Lord Garnier Portrait

Lord Garnier

Conservative - Life peer

Became Member: 22nd June 2018


1 APPG membership (as of 30 May 2024)
Human Rights
2 Former APPG memberships
Democracy and the Constitution, Victims of Crime
Common Frameworks Scrutiny Committee
17th Sep 2020 - 31st Dec 2023
Sentencing (Pre-consolidation Amendments) Bill [HL] Special Public Bill Committee
20th Jun 2019 - 23rd Jul 2019
Draft Registration of Overseas Entities Bill (Joint)
25th Feb 2019 - 18th Jul 2019
Human Rights (Joint Committee)
7th Apr 2014 - 30th Mar 2015
Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
14th May 2010 - 6th Sep 2012
Shadow Attorney General
7th Sep 2009 - 6th May 2010
Shadow Minister (Justice)
3rd Jul 2007 - 7th Sep 2009
Shadow Minister (Home Affairs)
10th May 2005 - 3rd Jul 2007
Draft Corruption Bill (Joint Committee)
10th Mar 2003 - 31st Jul 2003
Shadow Attorney General
15th Jun 1999 - 18th Sep 2001
Home Affairs Committee
27th Apr 1992 - 31st Jan 1995
Statutory Instruments (Joint Committee)
27th Apr 1992 - 4th Dec 1992
Statutory Instruments (Select Committee)
27th Apr 1992 - 4th Dec 1992


Division Voting information

During the current Parliament, Lord Garnier has voted in 368 divisions, and 20 times against the majority of their Party.

13 Jan 2021 - Covert Human Intelligence Sources (Criminal Conduct) Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 13 Conservative Aye votes vs 208 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 339 Noes - 235
18 Nov 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 15 Conservative Aye votes vs 190 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 367 Noes - 209
9 Nov 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 44 Conservative No votes vs 147 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 165 Noes - 433
9 Nov 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 38 Conservative No votes vs 134 Conservative Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 148 Noes - 407
20 Oct 2020 - United Kingdom Internal Market Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 39 Conservative Aye votes vs 158 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 395 Noes - 169
6 Dec 2021 - Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill [HL] - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 14 Conservative Aye votes vs 70 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 25 Noes - 74
8 Dec 2021 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 6 Conservative Aye votes vs 131 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 125 Noes - 162
15 Dec 2021 - Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Conservative Aye votes vs 141 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 90 Noes - 159
7 Feb 2023 - Public Order Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 5 Conservative Aye votes vs 186 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 284 Noes - 209
7 Feb 2023 - Public Order Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 5 Conservative Aye votes vs 178 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 283 Noes - 192
7 Feb 2023 - Public Order Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Conservative Aye votes vs 186 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 259 Noes - 200
20 Jun 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 4 Conservative Aye votes vs 170 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 218 Noes - 175
27 Jun 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 162 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 179 Noes - 176
27 Jun 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 152 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 176 Noes - 160
27 Jun 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 4 Conservative Aye votes vs 141 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 164 Noes - 150
11 Sep 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Conservative Aye votes vs 174 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 211 Noes - 185
11 Sep 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 175 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 218 Noes - 186
18 Oct 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 192 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 245 Noes - 204
18 Oct 2023 - Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 3 Conservative Aye votes vs 197 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 245 Noes - 209
21 May 2024 - Victims and Prisoners Bill - View Vote Context
Lord Garnier voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Conservative Aye votes vs 179 Conservative No votes
Tally: Ayes - 91 Noes - 192
View All Lord Garnier Division Votes

Debates during the 2019 Parliament

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Sparring Partners
Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon (Conservative)
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
(17 debate interactions)
Lord Bellamy (Conservative)
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
(12 debate interactions)
View All Sparring Partners
Department Debates
Ministry of Justice
(42 debate contributions)
Home Office
(35 debate contributions)
Scotland Office
(22 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
Legislation Debates
Victims and Prisoners Act 2024
(7,674 words contributed)
Financial Services Bill 2019-21
(3,039 words contributed)
View All Legislation Debates
View all Lord Garnier's debates

Lords initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Lord Garnier, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.


Lord Garnier has not introduced any legislation before Parliament

Lord Garnier has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


Latest 50 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
5th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many investigations have been undertaken in each of the last 25 years for which figures are available into alleged offences under (1) section 1(1), and (2) section 1(2) of the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925; on how many occasions in such a period evidence has been provided to the Crown Prosecution Service for its consideration of a prosecution under each of these sub-sections of the Act; and when any such occasions took place.

Records held by the Crown Prosecution Service (‘CPS’) indicate that between 2004 – 2021 there have been no criminal charges in relation to offences under the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925.

The CPS does not hold records of the number of pre-charge case files referred by the police, and information relating to criminal investigations is a matter for the police.

Lord Stewart of Dirleton
Advocate General for Scotland
5th Jan 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to reform or update the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925.

The Government currently has no plans to review the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act 1925. It is against the law to sell an honour or a peerage under the Act. Anyone who has evidence that an organisation or individual is claiming to be selling honours should be reported to the police.

Lord True
Leader of the House of Lords and Lord Privy Seal
7th Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they are taking to ensure human rights defenders working to expose corruption will be supported both (1) within, and (2) outside, the United Kingdom.

The UK strongly supports human rights defenders worldwide to enable them to carry out their work safely and without fear. When the Foreign Secretary spoke at the UN General assembly special session on corruption on 2 June, he called on other countries to deliver 'a safer environment for journalists to shine a light on corruption'. The UK is supporting investigative journalists through the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project to help expose corruption and illicit finance in both the Middle East and North Africa and sub-Saharan Africa. UK funding directly contributes towards strengthening local journalists' capacity to investigate the perpetrators, professional enablers, offshore entities, and financial systems that facilitate corruption and the illicit flow of money. The project helps, helping fight for the key changes needed in developing countries held back as a result, and pushes for justice in key cases to ensure accountability, good governance and sustainable development.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
7th Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to incorporate commitments to improve support and protection for human rights defenders into G7 statements on the promotion of "open societies".

The UK strongly supports human rights defenders worldwide. We know human rights defenders form an integral part of civil society, as representatives and key enablers of civic space. The G7 Foreign and Development Communique and the G7 Leaders' Open Societies Statement acknowledges the importance of human rights defenders in promoting human rights and fundamental freedoms. G7 members have committed to condemn the intimidation and harassment of, and violence against, journalists, many of whom act as defenders when reporting on human rights abuses. The G7 has also committed to support initiatives such as the Global Media Defence Fund, which supports projects that bolster journalists' legal protection and/or enhance media freedom through investigative journalism or strategic litigation.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
7th Jun 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to incorporate objectives on working with human rights defenders into (1) all "open societies", and (2) Human Rights Directorate, plans and strategies.

The FCDO puts human rights and their defenders at the heart of its work. We regularly assess how the UK can enhance our ability to assist human rights defenders to carry out their work safely and without fear, including in the context of the increased risks posed by the COVID-19 pandemic. In July 2019 we published a report titled 'UK Support for Human Rights Defenders', which publicly underlined the UK's commitment to protecting them. In the recent Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy, we said that one of our priority actions would be to defend universal human rights, including by working with local civil society and human rights defenders. As part of a wider review of departmental strategy, we are considering a range of options for how we should advance the human rights agenda globally, including our support for human rights defenders.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they plan to conclude the review of the evidence of the government of China's use of Uighur forced labour in Xinjiang; whether they plan to designate identifiable officials of that government as pursuant to the Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020; and if so, when.

On 6 July, the UK Government established the Global Human Rights sanctions regime. The Government's position remains that it is not appropriate to speculate about who may be designated under the Global Human Rights sanctions regime, as to do so could reduce the impact of the designations. We will keep all evidence and potential listings under close review. We remain deeply concerned that Uyghurs are being placed into forced labour programmes following "graduation" from internment camps, and others are detained for not participating in such programmes. We continue to raise these concerns, including most recently in a joint statement on Xinjiang with 38 other countries at the UN Third Committee in October.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
17th Dec 2020
To ask Her Majesty's Government when they plan to review the evidence of the government of China's non-compliance with international human rights law and respect for human rights in Hong Kong; whether they plan to designate identifiable officials of that government as pursuant to the Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations 2020; and if so, when.

As a co-signatory to the Joint Declaration, we have a duty to speak out when we have concerns. The UK has raised our deep concerns with China on a number of occasions and been clear with them that they should reconsider their actions. In light of our concerns we have taken three decisive actions in relation to the erosion of rights, freedoms and autonomy in Hong Kong - specifically in response to the National Security Law. This has included: a new immigration path for British Nationals (Overseas); suspending our extradition treaty with Hong Kong; and extending our arms embargo on mainland China to HK.

We will continue to consider designations under the Global Human Rights Sanctions Regulations. It is not appropriate to speculate who may be designated under the sanctions regime in the future. To do this could reduce the impact of the designations. We continue to bring together our international partners to stand up for the people of Hong Kong, to call out the violation of their freedoms, and to hold China to their international obligations.

Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon
Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
12th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many applications have been made for licences to permit legal advice to be given to sanctioned (1) individuals, or (2) entities, since Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February; and how many of those applications have been (a) granted, (b) refused, and (c) not yet dealt with.

The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) in HM Treasury is responsible for financial sanctions enforcement. OFSI may issue a licence to enable the payment of reasonable fees and/or expenses for the provision of legal services. Providing legal services to a designated person or entity subject to financial sanctions restrictions is not prohibited, a licence is only required to permit payment for these services.

OFSI aims to engage with the substance of licence applications within 4 weeks, however application times can vary where further information is required.

From June 2021 to June 2022 OFSI issued 29 licences for the payment of legal fees. OFSI is unable to provide all of the information requested as it does not collate information on legal expenses licence applications broken down by (a) legal advice and (b) legal representation, or by the involvement of sanctioned (1) individuals or (2) entities, or by the live status of the application, and it would involve disproportionate costs to gather.

The number of active staff in OFSI since Financial Year 2016-2017 can be found in the table below:

Financial Year

Total number of staff

2016-2017

27

2017-2018

30

2018-2019

36

2019-2020

38

2020-2021

40

In light of recent developments in Ukraine, the number of staff has since increased. Releasing further details of OFSI’s headcount by function could prejudice its operational effectiveness.

OFSI publishes an Annual Review containing information on the breakdown of legal expenses licences issued during the preceding financial year. The 2020/21 Annual Review can be found on gov.uk. Data for the 2021/22 financial year is expected to be published in the Autumn and this will include a further update of total OFSI headcount.

Baroness Penn
Minister on Leave (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State)
12th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many applications have been made for licences to permit payment for legal (1) advice, or (2) representation, since Russia invaded Ukraine on 24 February; and how many of those applications have been (a) granted, (b) refused, and (c) not yet dealt with.

The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) in HM Treasury is responsible for financial sanctions enforcement. OFSI may issue a licence to enable the payment of reasonable fees and/or expenses for the provision of legal services. Providing legal services to a designated person or entity subject to financial sanctions restrictions is not prohibited, a licence is only required to permit payment for these services.

OFSI aims to engage with the substance of licence applications within 4 weeks, however application times can vary where further information is required.

From June 2021 to June 2022 OFSI issued 29 licences for the payment of legal fees. OFSI is unable to provide all of the information requested as it does not collate information on legal expenses licence applications broken down by (a) legal advice and (b) legal representation, or by the involvement of sanctioned (1) individuals or (2) entities, or by the live status of the application, and it would involve disproportionate costs to gather.

The number of active staff in OFSI since Financial Year 2016-2017 can be found in the table below:

Financial Year

Total number of staff

2016-2017

27

2017-2018

30

2018-2019

36

2019-2020

38

2020-2021

40

In light of recent developments in Ukraine, the number of staff has since increased. Releasing further details of OFSI’s headcount by function could prejudice its operational effectiveness.

OFSI publishes an Annual Review containing information on the breakdown of legal expenses licences issued during the preceding financial year. The 2020/21 Annual Review can be found on gov.uk. Data for the 2021/22 financial year is expected to be published in the Autumn and this will include a further update of total OFSI headcount.

Baroness Penn
Minister on Leave (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State)
12th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what is the median time taken to determine licence applications to permit payment for legal (1) advice, or (2) representation.

The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) in HM Treasury is responsible for financial sanctions enforcement. OFSI may issue a licence to enable the payment of reasonable fees and/or expenses for the provision of legal services. Providing legal services to a designated person or entity subject to financial sanctions restrictions is not prohibited, a licence is only required to permit payment for these services.

OFSI aims to engage with the substance of licence applications within 4 weeks, however application times can vary where further information is required.

From June 2021 to June 2022 OFSI issued 29 licences for the payment of legal fees. OFSI is unable to provide all of the information requested as it does not collate information on legal expenses licence applications broken down by (a) legal advice and (b) legal representation, or by the involvement of sanctioned (1) individuals or (2) entities, or by the live status of the application, and it would involve disproportionate costs to gather.

The number of active staff in OFSI since Financial Year 2016-2017 can be found in the table below:

Financial Year

Total number of staff

2016-2017

27

2017-2018

30

2018-2019

36

2019-2020

38

2020-2021

40

In light of recent developments in Ukraine, the number of staff has since increased. Releasing further details of OFSI’s headcount by function could prejudice its operational effectiveness.

OFSI publishes an Annual Review containing information on the breakdown of legal expenses licences issued during the preceding financial year. The 2020/21 Annual Review can be found on gov.uk. Data for the 2021/22 financial year is expected to be published in the Autumn and this will include a further update of total OFSI headcount.

Baroness Penn
Minister on Leave (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State)
12th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many applications for licences to permit payment for legal (1) advice, or (2) representation, have been made by (a) barristers, or (b) solicitors.

The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) in HM Treasury is responsible for financial sanctions enforcement. OFSI may issue a licence to enable the payment of reasonable fees and/or expenses for the provision of legal services. Providing legal services to a designated person or entity subject to financial sanctions restrictions is not prohibited, a licence is only required to permit payment for these services.

OFSI aims to engage with the substance of licence applications within 4 weeks, however application times can vary where further information is required.

From June 2021 to June 2022 OFSI issued 29 licences for the payment of legal fees. OFSI is unable to provide all of the information requested as it does not collate information on legal expenses licence applications broken down by (a) legal advice and (b) legal representation, or by the involvement of sanctioned (1) individuals or (2) entities, or by the live status of the application, and it would involve disproportionate costs to gather.

The number of active staff in OFSI since Financial Year 2016-2017 can be found in the table below:

Financial Year

Total number of staff

2016-2017

27

2017-2018

30

2018-2019

36

2019-2020

38

2020-2021

40

In light of recent developments in Ukraine, the number of staff has since increased. Releasing further details of OFSI’s headcount by function could prejudice its operational effectiveness.

OFSI publishes an Annual Review containing information on the breakdown of legal expenses licences issued during the preceding financial year. The 2020/21 Annual Review can be found on gov.uk. Data for the 2021/22 financial year is expected to be published in the Autumn and this will include a further update of total OFSI headcount.

Baroness Penn
Minister on Leave (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State)
12th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people are employed to deal with applications for licences to permit payment for legal (1) advice, or (2) representation.

The Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation (OFSI) in HM Treasury is responsible for financial sanctions enforcement. OFSI may issue a licence to enable the payment of reasonable fees and/or expenses for the provision of legal services. Providing legal services to a designated person or entity subject to financial sanctions restrictions is not prohibited, a licence is only required to permit payment for these services.

OFSI aims to engage with the substance of licence applications within 4 weeks, however application times can vary where further information is required.

From June 2021 to June 2022 OFSI issued 29 licences for the payment of legal fees. OFSI is unable to provide all of the information requested as it does not collate information on legal expenses licence applications broken down by (a) legal advice and (b) legal representation, or by the involvement of sanctioned (1) individuals or (2) entities, or by the live status of the application, and it would involve disproportionate costs to gather.

The number of active staff in OFSI since Financial Year 2016-2017 can be found in the table below:

Financial Year

Total number of staff

2016-2017

27

2017-2018

30

2018-2019

36

2019-2020

38

2020-2021

40

In light of recent developments in Ukraine, the number of staff has since increased. Releasing further details of OFSI’s headcount by function could prejudice its operational effectiveness.

OFSI publishes an Annual Review containing information on the breakdown of legal expenses licences issued during the preceding financial year. The 2020/21 Annual Review can be found on gov.uk. Data for the 2021/22 financial year is expected to be published in the Autumn and this will include a further update of total OFSI headcount.

Baroness Penn
Minister on Leave (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State)
18th Apr 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government when they will publish the guidance relating to failure to prevent fraud offences, as required under section 204 of the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023.

The government is currently working on the guidance for the new offence. We hope to publish it in early summer. The offence will then come into effect after an implementation period of 6 months is complete.

The offence is similar to the existing offence of failure to prevent bribery and failure to prevent facilitation of tax evasion, both of which have had success in changing business culture.

It will drive a culture change towards improved fraud prevention procedures in organisations and hold them to account if they profit from fraud by their employees, agents or other persons providing services on their behalf.

Lord Sharpe of Epsom
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)
10th Jan 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government how many (1) male, and (2) female, prisoners who were aged 25 years or younger at the time of sentencing, were serving a life sentence in custody with a tariff of 15 years or more, split by ethnic group, in each year since 2021; and of these how many were (a) unreleased, or (b) recalled.

The information requested in PQ HL1418 can be found in the attached table.

The information requested in PQ HL1419 is set out as follows:

The average (mean) tariff for murderers (excluding whole life cases) sentenced in 2022 is 257 months and 2023 is 264 months. Tariff information for 2023 is a subset of data published on 25 January 2024. It is subject to change – please see information under Data sources and quality.

Year of Sentence

Mean Tariff (months)

2022

257

2023*

270

Data sources and quality

Note that the minimum term is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date. The numbers are subject to revision as more data become available; any changes in the numbers since the last publication of this information is as a result of more sentencing data becoming available.

The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

The figures are rounded to the nearest whole number.

*2023 has some missing tariff information. This PQ response gives provisional information and is subject to change as more tariff information comes in.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
10th Jan 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government what the average tariff length in months for murder was in (1) 2022, and (2) 2023.

The information requested in PQ HL1418 can be found in the attached table.

The information requested in PQ HL1419 is set out as follows:

The average (mean) tariff for murderers (excluding whole life cases) sentenced in 2022 is 257 months and 2023 is 264 months. Tariff information for 2023 is a subset of data published on 25 January 2024. It is subject to change – please see information under Data sources and quality.

Year of Sentence

Mean Tariff (months)

2022

257

2023*

270

Data sources and quality

Note that the minimum term is the time between date of sentence and tariff expiry date. The numbers are subject to revision as more data become available; any changes in the numbers since the last publication of this information is as a result of more sentencing data becoming available.

The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.

The figures are rounded to the nearest whole number.

*2023 has some missing tariff information. This PQ response gives provisional information and is subject to change as more tariff information comes in.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
10th Jan 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government how many, and what proportion of, prisons holding young adults are (1) using the HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) maturity screening tool, and (2) using the HMPPS Choices and Changes resource pack.

The number of prisons screening for maturity continues to increase. As of December 2023, 88 out of 108 prisons (81 per cent) reported that they were screening for maturity. Screening was conducted using either the screening tool, or the Offender Management System (OASys), or a combination of both. 13 sites were using the screening tool alone.

67 prisons (62 per cent) reported using the Choices and Changes resource pack. Further work is in progress to support establishments to develop their delivery of the resource pack.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
10th Jan 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government how many prisoners serving (1) determinate, and (2) indeterminate, sentences have been granted compassionate release from prison on the grounds of ill-health in each year since 2019.

The number of prisoners granted compassionate release under the Early Release on Compassionate Grounds policy is as follows:

Year

Indeterminate releases

Determinate releases

2019

1

10

2020

2

11

2021

2

9

2022

0

1

2023 (to end June)

0

1

  1. Please note that the data for 2023 is up to and including June 2023 as data from July 2023 are a subset of data which are due for future publication as part of Offender Management Statistics Quarterly.
  2. The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
10th Jan 2024
To ask His Majesty's Government how many people currently in prison aged 80 or older are serving a sentence they originally received when aged (1) 15 to 17, (2) 18 to 20, (3) 21 to 24, (4) 25 to 29, (5) 30 to 39, (6) 40 to 49, (7) 50 to 59, (8) 60 to 69, and (9) 70 and older.

The data requested are in the attached tables.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
19th May 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government whether any Local Criminal Justice Boards have achieved the recommendation in the National Guidance for Local Criminal Justice Boards that they meet at least quarterly, for the past year for which information is available; and if so, which boards met this target.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold this information. Local Criminal Justice Boards are voluntary partnerships and are not governed by statute and are not an executive body. We do not therefore keep a record of meeting dates.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
19th May 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government what was the date of the last two meetings of each Local Criminal Justice Board.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold this information. Local Criminal Justice Boards are voluntary partnerships and are not governed by statute and are not an executive body. We do not therefore keep a record of meeting dates.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
19th May 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government when the last Criminal Justice Board meeting took place; and when the next one will take place.

The Criminal Justice Board last met on 12 July 2021. We are looking to hold the next meeting later this year.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
19th May 2023
To ask His Majesty's Government how many Local Criminal Justice Boards there are in (1) England, and (2) Wales.

There are 41 Local Criminal Justice Boards (LCJBs) in total, 37 in England and 4 in Wales.

Information on the running and membership of LCJBs can be found in the National Guidance at: National Guidance for Local Criminal Justice Boards (publishing.service.gov.uk).

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
11th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people received an extended determinate sentence with a custodial period of 10 years or more in each year since 2012; and of those, how many were aged (1) under 18, (2) 18 to 20, (3) 21 to 24, (4) 25 to 29, (5) 30 to 34, (6) 35 to 39, (7) 40 to 49, (8) 50 to 59, (9) 60 to 69, and (10) 70 or over, at the time of sentencing.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021, available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017. Where data is provided for 2012 to 2017, the 25 + age range is aggregated.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
8th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people were serving a determinate sentence of 20 years or more in each year since 2012; and of those, how many were aged (1) under 18, (2) 18 to 20, (3) 21 to 24, (4) 25 to 29, (5) 30 to 34, (6) 35 to 39, (7) 40 to 49, (8) 50 to 59, (9) 60 to 69, and (10) 70 or over.

Responses are collated from two different data sources. Please refer to the footnotes of the tables to understand the differences.

HL1598 and HL1599:

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021 available, in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables. Please note that court data records length as the custodial period specified in the sentence.

HL1594 and HL1595:

Requested information can be found in the attached data tables.

The sentence length information is the Judicially Imposed Sentence Length (JISL) which reflects the custodial period plus time to be served on post-release Probation supervision.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
8th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people were serving a determinate sentence of 20 years or more in each year since 2012, broken down by ethnicity.

Responses are collated from two different data sources. Please refer to the footnotes of the tables to understand the differences.

HL1598 and HL1599:

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021 available, in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables. Please note that court data records length as the custodial period specified in the sentence.

HL1594 and HL1595:

Requested information can be found in the attached data tables.

The sentence length information is the Judicially Imposed Sentence Length (JISL) which reflects the custodial period plus time to be served on post-release Probation supervision.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
8th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people aged 70 to 79 received a determinate custodial sentence of 20 years or more in each year since 2012.

Responses are collated from two different data sources. Please refer to the footnotes of the tables to understand the differences.

HL1598 and HL1599:

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021 available, in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables. Please note that court data records length as the custodial period specified in the sentence.

HL1594 and HL1595:

Requested information can be found in the attached data tables.

The sentence length information is the Judicially Imposed Sentence Length (JISL) which reflects the custodial period plus time to be served on post-release Probation supervision.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
8th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people aged 80 or over received a determinate custodial sentence of (1) 10 years to less than 15 years, (2) 15 years to less than 20 years, and (3) 20 years or more, in each year since 2012.

Responses are collated from two different data sources. Please refer to the footnotes of the tables to understand the differences.

HL1598 and HL1599:

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021 available, in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables. Please note that court data records length as the custodial period specified in the sentence.

HL1594 and HL1595:

Requested information can be found in the attached data tables.

The sentence length information is the Judicially Imposed Sentence Length (JISL) which reflects the custodial period plus time to be served on post-release Probation supervision.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
8th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people aged 60 to 69 received an extended determinate sentence with a custodial period of 20 years or more in each year since 2012.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021, available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017. Where data is provided for 2012 to 2017, the 25 + age range is aggregated.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
8th Jul 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many people aged 70 or over received an extended determinate sentence with a custodial period of 10 years or more in each year since 2012.

The Ministry of Justice publishes information on detailed sentence and custodial sentence length, in England and Wales, for the years 2017 to 2021, available in the Outcomes by Offence data tool (MS Excel Spreadsheet, 21 MB).

In this dataset, the age range for offenders 25 and over was not broken down further prior to 2017 – please refer to note 5 in the tables. Further breakdowns by age range are therefore not available before 2017. Where data is provided for 2012 to 2017, the 25 + age range is aggregated.

The data requested is provided in the attached tables.

Lord Bellamy
Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
5th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they conducted (1) an equality impact assessment, and (2) a safety impact assessment, for the proposed measures contained in the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March.

The Government did not produce a formal Equalities Statement or an Impact Assessment prior to publishing the Root and Branch Review but a detailed assessment of the equalities and other potential impacts of the proposals will be carried out as we develop the legislation that will be needed to implement the measures. An Equalities Statement and a full Impact Assessment will be prepared for publication when the legislation is introduced.

We consider that the proposed measures in the Root and Branch Review will not have significant equalities or safety impacts. The majority of prisoners going through the parole process will not be affected by the main proposals which are targeted at the top tier of the most serious cases. We consider those measures to be proportionate and justified by the need to enhance public protection when it comes to those who have committed the most serious offences and present the highest risk.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
5th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the proposals in the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March, are compatible with (1) the requirements of the Human Rights Act 1998, and (2) the UK's obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights; whether they have produced an assessment of the compatibility of that review with the provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998; and if so, what plans they have to publish a copy of that assessment.

The government considers that the proposals set out in the Root and Branch Review are compatible with the Human Rights Act and the UK’s obligations under the European Convention of Human Rights. The Government does not consider that it is required to produce an assessment of compatibility of its proposals in the review, as the Government's position is not to disclose the legal advice it receives. When the provisions of any Bill are brought forward to implement the proposals, the Government will comply with its obligations under section 19 of the Human Rights Act 1998.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
5th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government (1) what qualifications will be required, and (2) what the recruitment process will be, for independent panel members sitting alongside the Secretary of State in “top tier” parole cases, following their proposal in the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March.

The concept of top-tier parole cases being determined by independent panel members sitting alongside the Secretary of State is one of two options described in the Root and Branch Review for the future management of such cases. The alternative option is that following a Parole Board decision to release a top-tier case, the Secretary of State would have the power to review and refuse the decision on the basis that he does not agree with the Parole Board that the statutory release test is met – and that would be subject to an appeal to the Upper Tribunal.

We are not yet in a position to announce which of the two options the government will seek to include in the legislation that will be required to implement the parole reforms proposed in the Review. Further detail on how the preferred option will operate will be developed ahead of the introduction of the legislation and announced in due course.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
5th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many prisoners were refused (1) release, and (2) transfer to open conditions, due to being unable to complete programmes or other work identified by (a) Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service, or (b) the Parole Board, as necessary to assess or reduce risk, in each of the past five years.

The independent Parole Board take a holistic approach when assessing a prisoner’s risk for the purposes of considering whether to direct the prisoner’s release or recommend the prisoner’s transfer to open conditions. Where a prisoner has not completed a programme or other work specified in their sentence plan by the time of their next parole review, that does not constitute an insurmountable barrier to release or progression.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
5th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how membership of the Parole Oversight Group will be determined; and what plans they have to publish papers and minutes of the group’s activities and decision making.

The Parole Oversight Group will bring together senior representatives of all parts of the parole system to ensure that it functions effectively and to identify any potential further improvements. Terms of Reference for the group, including how it will be constituted, will be drafted and agreed as part of wider plans to implement the findings of the Root and Branch Review. When doing so, we will consider the appropriateness of the Group’s activities and decision-making being made publicly available.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
5th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many prisoners submitted evidence to inform "Chapter Five - prisoners' experience of the parole system" in their Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March.

No individual prisoners submitted evidence to the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System. The Review was concerned with the operation of the parole system as a whole and sought evidence and views from representatives who have broad first-hand knowledge and expertise in prisoners’ experience of the parole process. This included HMPPS practitioners, prominent charities and legal representatives who work directly with prisoners going through the process. That evidence was used to identify the main issues for prisoners and how the system could be improved.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
4th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government on how many occasions has a further serious offence been committed by a “top tier” offender, as described in their Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March, following a release decision in each of the past five years.

Table 1: Shows the number of ‘top tier’ offenders released by the Parole Board between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2020 and supervised by probation providers in England and Wales, who were subsequently convicted of an SFO.

Year of Release by the Parole Board

Index Offence Group

2015/16

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

2019/20

Total

1. Murder

2

3

2

1

0

8

2. Rape

3

1

2

3

0

9

3. Terrorism

0

0

0

0

0

0

4. Allowing or causing the death of a child

0

0

0

0

0

0

Total

5

4

4

4

0

17

Table notes:

1. These conviction figures are provisional and subject to change as outstanding cases are completed.

2. Figures only include convictions for serious further offences that have been notified to the national SFO Team, HMPPS.

3. Figures include cases where the offender committed suicide or died prior to any trial, where the judicial process concluded that they were responsible.

4. Data Sources and Quality. The data have come from administrative IT systems which, as with some large-scale recording systems, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing and may be amended as part of data cleansing or updates.

5. Figures are based on conviction data that was produced in September 2021.

6. Data is presented by year of release by the Parole Board and not by year of SFO conviction.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
4th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will provide (1) the (a) identity, and (b) qualifications, of officials who will determine which parole cases the Secretary of State decides personally, and (2) the criteria they will use, following their proposal in the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March.

The Root and Branch Review of the parole system announced that the government proposes to introduce an additional layer of Ministerial oversight, based on a precautionary approach to public protection, when the top-tier of parole eligible offenders are being considered for release.

There are two circumstances where this Ministerial power to review cases could apply. First, where the Parole Board cannot confidently conclude that the release test has been met and decide to refer the case to the Secretary of State, all such cases will be referred to Ministers to review and make a decision about release.

Secondly, where the Parole Board directs the release of a top-tier offender, there would be a power for Ministers to review the case and refuse release if they consider the release test had not been satisfied. In these circumstances, HMPPS officials with relevant knowledge and skills, will on behalf of the Secretary of State, examine each decision in scope of the power to assess whether the particular characteristics require the case to be referred to Ministers.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
4th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what evidence they have used to conclude that there is increased public concern about the operation of the parole system in their Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March; and what wording they intend should replace the current release test, following their proposal in that review.

Public concern surrounding the operation of the Parole system has been evidenced by reactions to a number of decisions by the Parole Board in recent years – including the decision in 2021 to release Colin Pitchfork and his subsequent recall to prison shortly afterwards – and these decisions have damaged confidence in the Parole system. The government considers that, where very serious and high-risk offenders are being assessed for release, it is necessary to introduce further scrutiny and safeguards in the decision-making process to make sure that such prisoners are not released if they continue to present a threat to the public.

With regard to the statutory release test, our intention is not to replace the current test, but instead to clarify what is meant by “necessary for the protection of the public”, with a greater emphasis on being satisfied that the public would not be put at risk. In addition, a list of criteria the Board is required to take into account will be included in the release test; that proposed list was set out in the Root and Branch Review.

The Root and Branch Review is attached.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
4th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government which (1) professions, and (2) professional backgrounds, they consider to qualify as "law enforcement", following their proposal in the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March.

The Root and Branch Review proposes to increase the number of Parole Board members who have experience in ‘law enforcement’, and mandate that members with this experience sit on panels who review offenders in the ‘top-tier’ of cases. The scope of what is meant by "law enforcement" will encompass those from a police background but is also likely to include those who have worked in other law enforcement agencies.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
4th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many absconds have taken place from open prisons by people who were eligible for parole at the time, in each of the past five years.

Absconds from prison have more than halved since 2010 and are extremely rare. All open prisons now have local Abscond Reduction Strategies in place to ensure that the risk of abscond is minimised and to share good practice around the Open Prison Estate.

Open prisons hold only prisoners who have been formally assessed as being suitable to hold in conditions of lower security. Following a decision by the Deputy Prime Minister last year, when it comes to the Parole Board recommending that indeterminate sentence prisoners be transferred to open conditions, there will now be greater Ministerial scrutiny.

Public protection is our top priority. When a prisoner absconds, the Police are immediately notified and are responsible for locating the offender. The majority of absconders are quickly recaptured and returned to custody.

This table shows the number of absconds for prisoners who were eligible for parole at the time they absconded.

Financial year

Number of absconds

2016-17

40

2017-18

34

2018-19

43

2019-20

32

2020-21

32

Data has been drawn from large-scale IT systems and as with all such systems, is subject to errors with data entry and processing.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
4th Apr 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what estimate they have made of the number of cases that will fall into the “top tier” of highest risk offenders in each year, following their proposal in the Root and Branch Review of the Parole System, published on 30 March.

Alongside the Root and Branch Review, the government published historic release data for the top-tier cohort of parole cases. This can be found in the accompanying attachment.

The data shows the number of parole reviews completed for top-tier cases since 2016/17 broken down by offence type and how many of the completed reviews resulted in a release decision. This can be summarised as follows:

Year

2016/17

2017/18

2018/19

2019/20

2020/21

Total completed reviews (top-tier cohort)

2,014

2,043

1,851

1,777

1,975

Release decisions (top tier cohort)

640

710

606

598

699

Total completed reviews (all cases)

12,998

12,080

11,382

13,209

15,644

It is anticipated that release decisions in top-tier cases are the most likely cases to be caught by the new powers for ministerial oversight. The data illustrates that the new policies will apply to a small percentage of the Parole Board’s overall caseload.

Baroness Scott of Bybrook
Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities)
21st Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the average number of additional offending behaviour programmes that prisoners subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences in England and Wales were directed to complete (1) once the initial sentence plan was completed, and (2) post recall, in each year since 2017.

The requested information is not held centrally and could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.

21st Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress they have made to ensure that contracted sites are compliant with national strategies for management and progression of prisoners subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences, further to the Joint IPP Action Plan, published by Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service and the Parole Board in June 2019.

The IPP Action Plan is regularly reviewed to ensure that it is responsive to the needs of those serving IPP sentences, whether in prison or in the community. During the COVID-19 pandemic, and in accordance with measures mandated in the interests of public health, HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) implemented exceptional delivery models which inevitably had some impact on all operational work. A large number of IPP prisoners have been released each year since the IPP Action Plan first introduced in 2016, and the Plan will be refreshed, reviewed and republished after careful consideration of the forthcoming Justice Select Committee’s Report and recommendations.

A progression unit for prisoners serving IPP sentences with a conviction for a sexual offence has been open at HMP Littlehey for the last three years. The unit provides an environment where prisoners feel safe and receive support to focus on their progression. As with the other workstreams within the IPP action plan, HMPPS will review the progress of the unit this year, which will also take account of any relevant aspects of the report and recommendations of the Justice Select Committee.

HMPPS continue to engage with senior managers in prisons run under contract, to ensure that the IPP Action Plan initiatives are reflected in their delivery plans. For example, each contracted site has an IPP single point of contact for Psychology Services.

21st Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many prisoners in England and Wales subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences have (1) started, and (2) completed, accredited offending behaviour programmes in each year since 2017.

National data on all prisoner enrolments (starts) and completions in prison-delivered accredited Offending Behaviour Programmes (OBPs) are collected and published annually and published as part of the HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) Annual Digest, but this does not provide further break-down by sentence type.

The table attached provides the number of indeterminate sentenced prisoners serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence who enrolled on and completed accredited OBPs, in each financial year since 2017. Changes to accredited programme delivery were implemented in response to the threat of COVID-19, with programmes affected throughout 2020/21. This resulted in far fewer starts and completions compared with those in previous years. During the period covered the numbers serving an Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentence also fell.

Whilst the number of places available has decreased, IPP prisoners have remained a priority for spaces.

The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. HMPPS remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.

21st Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government how many prisoners subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences in England and Wales have been on a waiting list to begin an accredited offending behaviour programme in each year since 2017.

We do not hold data on the numbers of prisoners with sentences of Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) on a waiting list to begin an accredited offending behaviour programme (OBP) prior to late 2020. New data collection systems were established in response to the pandemic to aid future recovery planning for OBPs.

This table below shows the number of IPP prisoners waiting to commence an accredited general or sexual offending programme based on information gathered from prisons which run the courses. The information has been drawn from local records and, as with any large-scale reporting tool, may be subject to inaccuracies as well as subject to change.

The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. HM Prison and Probation Service remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.

Date

Total

Total December 2020

116

Total April 2021

161

Total August 2021

158

Total October 2021

103

Total December 2021

113

Total February 2022

109

21st Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what was the average number of accredited offending behaviour programmes completed by prisoners subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences in England and Wales before being (1) transferred to open conditions, and (2) released, in each year since 2017.

National data on all prisoner enrolments (starts) and completions in prison-delivered accredited offending behaviour programmes (OBPs) are collected and published annually and published as part of HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) Annual Digest, but this does not provide further break-down by progression through the estate or by sentence type.

The table attached provides the average number of accredited offending behaviour programmes completed by prisoners subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences prior to being transferred to open conditions, and ahead of release, in each financial year since 2017. No transfers to open conditions in 2020/21 involved individuals who had completed an accredited programme, hence no number is recorded.

The Government’s primary responsibility is to protect the public. Accredited programmes aim to protect the public and reduce reoffending and are part of a range of rehabilitation and risk reduction opportunities available. HMPPS remains committed to supporting the progression of those serving IPP sentences in custody, so that the Parole Board may direct their release, or as the case may be, re-release, as soon as it is safe to do so.

21st Mar 2022
To ask Her Majesty's Government what progress they have made in establishing a progression unit for prisoners subject to Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences with a sexual offence, further to the Joint IPP Action Plan published by Her Majesty's Prison and Probation Service and the Parole Board in June 2019.

The IPP Action Plan is regularly reviewed to ensure that it is responsive to the needs of those serving IPP sentences, whether in prison or in the community. During the COVID-19 pandemic, and in accordance with measures mandated in the interests of public health, HM Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) implemented exceptional delivery models which inevitably had some impact on all operational work. A large number of IPP prisoners have been released each year since the IPP Action Plan first introduced in 2016, and the Plan will be refreshed, reviewed and republished after careful consideration of the forthcoming Justice Select Committee’s Report and recommendations.

A progression unit for prisoners serving IPP sentences with a conviction for a sexual offence has been open at HMP Littlehey for the last three years. The unit provides an environment where prisoners feel safe and receive support to focus on their progression. As with the other workstreams within the IPP action plan, HMPPS will review the progress of the unit this year, which will also take account of any relevant aspects of the report and recommendations of the Justice Select Committee.

HMPPS continue to engage with senior managers in prisons run under contract, to ensure that the IPP Action Plan initiatives are reflected in their delivery plans. For example, each contracted site has an IPP single point of contact for Psychology Services.

20th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the findings of the Ministry of Justice’s review of the Constitutional Reform Act will be published for public consultation; and if so, when.

The Government is considering what improvements can be made to the settlement left by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. Our constitution is always evolving, and it is entirely proper, sixteen years on from the Act, to examine that settlement in the round and to take stock of subsequent debate and of continuing interest in both Houses.

The Lord Chancellor has said that he places great importance on taking an open and consultative approach to any proposals for reform, and the Government will make its plans known in due course.

20th Jul 2021
To ask Her Majesty's Government whether the Ministry of Justice's review of the Constitutional Reform Act is considering giving ministers greater influence over senior judicial appointments.

The Government is considering what improvements can be made to the settlement left by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005. Our constitution is always evolving, and it is entirely proper, sixteen years on from the Act, to examine that settlement in the round and to take stock of subsequent debate and of continuing interest in both Houses.

The Lord Chancellor has said that he places great importance on taking an open and consultative approach to any proposals for reform, and the Government will make its plans known in due course.