Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 10th November 2026 Commons Chamber

[Alex Davies-Jones]

I will gladly meet my hon. Friend and the survivors, and let me put on record my thanks to Sarah for her remarkable courage in coming forward to describe her horrific experience. We will of course continue to engage with colleagues across Government, particularly those in the Department of Health and Social Care, to ensure that anyone who abuses his or her position of trust and influence is held to account, and I look forward to meeting my hon. Friend and Sarah.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

An issue that crops up regularly in Northern Ireland is the searching of the £400 million digital patient record system by healthcare staff, some 30 of whom have been able to gain access to information and data through the system. What discussions has the Minister had, or will she have, with the Northern Ireland Assembly—and, in particular, with the relevant Minister—to ensure that appropriate penalties are in place to deter healthcare staff from accessing confidential patient records without authorisation?

[Alex Davies-Jones]

This issue is of grave concern to the Government, in England and Wales but more broadly across the United Kingdom. Anyone accessing records without the appropriate permission and level of security should be held accountable. As the hon. Gentleman will know, the Public Office (Accountability) Bill is in the other place, and although the new offence of misconduct in public office does not apply to frontline NHS workers, I have had conversations with the Health Secretary about how we can apply nuance in the case of people accessing records without permission. It causes immense distress to victims and bereaved families, and I will be sure to raise the matter with my counterparts across the United Kingdom.

Causing Death by Dangerous or Careless Driving: Sentencing

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Wednesday 28th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Lewell, and to be called to speak. I thank the hon. Member for Cardiff West (Mr Barros-Curtis) for securing this incredibly sensitive debate, and I thank all hon. Members for their contributions. By the very nature of life, we will have circumstances in our constituencies where someone has passed away or been killed as a result of a road accident or has died afterwards.

I have to say this: I do not believe that anyone sets out in their car intending to take a life. Tragically, however, it does happen, whatever the reasons may be—from using a phone behind the wheel to driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs. I am old enough to remember when driving under the influence of alcohol was always the reason; then it was alcohol and drugs, or just drugs on their own. In the last few years, the prevalence of motorists using drugs that affect their driving and make them a threat to others behind the wheel, has become a massive issue.

The maximum penalty in England and Wales for causing death by dangerous driving is now life imprisonment, but in many cases, as the hon. Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh) says, it is not applied. The hon. Lady referred to the possibility of a mandatory life sentence for the crime. That is probably what I would seek as well, rather than leaving it to the discretion of the magistrate or the judge handing out the sentence. Judges retain a large amount of discretion, allowing them to assess individual culpability. I am not quite sure how that is done. It is not for me to tell a judge that they are doing things wrong, because that is not my way of doing things, nor does my knowledge cover legal matters. However, I do believe that justice in these cases is best served by allowing judges to consider the unique circumstances of each case. It is clear that the system is largely effective, as 95% of those convicted of causing death by dangerous driving are sent to prison. The stats indicate that the majority receive a prison sentence, but often the cases that come to our attention are those in which there is no life sentence or no sending to prison.

I should have welcomed the Minister to his place; I apologise for not doing so earlier. I wish him well in his role, and I hope that Members can get the answers that we seek from him. None the less, we must continue to listen to the concerns of victims’ families, because that is what motivates us all as elected representatives.

As some Members highlighted, offenders can continue driving until conviction after causing a fatality, or can resume driving soon after leaving prison. When offenders receive a sentence and go to prison, it would be appropriate for them to have their driving licence removed. They should not be able to just resume driving as soon as they exit prison, in many cases probably after serving a small sentence. These gaps must be addressed, both to protect the public and to provide greater reassurance to families.

In Northern Ireland, the maximum sentence for causing death by dangerous driving remains 14 years. That should be brought into line with England and Wales, giving our courts greater powers to impose even harsher sentences where they see fit. My Strangford constituency has seen the blight of dangerous driving, with people losing their lives as a result. Just last year, on the same night, two young people were killed in separate incidents: Lucas Trainor, aged 12, and Jaidyn Rice, aged 16. They were two lovely young people and had not even got to the prime of life when they lost their lives as a result of accidents. My thoughts continue to be with both families, whose lives have been changed forever.

Members have explained and retold the stories of families in the Chamber today. The families who have been left behind face the impact every day of their lives. The son of one of my good friends was killed in a different circumstance. I remember that my friend always told me, “Jim, when I go to bed at night, I think of Stuart, and when I wake up in the morning, I think of Stuart.” That is the kind of thing these families do. Something like a vacant chair is very real to them, as are the anxiety, angst and pain in their hearts.

I call on the Government to make jail time mandatory for these cases while retaining some judicial discretion when sentencing. These cases are immensely complex. They cause profound distress to drivers, victims and their families. Although no sentence can ever reflect the loss suffered, the court must be allowed to assign a sentence that is truly reflective of blameworthiness. I thank the hon. Member for Cardiff West for giving us the chance to speak about this issue today, and I look forward to the Minister’s response.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Jake Richards)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Ms Lewell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff West (Mr Barros-Curtis) for securing this incredibly important debate and raising these issues, both in the Chamber and outside of it with me and others in the weeks preceding the debate.

I start, as many have, by paying tribute to my hon. Friend’s constituent Sian, who is here today. She has shown extraordinary courage in fighting to make sure that the death of her daughter, Keely, was not in vain, and to make changes to improve the country for others. We should applaud her for that. It is not easy, and it is hugely admirable. I want to apologise Sian, too, because she wrote to me, through her Member of Parliament, and did not receive a prompt response. There has been an error in my office. That is unacceptable, and I am getting to the bottom of it. I look forward to meeting her later today, hopefully to talk about the substantive issue, but also to apologise to her personally.

I also thank my hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Josh Dean). I met him and the Watermans, and it is good to see Derek and Sue here again today. After that meeting, I committed to raise the specific issues of their campaign and the tragic death of Jess with the then Roads Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham South (Lilian Greenwood). I did so in writing and then met her, her officials and her special advisers, who are political appointees in the Department for Transport, to make sure that those issues are really high on the agenda as the Government’s strategy on road safety comes into force. There is more that we can do; this is work in progress. The Roads Minister has changed since then, but I have also met the current Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Ellesmere Port and Bromborough (Justin Madders)—indeed, because of the debate today, I wrote to him again this morning—to make sure that the campaigns and issues we are talking about are right at the top of his agenda.

I am not trying to duck the issues raised during the debate, but some of them are for the Department for Transport. I will try to address as many of them as possible and, of course, to deal with the sentencing aspects, but if I cannot address an issue, I will make sure that the Member who raised it gets a written response from the Roads Minister, who deals with some of the road safety issues.

[Jim Shannon]

I look forward to hearing the Minister’s responses to my questions. The hon. Member for Esher and Walton (Monica Harding) referred to graduated driver licensing in Northern Ireland, which we introduced after a long consultation and deliberation with all the bodies concerned. That seemed to be a strategic way forward, and it has certainly been received well by all sections of the general public in Northern Ireland. Is that something that the UK Government and the Ministry of Justice will consider introducing?

[Jake Richards]

Critically, it is not for my Department to consider it, but the Department for Transport is certainly looking at it and is alive to the international evidence that has been raised by a number of Members. I cannot get ahead of what the Roads Minister will set out, but I will make sure that he has heard the contributions to this debate.

I thank hon. Members from all parties for raising difficult cases, particularly my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham and Morden (Dame Siobhain McDonagh). I was not aware of the work that Debbie has done around Lillie’s tragic death, so it was very moving to hear about that, and particularly about the café, which so many people will enjoy in her memory. I am very happy to meet Debbie if that would be helpful to her—or, indeed, I will get the Roads Minister to meet her if that would be more beneficial.

Electronic Monitoring of Offenders

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 27th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

That question has a simple answer: the hon. Gentleman will be able to see the data when it is published in January. We have just had data published for the previous three months. The data obviously needs to be verified and accurate. We are not in the business of publishing data that is not robust, and we will publish it in due course in the normal way.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for her very comprehensive answers. Electronic monitoring of offenders can be a useful tool to manage prison capacity for individuals who have carried out non-violent crimes, but there are some serious concerns about regional co-ordination. Can she assure the House that robust safeguards are in place to ensure that private monitoring contractors are sharing real-time flawless data with police forces in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? What specific metric is her Department using to confirm that tagging systems are genuinely reducing offending, rather than being a sticking plaster for a broken system?

[Catherine McKinnell]

The hon. Gentleman asks a very thoughtful question, and one that probably requires a lengthier answer than I have time to give, but I absolutely acknowledge the point he makes. I am determined that we have the data, the monitoring and the reporting to ensure that this scheme does work and is not a sticking plaster, so that victims can have faith in it, and probation officers and the police can be supported to do what they need to do to keep our communities safe. We are investing significantly in this technology, and we need to ensure that it works. He raises a genuine and good point.

Prisoner Early Release Scheme

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 13th October 2026 Commons Chamber

[Mr Speaker]

We will let the Front Benchers change over after we have heard from Jim Shannon.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister very much for his answers. I am sure that he was watching television this morning when the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, Sir Mark Rowley, said that he was arresting

“two or three early-release offenders a week”,

and that seems to be the case. He gave the example of someone who was released last week having originally been arrested for shop theft, and who lasted just a few days before doing the very same thing and is now back in prison. More worryingly, the Met Commissioner said that those who have been convicted of firearms offences have also been released. Surely it is time to ensure that gun-toting criminals are not allowed back on the streets.

[Jake Richards]

I had thought that there was going to be a session without a question from the hon. Member, so it is reassuring to hear one.

We know, for example, that one in seven of the prison population are on recall. There are recall provisions in operation, and that is right. If people are released from prison and then break their licence conditions, or indeed commit a further offence, they should be brought back to prison. That is the system working. We want to bring the number down, because we want to tackle reoffending and ensure that when people do leave prison they do not turn to crime again, and that constitutes much of the work that we are doing with the Probation Service and local authorities.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 15th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

My hon. Friend raises an interesting case. There is so much work going on with technological development that can support a more efficient Prison Service. We are investing £82 million, following the Dame Lynne Owens review, because there was chronic under-investment by the previous Government in technology, and we want the Prison Service taken into this century and beyond.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I welcome the Minister to her place, and wish her well in her role; I know that she will do exceptionally well. She referred to technological advances on the UK mainland. The hon. Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh (Chris Murray) mentioned that the justice system is devolved in Scotland; it is devolved in Northern Ireland as well, but it is important that that technology is shared. Can the Minister assure me that the Justice Minister in Northern Ireland will have access to that technology?

[Catherine McKinnell]

I appreciate the spirit in which the hon. Gentleman asks his question, and he has my assurance.

Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill

Jim Shannon Excerpts

2nd reading
Friday 11th September 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The hon. Lady is setting the scene for what the Bill hopes to achieve, but she cannot ignore the overwhelming 68% of the public who believe that it must be paused, or the 73% of people who say that it should be rejected outright. The public see the danger. This House must halt the process, pause the Bill and instead focus on properly funding world-class palliative care.

[Lauren Edwards]

I think we need to be very careful when we are quoting polling. For instance, we know that Whitestone Insight has been criticised heavily by the British Polling Council in recent weeks for failing to meet its standards in terms of disclosing who has been funding its research. The reference I am making in my speech is to those very robust, independent polls, such as the British attitudes survey, which in 2024 found that 73% of the British public supported assisted dying and have done so over the last 20 years.

--- Later in debate ---

[Dame Karen Bradley]

I will give way to the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), and then to the previous sponsor of the Bill, the hon. Member for Spen Valley (Kim Leadbeater), and then I will make progress.

[Jim Shannon]

I quote the story of one of my constituents, a motor neurone disease sufferer. He said that, if he had had the option of assisted dying two years ago, he probably would have taken it. But, in his words, “I would have missed out on the most fulfilled two years of my life and the knowledge that I can have more moments like this ahead of me.” His words are, “Please don’t do this, life is worth living.” Does the right hon. Lady agree?

[Dame Karen Bradley]

The hon. Gentleman makes a very important point.

Fathers and Positive Male Role Models

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Thursday 10th September 2026 Westminster Hall

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I thank the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) for leading the debate and sharing some of his childhood experiences. I think he has turned out all right, by the way; I think we probably all think that, and we congratulate him.

I deeply value the opportunity to be a positive role model myself, in my role as a father and a grandfather. I have six grandchildren, three girls and three boys. It is different being a grandfather. A dad has a stronger role, but a grandfather enjoys all the good times. The great thing about being a grandfather is that at 7 o’clock at night, I can give them back, just at the stage when they are getting stroppy and want things that maybe their grandfather cannot give them.

I am very pleased and privileged to have a good relationship with my three sons. I am also very thankful for my good wife, who has stuck with me over 39 years of married life. I am also very thankful for our godly father, who believed in loving his son and expecting good things, but also giving grace and love. My dad is dead some 11 years, but not a day passes that I do not miss him. I can only hope to have a similar relationship with my three sons and indeed with my grandchildren.

One of the headings in the House of Commons Library briefing is “Lads Need Dads”. They do. Many young men today find themselves facing what can only be described as a real crisis of value and purpose. While personal testimony alone is powerful, the research backs it up. Fatherlessness has been proven to have profound consequences for young men’s mental health, educational achievements and futures. This is an issue that is aptly termed not as lads need dads, but as a lost boys crisis.

In Northern Ireland, there are specific education and employment challenges facing working-class men, with male working-class pupils continuing to experience some of the poorest educational outcomes. That, combined with the decline of traditionally male-dominated, skills-based manufacturing industries, has removed many of the employment opportunities that were once accessible to those young men, and especially to their dads. That has led to concerning levels of economic inactivity among young men, creating a worrying cycle in which young men are left without a clear sense of purpose or belonging. The “Lost Boys” report of 2025 highlighted that, shockingly, boys in the United Kingdom are more likely to own a smartphone than to live with their father.

What difference does this make to young boys growing up today? As the presence of a positive role model is increasingly removed, boys turn, lost, to other things or people—people like controversial social media influencer Andrew Tate, who promotes harmful ideologies and reinforces damaging attitudes towards women. The hon. Member for Bishop Auckland referred to that. I was brought up to be respectful towards women, and that is what we should do.

We should certainly not underestimate the devastating consequences. Northern Ireland’s male suicide rates remain consistently higher than those of England and Wales. That is in my constituency, among the people I represent—it is real and it is happening. It should make every one of us stop and think about what we can do to ensure that these young men have the support that they need. I am pleased to see the Minister in his place. Does he agree that more needs to be done to support positive male role models, perhaps through mentorship programmes, which will ensure the wellbeing of our young men for the future?

This is not about suggesting that a child must grow up in a certain type of family. A positive role model can be a father, a teacher, a youth worker, a sports coach or an employer. In a world where children have access to so many voices, what matters is that they see men who demonstrate responsibility, integrity, kindness and respect for others. If we can demonstrate those four things, we can inspire young people for tomorrow. There are those whose mums take on both roles. These women are to be admired, and we are so thankful for all that they do, but there is a place for men. We need to encourage men to understand that while their relationship with others may sour, their children are theirs to help guide and love for life. That is an honour we should all cherish.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Jake Richards)]

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Hobhouse. I am grateful to the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Sam Rushworth) for introducing this debate. I am cheered by the fact that since the general election, when I and most hon. Members at this debate—at least those on the Labour Benches—entered Parliament, the issue has been raised repeatedly in both Chambers. Members from all parties should be heartened that we are talking about such matters and making sure that they have the prominence they deserve.

We have heard a number of thoughtful and important contributions, but I was particularly moved by what my hon. Friend the Member for Stirling and Strathallan (Chris Kane) said about being a father and parent, and sometimes feeling like you are failing in that. That is an incredibly important emotion for us public servants to consider when we think about public policy. Often, fathers may feel unable to provide for their children, materially or emotionally, and we have to think about how we, as a society and as a Government, can support men and parents through that difficult period. That important point is not often made, so I am grateful to my hon. Friend for doing so.

To answer the questions of the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith) and the hon. Member for Hinckley and Bosworth (Dr Evans) directly, when I was reappointed to my role, the Prime Minister made it explicitly clear that the cross-Government men and boys agenda would be right at the heart of his Government. The conversations I have had with him, both prior to and post him entering Downing Street, have only cemented that. We will undertake a summit in due course and at the right moment, and the change of Prime Minister and Government gives us an opportunity to work out the best mechanism for doing that.

It is one thing to hold a summit in Downing Street, but could we be more interactive across the country? We are looking at different mechanisms to make that a real moment for the country to talk about these issues and would be genuinely open to suggestions on a cross-party basis about how we can get that conversation going, out of this building and around the country, not just in Westminster. That is an ongoing discussion, and no doubt we will be able to update the House.

It is a great personal honour to be speaking in this debate. I am the father of a three-year-old girl—she turned three just yesterday. I think I speak for all parents when I say that from the moment you find out you are going to become one, your life is never quite the same again—that feeling is correct, because it never is. On a professional level, every day since becoming a Member of Parliament, I have been struck by the incredible work that organisations and groups do to support men. In my constituency, that includes Better Today in Kiveton Park, Andy’s Man Club in Maltby, Bramley and Kiveton Park—it operates across the country; I know we have a lot of Andy’s Man Club supporters in the Chamber today—and Dinnington boxing club. Sport is such a big part of this conversation about reaching and supporting men, and there is brilliant work in my constituency, too.

As all Members have said, fathers clearly matter, and where a father is not present, another male role model can also make an extraordinary difference—a granddad, a stepdad, an uncle, a teacher, a youth worker, a football or rugby coach, or a mentor. Indeed, the hon. Member for South West Devon raised the issue of teaching. I am always struck by the fact one in three primary schools does not have a male teacher. That is a massive problem, which I know colleagues in the Department for Education are trying to change. However, we all have a role, as parliamentarians and indeed as society, to perhaps try to change attitudes to teaching, particularly in early years, because this issue is vital.

My hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton North East (Sureena Brackenridge) talked about the importance of mentors. Absolutely, and there is a lot of good work happening already, including in her constituency, which she touched upon. Gareth Southgate is working on a mentorship scheme—many of us will have seen the documentaries—and there are other great organisations, such as Football Beyond Borders. I am also looking at what is happening internationally—some brilliant work is being done in California to recruit 10,000 new mentors to mentor young men and boys. There is a big opportunity here because there is already good work happening. What can we do as a Government to turbocharge that and make sure it is happening across the country? Watch this space on that one, because I am looking forward to developing this further.

We know, as has been touched on in the debate, that men are sometimes bombarded with competing ideas about what it means to be a man. The Government recently issued new guidance, which schools are following from this month, that rightly talks about young people developing positive conceptions of masculinity and femininity and learning from positive male role models. We will not counter the kind of toxic masculinity that we have spoken about in this debate by simply wagging our fingers at teenage boys, telling them just to get off their phone, or suggesting that all men are evil or that all masculine traits are wrong. We have to offer something positive—something better, something in the real world—to get them away from that narrow online space and back to participating again in society. If we cannot give boys a convincing idea of masculinity, built on confidence and kindness, responsibility and respect, and a sense of purpose, the algorithm will be only too eager to provide another one instead.

There is also a wider challenge, which is fuelled by a really difficult backdrop for men and boys in our country, and public policy must be made through that lens. We know that boys fall behind girls at every stage of education, from early years through to GCSE and beyond. Boys are more than twice as likely to be excluded from school and make up a far larger proportion of the NEET population, which is of course an issue that this Government are prioritising—my hon. Friend the Member for Watford (Matt Turmaine) spoke about that. Indeed, the gender pay gap, which is a huge systemic issue in our country—the Treasury is doing good work to try to narrow it more generally—is in reverse for those aged 18 to 24. That does not mean that we take our foot off the pedal in trying to get equality for women, but it does mean that we have to consider that age group and what is happening for young men in our labour market, and I know that this Government will.

We know that men continue to have a lower life expectancy than women, and we know that suicide is still one of the leading causes of death for men under 50—a fact that is particularly poignant today, on World Suicide Prevention Day. Again, that was mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham). We lose so many men to suicide—75% of suicides are men. That does not mean that we ignore women by any means, but when we think about mental health provision, we need to look at the facts and the data. What we are being told is that this is a particular issue, and it should inform policy.

Across a lot of areas—health, education, employment, family life—men and boys experience poorer outcomes. That is all part of a broader pattern that requires a broader cross-Government response, which is why my role as the Minister with responsibility for men and boys is a cross-Government one. Many of the industries that once provided generations of men with secure work and an identity have declined. Work and working-class communities were mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for York Outer (Mr Charters). I see the decline in my own constituency. I am hugely proud to represent former mining towns built on the graft of working-class communities and often working- class men.

We should not of course romanticise the past. Many of the gender expectations of previous generations were highly restrictive, particularly for women, and nobody would want to turn the clock back completely. But we do have to understand what disappeared when those industries went and that post-industrial period occurred. What went were the routes into skilled work and institutions with social connection and status, and for many men a sense that they had an almost automatic, useful role to play in society and our economy. Where do boys and young men find that purpose today? When I speak to men and organisations working with them, three things come up: a need for purpose, belonging and connection. The decline of our industrial base in this country has greatly challenged that. We have to look for new mechanisms. We cannot just turn back the clock. Again, that is partly economic policy, but no doubt social policy as well. And it all goes back to the theme of this debate and why fathers and role models are so important, not as a social ideal, but as people who are present in young men’s lives to set an example, provide stability and help anchor them when life becomes difficult.

Supporting fathers is preventative: by strengthening relationships early on we can stop problems taking root. We can keep an eye on the longer term prize, because the boys we support today will become the fathers, partners and role models of tomorrow. The Government are doing that in several ways. I am proud to be part of a pro-family Government, something that I am very pleased to say explicitly. We are supporting families from the very beginning. We want family services to be accessible and welcoming to all parents, and for fathers to feel that support is for them, too. That includes recognising that the transition to fatherhood itself can be really challenging and making sure fathers are supported during those critical months around birth.

I mentioned Best Start family hubs and our wider family support services. No doubt my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland will push us to go further and faster. He mentioned parenting courses—I am a big fan. There is good evidence in Australia on the use of online parenting courses. It is less about telling parents how to parent, and more about giving them the opportunity to take stock, have a moment and consider how they are parenting and whether their routine and their life is building a healthy family environment. I think we could all do with that every now and again. “Parenting courses” is sometimes the wrong term, but it is a moment for families to consider how they are raising their children. The Best Start family hubs agenda is reaching men in ways that hopefully work for them and includes flexible weekend provision, dedicated groups and outreach through trusted community settings.

Government Members will no doubt be pleased to hear that we are reviewing parental leave and looking carefully at how the system can better support working families and allow parents to play an active role during those crucial months. We heard from my hon. Friends the Members for High Peak (Jon Pearce) and for Sittingbourne and Sheppey (Kevin McKenna) about how important that is. Again, there was powerful advocacy for that change. They know that the Government are reviewing it and will return to Parliament with an update early next year. No doubt the Chancellor will hear their cries. Even if he is not here today, it will be noted.

We are also actively recognising the importance of positive role models and strong support networks more generally. Just yesterday I held a roundtable in Downing Street with a number of men’s mental health charities on the issue of suicide prevention to try to look at how we as a Government can work with partners in the communities as part of our developing agenda on devolution in place. There is no point in us in Whitehall just saying things. We have to work with the organisations that actually deliver. Too often public policy does not work for them.

[Jim Shannon]

On the issue of suicide, in my contribution I referred to the stats. It is unfortunately true that the level of male suicides in Northern Ireland is the highest in the whole of the United Kingdom—higher than in Scotland and Wales and higher than in England. Will the Minister share his thoughts with the relevant Minister in Northern Ireland—Robbie Butler, the Health Minister —to ensure that the good things that the Minister and the Government are doing here can be shared and we can take advantage of what they have learned?

[Jake Richards]

Absolutely. This agenda has to include our devolved nations as well, and I will make sure that we do that. The disparities in suicide rates across the country are really striking. The north-east in particular has far higher suicide rates than London. More generally, the areas that are more isolated are where people become more isolated. There is also a link to economic factors, deprivation and unemployment, with unemployment being the metric that aligns most. We know that work is not just about financial support, but about purpose, routine, structure and connection, which are so important.

All of this feeds into our wider agenda. That includes tackling health inequalities, and we have launched England’s first men’s health strategy. It is focused on opportunity, which means ensuring that boys and young men can succeed in education. We have heard about the Milburn report, and all the work happening now and in the coming weeks and months. It is also focused on connection and belonging, which are fundamental. That means supporting healthy relationships, positive understandings of masculinity and strong community ties.

I once again thank my hon. Friend the Member for Bishop Auckland for securing this debate. I reassure him and all Members that, as we develop the Government’s work on men and boys, fatherhood, mentoring and positive male role models, they will absolutely remain at the heart of this conversation. I want this to be a collaborative process across Government and with parliamentarians from both sides of the House, because this issue is clearly vital to all the communities we represent.

Oral Answers to Questions

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sarah Sackman]

I commend my hon. Friend on his work, looking at how we can combat predatory marriages and those who prey on the vulnerable. The Law Commission’s recommendation that the rule that marriage revokes a will be abolished is well evidenced. We will take a holistic look at the issue, but we will certainly consider carefully.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I welcome the hon. Member for Leeds North East (Fabian Hamilton) back after his operation. It is good to see him again, and I wish him a speedy recovery.

I thank the Minister for her answer. What steps is her Department taking to ensure that the insights and the drafting expertise in the “Modernising Wills Law” report are taken on board by the Northern Ireland Executive, to ensure families in Northern Ireland can benefit from similar modernised protections against predatory marriage through updated legislation?

[Sarah Sackman]

As we consider the Law Commission’s recommendations, we will of course consider how they might lead to law changes and law reform across the United Kingdom. However, where matters are devolved, we respect that as well.

Prisoner Early Release

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 29th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Jake Richards]

Let me put on the record my gratitude for the bravery of those victims that the hon. and learned Gentleman identified for what they undertook to ensure that there was justice. What undermines confidence in the criminal justice system is a system that completely unravels. Without the appropriate prison places and without getting down the Crown Court backlog, which my hon. and learned Friend the Courts Minister is busy doing, we undermine faith in the system completely. We cannot let that happen. That will mean difficult decisions, but we will not shy away from them.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for his answers to the questions. My constituents are horrified by the early release of rapists and child groomers. If a criminal is sentenced to 15 years for destroying a child’s life or committing a horrific rape, they should serve every single day—indeed, every single hour—of that sentence behind bars. Opening the prison gates early does not fix the justice system; it actively endangers women and children across the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Will the Minister urgently review these catastrophic legal changes and guarantee that no convicted rapist or child groomer will be given a get-out-of-jail card by this Minister’s Department and this Government?

[Jake Richards]

We will not shy away from the difficult decisions needed to save the criminal justice system to ensure that we have prison places to put criminals behind bars. By the end of this Parliament, more criminals will be behind bars than ever before. This is not a matter of being soft on crime; it is a matter of ensuring that we can put criminals away in future.

Home Office and Ministry of Justice

Jim Shannon Excerpts

Monday 29th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown (North Cotswolds) (Con)]

I thank the Backbench Business Committee, Mr Speaker, and yourself, Madam Deputy Speaker, for granting the debate, and the Minister for being here—I hope she will find it useful.

We often speak in this Chamber about defence spending, and rightly so. Defence keeps our nation safe, but justice is what keeps the public safe, ensuring that victims receive justice and that offenders are removed from our streets. According to the National Audit Office, the Ministry of Justice’s total expenditure for 2024-25 was £15.5 billion, with an income of £1.9 billion, resulting in a net cost to the taxpayer of £13.6 billion. To put that into perspective, it is the equivalent of just two weeks of welfare spending.

When I refer to one justice system, I mean the police, the courts, prison officers and the Probation Service working together as a single interdependent system. When one part underperforms, it creates a domino effect across the entire system. Since the beginning of this parliamentary term, the Public Accounts Committee has published a number of critical reports on the criminal justice system, covering Crown courts, police productivity, probation efficiency, violence against women and girls, MOJ reports and prison estate capacity. These are not separate issues; they are interconnected pressures within one system, and they must be analysed, funded and reformed accordingly, not in isolation. I suggest that the PAC is a very useful Committee for considering these types of cross-cutting issues.

It is clear that the criminal justice system has considerable weaknesses. A central issue is the lack of usable integrated data. The police, courts and prisons operate on separate systems that do not effectively communicate with one another. This fragmentation makes it difficult for the system to function efficiently as a whole and increases the risk of serious administrative errors. That is reflected in the number of erroneous prisoner releases. In the last 12 months to March 2025, 262 prisoners were mistakenly released—an increase of 128% compared with the previous years.

Let me turn first to the estimates themselves—after all, that is what the debate is about. It is striking that even identifying a clear, unified figure for the system is difficult because of the fragmented way in which the funding is structured and assessed. The House of Commons Library has confirmed that the Ministry of Justice 2026-27 main estimate for resource departmental expenditure limit—running expenditure—is £12.69 billion, and capital departmental expenditure limit is confirmed at £2.36 billion. That represents a 4.4% and 2.6% increase compared with last year respectively. By contrast, the Home Office main estimate for RDEL for 2026-27 was £19.5% billion, representing a 10.8% increase on last year.

The Prime Minister has said that governing this country is about choices, so the question is: are these the right choices? Although the Government have committed to increasing the Ministry of Justice budget by more than 2% per year, the Department faces mounting pressures, as the Minister will know. Half its running costs are spent on staff, and it has experienced rising demand, inflationary pressures, and higher than expected costs. It has responded by transferring £695 million from underspent capital budgets into day-to-day expenditure, largely due to delays in the prison expansion programme. At the same time, it has committed to delivering at least 5% in savings, reducing administrative costs by 15% by 2029-30, and introducing AI to drive efficiencies. Those are all good things, but they do put pressure on the current budget. These ambitious targets must not come at the expense of frontline services, and they must come with the data to back up the ambition.

Let me turn to some of the issues in more detail. Police officers are on the frontline, and too often they face criticism without proper recognition for the vital work they do to keep our communities up and down the country safe. Although their funding has increased, with a £535.8 million uplift in 2026-27, forces are dealing with the growing complexity of crime, sustained financial pressure and persistent productivity challenges. In Gloucestershire, the Government are not delivering sufficient funding through the police grant to invest in any new digital IT, which would enable the police to be more efficient, and such pressures inevitably feed into the courts, which are already under severe strain.

The rising population in this country is bound to mean that more people will be going through our court system. Around 4 million new cases are now entering our courts and tribunals each year in England and Wales, and the average time to resolve a case has risen dramatically, from 481 days to 685. The backlog in the criminal courts remains exceptionally high, with an unprecedented 88,200 Crown court cases open as of December 2025—it might have come down a little since then. The median time from an offence being committed to the case being completed is 355 days, with some rape and other serious sexual offences—the so-called RASSO cases—taking three years or more, and some being postponed up to six times. Many victims simply give up before their cases come to court in order to try to put the trauma they have suffered behind them.

Is the system any better in the magistrates courts, where there is a backlog in excess of 310,000 cases? Through the Courts and Tribunals Bill, the Government propose to increase magistrates’ sentencing powers to up to 36 months. However, we have a huge problem with the recruitment of magistrates, meaning that the system is likely to be overwhelmed if more cases are diverted to them. It cannot be right that we have empty courtrooms and burgeoning waiting lists. The Government’s changes to legal aid have also led to inefficiency, with more people now representing themselves; I do not blame them at all, but it means that each case takes longer because people often need the court procedure explained to them.

Crown court sitting days have not kept pace with demand, despite offers from the Lady Chief Justice to increase capacity, which have not been taken up fully by the Government. Around 11% of courts are inactive on any given day. Delays of that scale are unacceptable for victims, defendants and public confidence in the system. These delays have the direct impact on the prison population, with more people being held on remand due to the backlog, as well as increased time for preliminary hearings and the granting of bail.

We are also seeing an increase in the number of people received into prison, driven by tougher sentencing and a rising remand population. Currently, between 16,600 and 18,000 people are held on remand in UK prisons, meaning they have been denied bail or are awaiting trial. Many of those people have been on remand for over six months, which is the target for maximum remand. That accounts for nearly 20% of the prison population. The increased flow of untried defendants and extended waiting times due to court backlogs is leading to that unacceptable increase in the prison population. If dealt with more efficiently, it would help with overcrowding in our prisons, but without sufficient capacity or staffing, the trend is unsustainable. The prison population reached a record high of 98% capacity, or 88,000, in August 2024—the highest ever. Overcrowding is driving violence, placing staff at risk, and undermining rehabilitation efforts.

As we know, the Government have committed to creating 20,000 new prison places, yet progress has been slow, with repeated delays and underspending. In a recent accounting officer assessment, there were significant delays in awarding new contracts at both HMP Forest Bank and HMP Rye Hill. The AOA does not set out the cause for those delays or for the additional costs incurred.

At the same time, retention of prison officers remains a serious challenge, affecting safety and stability across the prison estate. To give just one example of what is going on in the prison system, at our hearing on HMP Dartmoor the issue of radon was raised. The Ministry of Justice has signed a lease that cannot be broken until 2033, yet no sooner had that lease been signed, the prison was deemed unsafe because of radon. It is costing £4 million a year for an empty prison. HMP Dartmoor is an example of a Department making a decision under pressure and at speed, leading to a complete waste of public money.

In March 2025, approximately 242,000 individuals were under probation supervision. Vacancy rates in the probation service have risen from 14% in 2021 to 21% in 2025. Staff are routinely working beyond capacity, estimated at 118%, although the figure is likely to be higher, particularly in London. That workload will be increased further with the Government’s early release scheme. We heard deeply concerning evidence describing a culture of emotional strain and trauma among probation staff. This is not just a workforce issue, but a public safety issue, because when probation fails, reoffending rises, placing additional burdens on the police, courts and prisons.

The cost to this country of reoffending alone stands at a staggering £20.9 million, but the human cost to victims and communities is immeasurable. In part that is because our prisons are so overcrowded that prisoners are not being given meaningful activity, for example work training, so that when they are released they have developed skills that could help them to find work and reduce the reoffending rate.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that when prisoners are engaged in retraining or rehabilitation, they can then return to the community they were brought up in, but that is often where their problems started? The report might be able to recommend things that can be done in prison, but when people get back to their community, that takes over and they start where they left off. Does he agree that such issues must be sorted out in the location, in the community, and in the place people come from, to ensure that they do not go back to their bad habits?

[Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown]

The hon. Member makes an interesting point, and the Government must consider in the round how they can give people useful training, work and leisure in prison, so that they come out with some skills. Where people go, how they are housed and what employment offers they get are issues that the Government need to consider seriously—it is a really big problem.

The number of recalls to prison is now at an all-time high, demonstrating a system under severe stress. Planned reforms, including early-release schemes, risk placing even greater pressure on an already overstretched probation service. Well-run probation is not optional; it is essential. It is what enables people to reintegrate into society and prevents the cycle of crime from continuing.

In conclusion, the criminal justice system must be treated as one system. The Home Office and the Ministry of Justice need to work much more closely together to resolve some of the serious problems that I have outlined. Investment, reform and accountability must reflect that reality. Fixing one part in isolation will not solve the wider problem. As I have said, democracy is founded on an effective and properly functioning criminal justice system to keep its citizens safe. Serious criminals need to be removed from society by imprisonment, but the system must help itself by taking strenuous steps to reduce reoffending, which I repeat costs this country £20.9 billion a year. It is a well-thumbed maxim that, whatever the cause, justice delayed is justice denied.