Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith and Chiswick)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, on the basis of what evidence was the estimate of a 20 per cent time saving for judge only trials made, including the following evidence referred to in the Leveson report (i) the quantitative analyses, (ii) the quantitative estimate of impact from the workshop with HMCTS operational staff and (iii) a summary of judicial expectations of time saving; and what is the confidence interval for the 20 per cent estimate.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Hearing cases without a jury negates the need for jury selection, judges explaining legal concepts to jurors, and jury deliberation. There is no denying that these add to the time it takes to hear a case.
The latest figures show offences heard by magistrates already complete more than four times faster than similar cases in the Crown Court.
In Part I of the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, Sir Brian Leveson, one of the foremost judges of his generation, and his Expert Advisers have estimated a new Crown Court bench division would speed up cases by at least 20%. Sir Brian himself has indicated that he believes this was a conservative estimate and could be significantly more in practice.
Further details of the work undertaken to arrive at this assumption can be found below:
Quantitative analyses explored potential proxies for jury trial savings by drawing comparisons within the current system. Whilst there is no directly comparable proxy for judge only trials within our own systems, this provided a framework for elicitation workshops and judicial engagement.
A structured elicitation workshop with expert operational staff from HMCTS. The quantitative analysis was shared with participants, and the workshop generated a suggested estimated range of 10-30% for lower to upper end plausible time savings, with 20% given as a median value.
Engagement session with judges to understand their personal expectations of potential time-savings, intended to provide an anecdotal indication of where and how the judiciary thought time savings may or may not become apparent in a CCBD. Their views were in keeping with wider estimates.
The 20% assumption is also broadly in line with international evidence from New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research who compared quantitative data from judge only and jury trials. Whilst time savings varied by offence type, for all offences it found a 16% reduction in trial length for judge only trials, and a 29% time saving for complex and prejudicial offences.
A full Impact Assessment of the policy measures announced will be published alongside legislation as is usual.
We will continue to monitor conviction rates and sentencing outcomes as part of our ongoing assessments of the criminal justice system.
Asked by: Samantha Niblett (Labour - South Derbyshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how much his Department has spent on software licenses from Microsoft in the last 12 months; and what proportion this represents of his Department’s total technology spend.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
In the last 12 months, the Ministry of Justice has spent £68 million on software licenses from Microsoft. This represents approximately 11% of the Department’s total technology spend.
Asked by: James Cleverly (Conservative - Braintree)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average time is for an application to enforce a Temporary Stop Notice to be heard in the Planning Court.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The information requested is not held centrally, we do not hold data on the average time for an application to enforce a Temporary Stop Notice to be heard in the Planning Court.
Asked by: Stuart Andrew (Conservative - Daventry)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of delayed pay awards on staff morale, workload and retention in the Probation Service.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
We recognise that fair and competitive pay is a key part of supporting and retaining our valued probation workforce.
Staff retention and morale is vitally important to us, and we continuously monitor staff workload and retention. The first Recruitment and Retention Strategy was published in 2021. Since its launch, the Strategy has delivered a range of initiatives aimed at increasing recruitment and improving retention across the Probation Service. A full evaluation of the strategy was undertaken to measure progress and identify further areas for future improvement in the recruitment and retention space.
The latest retention data can be found in the HMPPS Official Workforce Statistics which were published on 19 November 2025: HM Prison & Probation Service workforce quarterly: September 2025 - GOV.UK. As these statistics show, the leaving rate for staff in the Probation Service has decreased.
We have taken steps to acknowledge the continued dedication of staff during this challenging period. As part of this, we secured agreement to pay the Competency-Based Framework progression payments, as an interim award, to eligible staff in June 2025. This recognises their vital contribution to delivering on our operational priorities.
Asked by: Stuart Andrew (Conservative - Daventry)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when staff working in HMPPS Probation Services will receive their pay award for 2025–26; and for what reason it has not been implemented.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
We recognise that fair and competitive pay is a key part of supporting and retaining our valued probation workforce. We continue to work to deliver on the 2025-26 pay awards for Probation Staff who are members of the Civil Service. We could not start the process until the Civil Service Pay Remit Guidance was published on 22 May 2025, and since then we have worked hard to develop options and are now seeking the necessary approvals to move to the next part of the process which is to start formal negotiations with the trade unions and work towards making a final offer.
In the meantime, we have taken steps to acknowledge the continued dedication of staff during this challenging period. As part of this, we secured agreement to pay the Competency-Based Framework (CBF) progression payments, as an interim award, to eligible staff in June 2025. This recognises their vital contribution to delivering on our operational priorities.
Once the pay award has been determined it will be back dated to April 2025 for eligible staff.
Asked by: Stuart Andrew (Conservative - Daventry)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to ensure that increased workloads among HMPPS Probation staff are matched by appropriate pay and support.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
We have taken immediate steps to reduce probation workload where possible. “Probation Reset” was fully implemented on 1 July 2024, followed by the introduction of “Impact” on 28 April 2025. These initiatives are among several designed to alleviate workload pressures by refocusing resources to manage those on probation more efficiently.
Further to these immediate steps, the Our Future Probation Service Programme has been established which aims to ensure that workloads for probation staff are sustainable by deploying new technologies, reforming processes, and ensuring prioritisation of probation staff time. We are committed to supporting the wellbeing of staff by ensuring workloads are sustainable.
I recognise the ongoing workload pressures on the Probation Service and supporting staff wellbeing and safety is critical for us. To address this, a new wellbeing support model has been established across HMPPS, with staff support and well-being leads for both prison and probation.
Asked by: Matt Vickers (Conservative - Stockton West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure that lessons are learned from the systemic failings at Medomsley Detention Centre to prevent similar abuse in youth detention facilities in the future.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Prison and Probation Ombudsman’s investigation published on 12 November set out in stark detail the horrific abuse that boys and young men experienced at Medomsley Detention Centre (MDC). The PPO asked the Government to consider three issues – that the Government make an apology, that the complaints process should be reformed, and that children should be asked about their experiences of custody by a trained independent member of staff.
On 12 November, the Government published a Written Ministerial Statement and sent an open letter to victims and survivors. In both, we made a full apology for the abuse which victims and survivors endured and recognised the ineffective governance structures and failures of leadership at every level, which meant the abuse was allowed to continue for such a long time. In the Government response, we also committed to setting up a Youth Custody Safeguarding Panel to make recommendations to improve safeguarding across the youth estate today, including reviewing the ways children can make complaints and are asked about their experiences in custody. This panel has now been established and will be chaired by Isabelle Trowler (the Chief Social Worker for Children and Families), who will consider the issues raised in the PPO report and report to ministers by spring 2026.
In terms of support for victims and survivors, the Ministry of Justice put in place a settlement scheme to provide compensation. To date, this has settled over 2,700 claims, totalling over £10 million. Whilst no amount of compensation can change what has happened in the past, this scheme remains open and we have encouraged anyone who has not already, to make a claim.
There are not any plans to establish a public inquiry into MDC. The PPO report is forensic and follows criminal investigations by the Durham Constabulary – Operations Halter One and Two in the 2000s, and the comprehensive Operation Seabrook beginning in 2013. Due to the breadth and depth of these investigations, a public inquiry would be very unlikely to uncover any new information or insight. Adrian Usher, the Ombudsman, has shared this view – “It is my opinion that should a public inquiry arise following the publication of my report, I cannot see how it would produce a more comprehensive account of what happened at Medomsley, and the causes of it, than my investigation has revealed.”
Asked by: Matt Vickers (Conservative - Stockton West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what measures are currently in place, or planned, to provide ongoing support and redress for survivors of abuse at Medomsley Detention Centre.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Prison and Probation Ombudsman’s investigation published on 12 November set out in stark detail the horrific abuse that boys and young men experienced at Medomsley Detention Centre (MDC). The PPO asked the Government to consider three issues – that the Government make an apology, that the complaints process should be reformed, and that children should be asked about their experiences of custody by a trained independent member of staff.
On 12 November, the Government published a Written Ministerial Statement and sent an open letter to victims and survivors. In both, we made a full apology for the abuse which victims and survivors endured and recognised the ineffective governance structures and failures of leadership at every level, which meant the abuse was allowed to continue for such a long time. In the Government response, we also committed to setting up a Youth Custody Safeguarding Panel to make recommendations to improve safeguarding across the youth estate today, including reviewing the ways children can make complaints and are asked about their experiences in custody. This panel has now been established and will be chaired by Isabelle Trowler (the Chief Social Worker for Children and Families), who will consider the issues raised in the PPO report and report to ministers by spring 2026.
In terms of support for victims and survivors, the Ministry of Justice put in place a settlement scheme to provide compensation. To date, this has settled over 2,700 claims, totalling over £10 million. Whilst no amount of compensation can change what has happened in the past, this scheme remains open and we have encouraged anyone who has not already, to make a claim.
There are not any plans to establish a public inquiry into MDC. The PPO report is forensic and follows criminal investigations by the Durham Constabulary – Operations Halter One and Two in the 2000s, and the comprehensive Operation Seabrook beginning in 2013. Due to the breadth and depth of these investigations, a public inquiry would be very unlikely to uncover any new information or insight. Adrian Usher, the Ombudsman, has shared this view – “It is my opinion that should a public inquiry arise following the publication of my report, I cannot see how it would produce a more comprehensive account of what happened at Medomsley, and the causes of it, than my investigation has revealed.”
Asked by: Neil Duncan-Jordan (Labour - Poole)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure that its legal obligations under the Human Rights Act in relation to the detention of defendants are met.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department ensures compliance with its obligations under the Human Rights Act, and other legal requirements, through operational policies communicated to prisons and probation, and oversight by bodies such as HM Inspectorate of Prisons and Independent Monitoring Boards.
The Department works hard to ensure we maintain safe, lawful conditions and uphold prisoners’ rights.
Asked by: Matt Vickers (Conservative - Stockton West)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he plans to establish a statutory public inquiry into the abuse of young men at Medomsley Detention Centre and the systemic failures highlighted in the Prisons and Probation Ombudsman’s report.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Prison and Probation Ombudsman’s investigation published on 12 November set out in stark detail the horrific abuse that boys and young men experienced at Medomsley Detention Centre (MDC). The PPO asked the Government to consider three issues – that the Government make an apology, that the complaints process should be reformed, and that children should be asked about their experiences of custody by a trained independent member of staff.
On 12 November, the Government published a Written Ministerial Statement and sent an open letter to victims and survivors. In both, we made a full apology for the abuse which victims and survivors endured and recognised the ineffective governance structures and failures of leadership at every level, which meant the abuse was allowed to continue for such a long time. In the Government response, we also committed to setting up a Youth Custody Safeguarding Panel to make recommendations to improve safeguarding across the youth estate today, including reviewing the ways children can make complaints and are asked about their experiences in custody. This panel has now been established and will be chaired by Isabelle Trowler (the Chief Social Worker for Children and Families), who will consider the issues raised in the PPO report and report to ministers by spring 2026.
In terms of support for victims and survivors, the Ministry of Justice put in place a settlement scheme to provide compensation. To date, this has settled over 2,700 claims, totalling over £10 million. Whilst no amount of compensation can change what has happened in the past, this scheme remains open and we have encouraged anyone who has not already, to make a claim.
There are not any plans to establish a public inquiry into MDC. The PPO report is forensic and follows criminal investigations by the Durham Constabulary – Operations Halter One and Two in the 2000s, and the comprehensive Operation Seabrook beginning in 2013. Due to the breadth and depth of these investigations, a public inquiry would be very unlikely to uncover any new information or insight. Adrian Usher, the Ombudsman, has shared this view – “It is my opinion that should a public inquiry arise following the publication of my report, I cannot see how it would produce a more comprehensive account of what happened at Medomsley, and the causes of it, than my investigation has revealed.”