Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the risks to public safety arising from the early release of prisoners, including registered sex offenders, under the current early release scheme.
Answered by Lord Lemos - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe. Without the changes this Government made, courts would have had to halt trials and the police cancel arrests, undermining public safety.
Whilst measures like the SDS40 change provided the intended medium-term relief to the system, this was only ever a temporary change as a bridge to a more sustainable solution. That is why the Sentencing Act has been passed, to deliver a more sustainable solution to the prison capacity crisis we inherited.
Following a review, the Prime Minister and Lord Chanceller have decided that rape and certain child sex offences will be excluded from the progression model and these sentences will retain their current release points. This is in addition to the 18,000 offenders who are already ineligible for earlier release under the model given they have either been found by a court to be the most dangerous or are serving a life sentence.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the appropriateness of current sentences for sexual offences.
Answered by Lord Lemos - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for the independent judiciary. They must sentence within the legislative framework set by Parliament, and in line with the relevant Sentencing Council guidelines, unless not in the interest of justice to do so.
The Sexual Offences Act 2003 establishes a comprehensive framework of serious offences with robust maximum penalties. These penalties reflect the gravity with which such offending is treated.
The Government keeps criminal offences and the associated penalties under review to ensure that the legislative framework remains effective, proportionate and responsive to the seriousness of offending. The legislation has recently been further strengthened through the creation of specific sexual offences against children under 16, which carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. This demonstrates the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the law provides the highest level of protection for children and reflects the seriousness of these crimes.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the effectiveness of custodial sentences under 12 months.
Answered by Lord Lemos - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The evidence shows that those given a community order or suspended sentence reoffend less than similar offenders given a short prison sentence. Short prison sentences can exacerbate issues with employment, housing, and maintaining family ties, without allowing sufficient time to provide effective rehabilitative services.
In line with this evidence, and recommendations made by the Independent Sentencing Review, the Sentencing Act 2026 introduced a presumption for the courts to suspend sentences of immediate custody, of 12 months or less. The courts will always have the power to send offenders to prison where they have breached a court order, an individual is at significant risk of physical or psychological harm, or in exceptional circumstances.
Limiting the use of short sentences will help offenders to break the cycle of re-offending, reduce crime and lead to fewer victims and safer communities.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government when they intend to make further progress with the Courts and Tribunals Bill.
Answered by Lord Lemos - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government understands the pressure that is currently on the court system. The Crown Court backlog currently stands at over 80,000 cases and over 22,000 of those cases have been open for over a year. Behind each of those cases is someone awaiting justice – defendants seeking to clear their name and victims putting their lives on hold. The Crown Court caseload means that thousands of victims and witnesses are waiting years for their day in court. This cannot be acceptable. The justice system exists to serve the public, and this Government is committed to building a stronger justice system in which the public can have confidence.
The Courts and Tribunals Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and will have report stage in the House of Commons when parliamentary time allows.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask His Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of making refugee protections temporary subject to review every 30 months.
Answered by Lord Hanson of Flint - Minister of State (Home Office)
The 30-month review period for those granted protection reflects the Government’s view that protection should be provided for as long as it is needed. As conditions in countries of origin can change over time, it is appropriate to review whether an individual continues to require international protection before further permission is granted.
Individuals with an ongoing protection need will have their status renewed, while those who no longer require protection will be expected to leave the UK unless they qualify for leave on another basis. Safe return reviews have long been a feature of the UK's protection system. Protection needs can change over time, and it is therefore right that an individual's circumstances are reviewed before further leave or settlement is granted. The Government remains committed to providing protection to those who need it, in line with the UK's international obligations.
Settlement for those granted protection has never been automatic. Individuals have always needed to meet the requirements in place at the point they become eligible to apply, including demonstrating that they continue to require protection where relevant. The principle that protection should be provided for as long as it is needed, and reviewed where circumstances change, is a longstanding feature of the UK's protection system.
In addition, in future those on core protection will be able to switch to the protection work and study route, which will provide greater certainty about their future in the UK. This will also allow them to earn down the time it takes to obtain settlement and open up refugee family reunion rights. Individuals who switch to this route will no longer be subject to safe return reviews, recognising their contribution through work or study.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what regulatory action has been taken following the closure of the WellBN practice in Brighton; and what assessment they have made of whether other primary care providers are prescribing gender-related medication outside national clinical policy.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
As an outcome of an Independent Patient Safety Investigation by the National Health Service, the WellBN Practice in Brighton has stopped prescribing hormone medications to children under 18 years old for gender dysphoria, outside of NHS clinical commissioning policy.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) suspended WellBN’s ‘Good’ rating while concerns with the practice were investigated further. Suspension of ratings does not mean closure of the practice or suspension of the service’s registration with the CQC.
As part of their ongoing inspection, the CQC is also reviewing historical information relating to prescribing practices at the service. This may involve the use of the CQC’s legal powers to investigate incidents where individuals may have experienced harm or been put at risk of harm within health and social care services in England.
Additionally, a number of former and current clinicians at WellBN have been referred for the purpose of further professional investigation, both through their independent professional regulator and/or through the NHS professional standards mechanism.
The NHS has analysed prescribing data relating to hormone treatments given to children under 18 years old among general practices across England and it found that the WellBN Practice was a clear outlier.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what safeguarding requirements apply to adult gender dysphoria clinics when patients present with a history of childhood trauma, abuse or serious mental illness.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Safeguarding is firmly embedded within the core duties and statutory responsibilities of all organisations that provide National Health Services. The organisations that manage adult gender dysphoria clinics will have reference to NHS England's Safeguarding Accountability and Assurance Framework, 5th edition, published 2026, that sets out the safeguarding roles and responsibilities for NHS-commissioned providers and sets out the legal framework for safeguarding adults.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government what guidance has been issued to safeguarding leads in local authorities regarding parental disagreement with a child's or young adult's wish to undergo social or medical transition.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
No such guidance has been issued.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether they intend to set out a policy on the suitability of accommodating biological males in the women’s prison estate.
Answered by Lord Lemos - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The policy inherited by this Government is that no transgender woman charged with or convicted of a sexual or violent offence, or who retains birth genitalia, can be held in the general women’s estate, other than in exceptional circumstances and where granted an exemption by a minister. No such exemptions have been granted under this Government.
We are currently reviewing transgender prisoner allocation policy in light of the recently updated EHRC Code of Practice for Services, Public Functions and Associations, and will be able to say more on this shortly.
Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many patients of adult gender dysphoria clinics are simultaneously receiving prescriptions from private or overseas online providers; and what mechanisms exist to identify such patients.
Answered by Baroness Merron - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Neither the Department nor NHS England hold this information.