addition to the prison offender management system, and the ‘as at 30 June 2025’ data is the first publication of these figures. As such, we would expect numbers to increase over time as new prisoners entering the system are able to self-identify as ‘Roma’.
Asked by: Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, which countries the UK has prisoner transfer agreements with.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Enhancing our bilateral prisoner transfer capability is a government priority. We remain fully committed to transferring eligible foreign national offenders from the UK so they can serve the remainder of their sentences in their home country, and to repatriating British nationals imprisoned overseas.
Compulsory bilateral agreements
The UK has compulsory bilateral prisoner transfer agreements (PTAs) with Albania, Ghana, Libya, Nigeria and Rwanda. These agreements state that the consent of the prisoner is not required for transfer, although both States must agree to the transfer. The UK has also recently signed a compulsory bilateral PTA with Italy, which is currently undergoing parliamentary scrutiny and has not yet been ratified.
Voluntary bilateral agreements
The UK also has voluntary bilateral PTAs, where the consent of the prisoner to transfer is required in addition to the agreement of both States, with the following countries: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Brazil, Cuba, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, the Philippines, India, Iraq, Laos, Mexico, Morocco, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Peru, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, Suriname, Thailand and Vietnam.
Multilateral arrangements
The UK has multilateral prisoner transfer arrangements with all States that are party to the 1983 Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons. This includes:
All 27 European Union Member States.
NonEU Council of Europe members: Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Moldova, Montenegro, North Macedonia, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, Türkiye and Ukraine.
Non‑Council of Europe States (as the Convention is also open to non‑Council of Europe members): Australia, the Bahamas, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Ghana, Honduras, India, Israel, Japan, Kyrgyzstan, Mauritius, Mexico, Mongolia, Panama, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea, Russia, Tonga, Trinidad and Tobago, the United States of America and Venezuela.
The UK also participates in the Scheme for the Transfer of Convicted Offenders within the Commonwealth, which provides prisoner transfer arrangements with: Kenya, Malawi, Maldives, Botswana, Tonga and Uganda.
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much has been spent on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five years.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The spend on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five financial years is presented in the table below:
Year 2021-22 | £55.6m |
Year 2022-23 | £60.4m |
Year 2023-24 | £88.0m |
Year 2024-25 | £106.8m |
Forecast Year 2025/26 | £107.8m |
The total number of individuals with an electronic monitoring device assigned at 31 December 2025 was 28,111. This figure comes from the Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication: (Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication, December 2025 - GOV.UK).
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-december-2025
The cost per tag information is commercially sensitive. The Ministry of Justice believes that releasing information on device costs would prejudice, or likely prejudice Allied Universal Electronic Monitoring’s (the provider of the monitoring equipment) commercial interests.
The latest assessment of average running costs per offender per year is £3,130 – related to direct EM costs only. That figure includes contracted out and internal costs but does not include the average cost of a probation or police officer supervising an individual with EM.
Tagging is a critical tool for punishing and monitoring offenders outside of prison which is why we are already tagging more offenders than ever before and will increase numbers further through the Sentencing Act.
For information relating to the additional supervision costs of managing an individual with EM please refer to the following answer: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the cost is per electronic monitoring tag; and what the running costs are of those tags.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The spend on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five financial years is presented in the table below:
Year 2021-22 | £55.6m |
Year 2022-23 | £60.4m |
Year 2023-24 | £88.0m |
Year 2024-25 | £106.8m |
Forecast Year 2025/26 | £107.8m |
The total number of individuals with an electronic monitoring device assigned at 31 December 2025 was 28,111. This figure comes from the Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication: (Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication, December 2025 - GOV.UK).
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-december-2025
The cost per tag information is commercially sensitive. The Ministry of Justice believes that releasing information on device costs would prejudice, or likely prejudice Allied Universal Electronic Monitoring’s (the provider of the monitoring equipment) commercial interests.
The latest assessment of average running costs per offender per year is £3,130 – related to direct EM costs only. That figure includes contracted out and internal costs but does not include the average cost of a probation or police officer supervising an individual with EM.
Tagging is a critical tool for punishing and monitoring offenders outside of prison which is why we are already tagging more offenders than ever before and will increase numbers further through the Sentencing Act.
For information relating to the additional supervision costs of managing an individual with EM please refer to the following answer: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many electronic monitoring tags are in use.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The spend on electronic monitoring contracts in each of the last five financial years is presented in the table below:
Year 2021-22 | £55.6m |
Year 2022-23 | £60.4m |
Year 2023-24 | £88.0m |
Year 2024-25 | £106.8m |
Forecast Year 2025/26 | £107.8m |
The total number of individuals with an electronic monitoring device assigned at 31 December 2025 was 28,111. This figure comes from the Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication: (Electronic Monitoring Statistics Publication, December 2025 - GOV.UK).
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/electronic-monitoring-statistics-publication-december-2025
The cost per tag information is commercially sensitive. The Ministry of Justice believes that releasing information on device costs would prejudice, or likely prejudice Allied Universal Electronic Monitoring’s (the provider of the monitoring equipment) commercial interests.
The latest assessment of average running costs per offender per year is £3,130 – related to direct EM costs only. That figure includes contracted out and internal costs but does not include the average cost of a probation or police officer supervising an individual with EM.
Tagging is a critical tool for punishing and monitoring offenders outside of prison which is why we are already tagging more offenders than ever before and will increase numbers further through the Sentencing Act.
For information relating to the additional supervision costs of managing an individual with EM please refer to the following answer: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament
Asked by: Connor Rand (Labour - Altrincham and Sale West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the findings in the China Strategic Risks Institute report entitled The PRC’s Extraterritorial Legal Architecture, published in January 2026, regarding the risks of China's civil judgments being enforced in the UK against the public interest.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Decisions about recognition of foreign judgments are made by the UK’s independent judiciary, with safeguards against recognition and enforcement being available.
There are various grounds on which a judge may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign judgment, including for example where the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, the proceedings involved a breach of natural justice, or recognition would be contrary to public policy.
The Government engages regularly with the judiciary and stakeholders about the operation of frameworks for recognition and enforcement.
Asked by: Connor Rand (Labour - Altrincham and Sale West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to help prevent the principle of judicial comity from being used by the People’s Republic of China to conduct transnational repression against diaspora groups through UK civil courts.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Decisions about recognition of foreign judgments are made by the UK’s independent judiciary, with safeguards against recognition and enforcement being available.
There are various grounds on which a judge may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign judgment, including for example where the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, the proceedings involved a breach of natural justice, or recognition would be contrary to public policy.
The Government engages regularly with the judiciary and stakeholders about the operation of frameworks for recognition and enforcement.
Asked by: Connor Rand (Labour - Altrincham and Sale West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will review the assumption of judicial independence used to recognize civil judgments from Hong Kong, in light of the National Security Law and other developments.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Decisions about recognition of foreign judgments are made by the UK’s independent judiciary, with safeguards against recognition and enforcement being available.
There are various grounds on which a judge may refuse to recognise or enforce a foreign judgment, including for example where the foreign court acted without jurisdiction, the proceedings involved a breach of natural justice, or recognition would be contrary to public policy.
The Government engages regularly with the judiciary and stakeholders about the operation of frameworks for recognition and enforcement.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to page 92 of the Strategic Defence Review, how many meetings officials from their Department have attended on the national conversation on defence and security; which directorate in their Department is responsible for the departmental contribution to that national conversation; and what the job title is of the official responsible.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Officials from the Ministry of Justice regularly attend meetings to discuss matters of national security, defence and resilience as well as the associated public communications required to deliver these lines of efforts. The conversation on National Defence was a recommendation in the 2025 Strategic Defence Review (SDR), which the Government accepted. The Ministry of Defence is the lead department for delivering the SDR, with support from the Cabinet Office, and particularly from the National Security Secretariat.
As set out in the Strategic Defence Review, the national conversation will be a multi-year, cross-departmental effort designed to deliver on the whole-of-society approach to national security and defence allowing Government, the private sector and public to play their part in strengthening the UK’s resilience to any potential future shocks. This work addresses the risks and threats the UK faces, including those below and above the threshold of an armed attack.
The Ministry of Justice is actively supporting this work and regularly fields senior officials from across the Department, including the Permanent Secretary, to cross-government meetings on a range of issues, including national security, resilience and defence.