Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what discussions his Department has had with the 18 local authorities which did not return data for the Statutory Homelessness Detailed Local Authority Data 2024-25 dataset on the reasons for not doing so.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
Local authorities are bound by the conditions of the Homelessness, Rough Sleeping and Domestic Abuse Grant to submit all Homelessness Case Level Information Collection (H-CLIC) returns for each financial year. You can find the grant conditions on gov.uk here.
MHCLG tracks and monitors H-CLIC submissions quarterly and escalates concerns where there has been data missing or unpublishable data for consecutive and/or multiple quarters. The H-CLIC submission is a statutory requirement and forms part of the Single Data List, which sets out the datasets local authorities are required to submit to central government. As set out in the grant conditions of the HomelesR, there are financial penalties for local authorities that fail to comply with the requirement to submit H-CLIC data. Where there are rare, exceptional circumstances which affect local authorities’ ability to meet this condition and they are taking steps to rectify gaps in reporting adherence, MHCLG may at its discretion agree to waive the financial deduction.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what steps his Department is taking to ensure compliance with statutory homelessness data returns.
Answered by Alison McGovern - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
Local authorities are bound by the conditions of the Homelessness, Rough Sleeping and Domestic Abuse Grant to submit all Homelessness Case Level Information Collection (H-CLIC) returns for each financial year. You can find the grant conditions on gov.uk here.
MHCLG tracks and monitors H-CLIC submissions quarterly and escalates concerns where there has been data missing or unpublishable data for consecutive and/or multiple quarters. The H-CLIC submission is a statutory requirement and forms part of the Single Data List, which sets out the datasets local authorities are required to submit to central government. As set out in the grant conditions of the HomelesR, there are financial penalties for local authorities that fail to comply with the requirement to submit H-CLIC data. Where there are rare, exceptional circumstances which affect local authorities’ ability to meet this condition and they are taking steps to rectify gaps in reporting adherence, MHCLG may at its discretion agree to waive the financial deduction.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people are awaiting completion of security and vetting checks before commencing employment within His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The number of individuals currently awaiting completion of security and vetting checks prior to commencing employment within His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) was 14,694 as of 18 May 2026.
This figure reflects the full onboarding pipeline, covering candidates from the point at which they receive a provisional offer and enter pre-employment checks, through to the completion of all security and vetting processes and a final decision being made on their case. It therefore includes individuals at different stages of the process, not solely those awaiting a decision at a single point in time.
The Ministry of Justice does not centrally hold sufficiently robust or complete data to accurately report on the length of time individuals have been awaiting security and vetting clearance across all stages or providers. Vetting and pre-employment checks are undertaken through a combination of HMPPS, Shared Services Limited (SSL), and other parallel processes. As a result, a consolidated and reliable breakdown of waiting times, such as those exceeding three, six, or twelve months, is not available, and therefore unable to be provided.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the statistical analysis of prison leavers in England entitled Prison leavers in substance misuse treatment: 4-week outcomes – report, published 23 April 2026.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department of Health and Social Care’s analytical report on Prison Leavers in Substance Misuse Treatment: 4-week outcomes provides valuable data on the early outcomes of prison leavers receiving substance misuse treatment, including mortality and reincarceration rates, and differences in treatment engagement for different cohorts. We recognise that the first few weeks after release are high-risk for relapse, overdose and reoffending, and we are determined to ensure prison leavers have a smooth transition into the community, with swift access to care and treatment.
In England, improving health outcomes for people in prison and on probation is a shared priority across the Ministry of Justice, Department of Health and Social Care and NHS England. We have recruited over 50 Health and Justice Partnership Coordinators to strengthen links between prison, probation and treatment providers. We are improving information sharing between treatment providers and probation and enabling virtual pre-release appointments with community treatment providers via secure laptops. NHS England’s RECONNECT service also supports prison leavers with identified health needs to engage with the right health services in the community through referrals and peer support.
The report indicates that people in prison for shorter periods were less likely to be in treatment. This aligns with the rationale for key provisions within the Sentencing Act 2026, including the introduction of a presumption for the courts to suspend short sentences of 12 months or less. Around 60% of adults sentenced for under a year reoffend within 12 months. This is unacceptably high for victims and the public. The evidence shows that those given a community order or suspended sentence reoffend less than similar offenders given a short prison sentence.
We have also made changes to fixed term recall. The Independent Sentencing Review found the previous shorter 14 and 28 day fixed-term recalls did not provide enough time for offenders to address their criminal behaviour. 56 days provides more time to undertake a risk assessment and a thorough review of risk management plans to ensure offenders can be safely managed in the community.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps is the Minister taking to improve the speed of security and vetting checks for prison service applicants.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The checks that HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) undertake are required to assess individuals against a range of legislative requirements and security related factors that are pertinent to anyone working within a HMPPS environment. We are aware of an increase in onboarding timescales and are taking action to address this.
Both our third-party provider Sopra Steria Ltd (SSL) and HMPPS are employing flexible resource allocation and overtime to mitigate delays. Recruitment to the vetting team has also been prioritised, and the additional resource is now helping to reduce the backlog of cases awaiting clearance. HMPPS is working with SSL and providers to improve assessment of future recruitment activity, to ensure any spikes or increases can be managed appropriately.
Additionally, HMPPS is exploring all available opportunities for efficiencies, including by digitalising processes that were previously manual and conducting vetting checks in parallel with other parts of the onboarding process wherever possible.
We are taking all available opportunities to improve the timeliness of our vetting and onboarding process without compromising the safety and security of the organisation.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of delays in security and vetting processes on staffing levels across the prison estate.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Whilst we acknowledge the impact lengthened timescales may have on staffing levels across the prison estate, Personnel Security Vetting is the first line of defence in the screening of people working for or on behalf of HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS). Our processes must be defensible, consistent, legal, and fair with a clear focus on protecting the public and maintaining public confidence. We carefully screen criminal histories, unethical behaviour, or reputational risks, which could damage stakeholder trust and organisational image. Our processes demonstrate due diligence and commitment to security, which builds confidence but which in turn, take time to complete.
HMPPS is taking forward recommendations from the 2022 His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Police, Fire & Rescue Services report: “An Inspection of Vetting, Misconduct and Misogyny in the Police Service”. This programme contains modernisation of existing processes and protocols to strengthen vetting across the organisation and to raise the defence level against unsuitable individuals entering the organisation. Recent events, such as the murder of Sarah Everard by a serving police officer, have shone a spotlight on vetting, making it more important than ever that we ensure our policies, processes, and practices are up to standard, by:
Ensuring our processes are robust;
Working closely with colleagues in other areas of HMPPS; and
Taking action to address lessons learned and recommendations from national reviews such as the Angiolini report and the Baroness Casey review.
Security vetting is vital in HMPPS to ensure individuals can uphold the security and integrity standards expected of their role and ensure that prisons and probation remain safe for rehabilitation to take place. Whilst we acknowledge and understand the difficulties posed by lengthened vetting timescales, we remained committed to security, building confidence and providing rehabilitative services.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many people have been waiting (a) more than three months, (b) more than six months and (c) more than 12 months for security and vetting clearance required for employment in the prison service.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The number of individuals currently awaiting completion of security and vetting checks prior to commencing employment within His Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS) was 14,694 as of 18 May 2026.
This figure reflects the full onboarding pipeline, covering candidates from the point at which they receive a provisional offer and enter pre-employment checks, through to the completion of all security and vetting processes and a final decision being made on their case. It therefore includes individuals at different stages of the process, not solely those awaiting a decision at a single point in time.
The Ministry of Justice does not centrally hold sufficiently robust or complete data to accurately report on the length of time individuals have been awaiting security and vetting clearance across all stages or providers. Vetting and pre-employment checks are undertaken through a combination of HMPPS, Shared Services Limited (SSL), and other parallel processes. As a result, a consolidated and reliable breakdown of waiting times, such as those exceeding three, six, or twelve months, is not available, and therefore unable to be provided.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what safeguards exist to reduce the risk of unnecessary (a) arrest and (b) restraint of neurodivergent people during police encounters.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The College of Policing set training and guidance on arrest, de-escalation and the dangers of using restraint techniques on vulnerable individuals.
Before officers can be authorised to use force they must pass a comprehensive training programme, which includes how to assess the potential vulnerability of individuals they engage with, including neurodivergent people and people with, learning disabilities or poor mental health. Officers are trained to identify and adapt their approach accordingly, in these circumstances.
When officers take the decision to use force they are accountable through the law for their actions and must be able to justify their use of force as reasonable, proportionate and necessary in all circumstances.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what guidance her Department has issued to police forces on de-escalation techniques when interacting with neurodivergent people during police incidents.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The College of Policing set training and guidance on arrest, de-escalation and the dangers of using restraint techniques on vulnerable individuals.
Before officers can be authorised to use force they must pass a comprehensive training programme, which includes how to assess the potential vulnerability of individuals they engage with, including neurodivergent people and people with, learning disabilities or poor mental health. Officers are trained to identify and adapt their approach accordingly, in these circumstances.
When officers take the decision to use force they are accountable through the law for their actions and must be able to justify their use of force as reasonable, proportionate and necessary in all circumstances.
Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, with reference to the report entitled Ketamine: An updated review of use and harms published by the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs on 28 January 2026, what (a) research and (b) consultations were undertaken as part of the decision-making process.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
As the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD) is independent of Government, its internal and decision-making processes are matters for the ACMD.