Marie Rimmer Alert Sample


Alert Sample

View the Parallel Parliament page for Marie Rimmer

Information between 4th December 2025 - 24th December 2025

Note: This sample does not contain the most recent 2 weeks of information. Up to date samples can only be viewed by Subscribers.
Click here to view Subscription options.


Division Votes
8 Dec 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 305 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 395 Noes - 98
8 Dec 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 294 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 300 Noes - 96
8 Dec 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 305 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 327 Noes - 162
8 Dec 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 309 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 326 Noes - 162
9 Dec 2025 - Railways Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 316 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 170 Noes - 332
9 Dec 2025 - Railways Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 314 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 329 Noes - 173
10 Dec 2025 - Seasonal Work - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 311 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 98 Noes - 325
10 Dec 2025 - Conduct of the Chancellor of the Exchequer - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 290 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 90 Noes - 297
10 Dec 2025 - Seasonal Work - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 312 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 320 Noes - 98
15 Dec 2025 - Employment Rights Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 304 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 311 Noes - 96
16 Dec 2025 - Finance (No. 2) Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted No - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 333 Labour No votes vs 0 Labour Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 118 Noes - 340
16 Dec 2025 - Finance (No. 2) Bill - View Vote Context
Marie Rimmer voted Aye - in line with the party majority and in line with the House
One of 329 Labour Aye votes vs 0 Labour No votes
Tally: Ayes - 341 Noes - 195


Speeches
Marie Rimmer speeches from: Jimmy Lai Conviction
Marie Rimmer contributed 1 speech (270 words)
Monday 15th December 2025 - Commons Chamber
Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office


Written Answers
Myanmar: Rohingya
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Friday 5th December 2025

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what recent diplomatic steps she has taken with her international counterparts to ensure the protection of Rohingya women and girls in Myanmar.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

As penholder on Myanmar at the UN Security Council, we convened six Council meetings in 2024, including the first open meeting in five years focused on the Rohingya, and we have convened three Council meetings so far in 2025. We also co-sponsored a UN Human Rights Council resolution in April this year, and a UN Third Committee Resolution in November, on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, condemning ongoing violations particularly against ethnic minorities, including Rohingya. We continue to call for the protection of civilians and humanitarian access to Rakhine State, most recently at the UN Third Committee on 19 November.

Legal Aid Agency: Cybercrime
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Monday 22nd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to compensate legal aid providers for disruption caused by the cyberattack on the Legal Aid Agency in April 2025.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on 10 November to Question 87407.

Legal Aid Agency: Digital Technology
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Monday 22nd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, for what reason the Legal Aid Agency's Sign in to Legal Aid Services implementation has been delayed; what specific security issues have arisen; and when updates on its postponed launch will be made available.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

The Department has worked around the clock to ensure that digital services were restored as swiftly and safely as possible. There has been no delay to implementation of the new secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS), which went live on 11 August following a period of testing with providers

Since then, we have worked closely with providers to test functionality before bringing providers back onto our systems in a careful, phased approach. We are now in a position where all providers have online access to our civil legal aid services via SiLAS, alongside our criminal legal aid services, which were restored in September.

Ding Yuande
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Friday 19th December 2025

Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what recent discussions she has had with her Chinese counterparts concerning the detention of Falun Gong practitioner, Ding Yuande; and what diplomatic steps she is taking to support his release.

Answered by Seema Malhotra - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)

I refer the Hon Member to the answer provided on 9 April to Question 43452.

Migrant Workers: Visas
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Monday 22nd December 2025

Question to the Home Office:

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he will make an assessment of the potential merits of applying bandings to regional areas of the UK to the base minimum salary thresholds and occupation-specific going rates for businesses employing people with skilled worker visas.

Answered by Mike Tapp - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Home Office)

We do not plan to introduce varying salary requirements based on location. Our aim is to have a single immigration system which works for the whole of the UK.

Every occupation is expected to be paid at least the “going rate”, which is set at the median for all UK residents who perform that role, or the median rate for all qualifying occupations whichever is higher, according to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings.

The salary threshold, currently £41,700 for new applicants, is in place to ensure that resident workers’ wages should not be undercut and also to protect overseas workers from being used as low-cost labour.

Having a national salary limit keeps the Skilled Worker immigration route simple to operate and allows for movement between locations for larger companies.

The Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) published a review of Skilled Worker salary requirements on 17 December, and repeated a recommendation they have made many times previously, that salary thresholds should be set at a UK-wide level:

"We continue to believe that ‘regional salary thresholds also bring more complexity and may be harder to enforce within the migration system, particularly as the UK is geographically small, making it is easy to live in one region and work in another’. We also do not want to institutionalise some parts of the UK as ‘lower wage’. Furthermore, as the MAC has shown previously, wages vary far more within regions than across them so even if thresholds were set at a regional level there would still be many areas of the UK that would struggle to meet them."

Legal Aid Agency: Cybercrime
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Tuesday 23rd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, regarding the cyber attack in April 2025 on the Legal Aid Agency (LAA), other than the information on the LAA’s website, what steps have been taken to notify legal aid applicants that their confidential data has been accessed.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously.

Firstly, to ensure transparency about the cyber- attack and that we reached as many potentially impacted individuals as possible, the Ministry of Justice published a notice shortly after it became aware of the criminal cyber-attack at 08:15 on 19 May on GOV.UK

The notice provided information about the cyber-attack and directed concerned members of the public to the National Cyber Security Centre’s webpage, which contained information on how to protect against the impact of a data breach.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also set up dedicated Customer Services support via a telephone line and email for providers and clients who had concerns regarding the data breach. We did not write to all clients, to all the addresses that we had, because some of those addresses would no longer be current, and that would potentially create another data breach in itself.

The published statement referred to above sets out information about who may have been impacted and the nature of the information which may have been accessed. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.

In the interests of security, we cannot confirm the method by which unauthorised access was gained to the LAA’s online digital systems or details about specific steps taken or measures implemented to protect LAA systems against any future cyber-attacks.

Security of the new systems has been paramount as we have rebuilt the LAA’s digital systems following the attack. The compromised digital portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). SiLAS has been designed and built in line with UK government and industry best practice for secure development. Security has been included from the ground up, including multi factor authentication, with independent testing activities to validate that the appropriate security controls are in place.

A dedicated team will monitor and update the service to ensure it evolves to remain resilient to emerging threats and is supported by a security operations capability. While no system can be entirely risk free, we are confident that we have taken the right steps to protect the service and its users.

Responsibility for disaster recovery planning for digital systems lies with Justice Digital rather than the LAA. Prior to the cyber- attack there was no digital disaster recovery plan in place. However, had we had a fully funded disaster recovery system, any immediate restoration would have simply restored the systems without resolving the vulnerabilities that enabled the cyber- attack to occur. Justice Digital now have a new Service Owner structure in place where clear Service Standards will be defined and monitored. This will include digital disaster recovery plans for each digital product.

Prior to the cyber- attack the LAA had in place prepared business continuity plans for business-critical processes and services to ensure that access to justice could be maintained in the event of a system outage. These plans were tried and tested, and we were confident that the measures would be effective for our initial response. These measures gave us sufficient time to design and implement longer term measures to meet the specific needs of the incident that were introduced in June 2025.

At every stage, we have acted to protect public access to justice and to support providers in delivering legal aid. We have achieved this without affecting court backlogs or police station activity.

Our business continuity planning was effective in maintaining access to justice from the outset of the attack and the need to have longer term options in place is one of the lessons that we have taken from this incident.

A formal lessons learned approach will systematically analyse lessons from the Ministry of Justice’s and LAA’s preparation for and response to the cyber-attack. This work will cover pre-incident risk management and the response to the incident itself. This will inform future resilience planning, governance improvement and risk mitigation strategies across the Ministry of Justice and its agencies.

Legal Aid Agency: Cybersecurity
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Tuesday 23rd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, after the April 2025 data breach of the Legal Advice Agency, what specific steps have been taken, and what further measures are planned, to ensure that a similar security breach does not occur again.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously.

Firstly, to ensure transparency about the cyber- attack and that we reached as many potentially impacted individuals as possible, the Ministry of Justice published a notice shortly after it became aware of the criminal cyber-attack at 08:15 on 19 May on GOV.UK

The notice provided information about the cyber-attack and directed concerned members of the public to the National Cyber Security Centre’s webpage, which contained information on how to protect against the impact of a data breach.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also set up dedicated Customer Services support via a telephone line and email for providers and clients who had concerns regarding the data breach. We did not write to all clients, to all the addresses that we had, because some of those addresses would no longer be current, and that would potentially create another data breach in itself.

The published statement referred to above sets out information about who may have been impacted and the nature of the information which may have been accessed. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.

In the interests of security, we cannot confirm the method by which unauthorised access was gained to the LAA’s online digital systems or details about specific steps taken or measures implemented to protect LAA systems against any future cyber-attacks.

Security of the new systems has been paramount as we have rebuilt the LAA’s digital systems following the attack. The compromised digital portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). SiLAS has been designed and built in line with UK government and industry best practice for secure development. Security has been included from the ground up, including multi factor authentication, with independent testing activities to validate that the appropriate security controls are in place.

A dedicated team will monitor and update the service to ensure it evolves to remain resilient to emerging threats and is supported by a security operations capability. While no system can be entirely risk free, we are confident that we have taken the right steps to protect the service and its users.

Responsibility for disaster recovery planning for digital systems lies with Justice Digital rather than the LAA. Prior to the cyber- attack there was no digital disaster recovery plan in place. However, had we had a fully funded disaster recovery system, any immediate restoration would have simply restored the systems without resolving the vulnerabilities that enabled the cyber- attack to occur. Justice Digital now have a new Service Owner structure in place where clear Service Standards will be defined and monitored. This will include digital disaster recovery plans for each digital product.

Prior to the cyber- attack the LAA had in place prepared business continuity plans for business-critical processes and services to ensure that access to justice could be maintained in the event of a system outage. These plans were tried and tested, and we were confident that the measures would be effective for our initial response. These measures gave us sufficient time to design and implement longer term measures to meet the specific needs of the incident that were introduced in June 2025.

At every stage, we have acted to protect public access to justice and to support providers in delivering legal aid. We have achieved this without affecting court backlogs or police station activity.

Our business continuity planning was effective in maintaining access to justice from the outset of the attack and the need to have longer term options in place is one of the lessons that we have taken from this incident.

A formal lessons learned approach will systematically analyse lessons from the Ministry of Justice’s and LAA’s preparation for and response to the cyber-attack. This work will cover pre-incident risk management and the response to the incident itself. This will inform future resilience planning, governance improvement and risk mitigation strategies across the Ministry of Justice and its agencies.

Legal Aid Agency: Cybercrime
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Tuesday 23rd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what is the determined method by which unauthorised access was gained to the Legal Aid Agency's online digital systems during the April 2025 data breach.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously.

Firstly, to ensure transparency about the cyber- attack and that we reached as many potentially impacted individuals as possible, the Ministry of Justice published a notice shortly after it became aware of the criminal cyber-attack at 08:15 on 19 May on GOV.UK

The notice provided information about the cyber-attack and directed concerned members of the public to the National Cyber Security Centre’s webpage, which contained information on how to protect against the impact of a data breach.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also set up dedicated Customer Services support via a telephone line and email for providers and clients who had concerns regarding the data breach. We did not write to all clients, to all the addresses that we had, because some of those addresses would no longer be current, and that would potentially create another data breach in itself.

The published statement referred to above sets out information about who may have been impacted and the nature of the information which may have been accessed. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.

In the interests of security, we cannot confirm the method by which unauthorised access was gained to the LAA’s online digital systems or details about specific steps taken or measures implemented to protect LAA systems against any future cyber-attacks.

Security of the new systems has been paramount as we have rebuilt the LAA’s digital systems following the attack. The compromised digital portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). SiLAS has been designed and built in line with UK government and industry best practice for secure development. Security has been included from the ground up, including multi factor authentication, with independent testing activities to validate that the appropriate security controls are in place.

A dedicated team will monitor and update the service to ensure it evolves to remain resilient to emerging threats and is supported by a security operations capability. While no system can be entirely risk free, we are confident that we have taken the right steps to protect the service and its users.

Responsibility for disaster recovery planning for digital systems lies with Justice Digital rather than the LAA. Prior to the cyber- attack there was no digital disaster recovery plan in place. However, had we had a fully funded disaster recovery system, any immediate restoration would have simply restored the systems without resolving the vulnerabilities that enabled the cyber- attack to occur. Justice Digital now have a new Service Owner structure in place where clear Service Standards will be defined and monitored. This will include digital disaster recovery plans for each digital product.

Prior to the cyber- attack the LAA had in place prepared business continuity plans for business-critical processes and services to ensure that access to justice could be maintained in the event of a system outage. These plans were tried and tested, and we were confident that the measures would be effective for our initial response. These measures gave us sufficient time to design and implement longer term measures to meet the specific needs of the incident that were introduced in June 2025.

At every stage, we have acted to protect public access to justice and to support providers in delivering legal aid. We have achieved this without affecting court backlogs or police station activity.

Our business continuity planning was effective in maintaining access to justice from the outset of the attack and the need to have longer term options in place is one of the lessons that we have taken from this incident.

A formal lessons learned approach will systematically analyse lessons from the Ministry of Justice’s and LAA’s preparation for and response to the cyber-attack. This work will cover pre-incident risk management and the response to the incident itself. This will inform future resilience planning, governance improvement and risk mitigation strategies across the Ministry of Justice and its agencies.

Legal Aid Agency: Cybercrime
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Tuesday 23rd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what types of personal and sensitive data were compromised in the April 2025 cyber attack on the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) including whether the breach included information on vulnerable individuals such as victims of domestic abuse and asylum seekers.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously.

Firstly, to ensure transparency about the cyber- attack and that we reached as many potentially impacted individuals as possible, the Ministry of Justice published a notice shortly after it became aware of the criminal cyber-attack at 08:15 on 19 May on GOV.UK

The notice provided information about the cyber-attack and directed concerned members of the public to the National Cyber Security Centre’s webpage, which contained information on how to protect against the impact of a data breach.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also set up dedicated Customer Services support via a telephone line and email for providers and clients who had concerns regarding the data breach. We did not write to all clients, to all the addresses that we had, because some of those addresses would no longer be current, and that would potentially create another data breach in itself.

The published statement referred to above sets out information about who may have been impacted and the nature of the information which may have been accessed. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.

In the interests of security, we cannot confirm the method by which unauthorised access was gained to the LAA’s online digital systems or details about specific steps taken or measures implemented to protect LAA systems against any future cyber-attacks.

Security of the new systems has been paramount as we have rebuilt the LAA’s digital systems following the attack. The compromised digital portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). SiLAS has been designed and built in line with UK government and industry best practice for secure development. Security has been included from the ground up, including multi factor authentication, with independent testing activities to validate that the appropriate security controls are in place.

A dedicated team will monitor and update the service to ensure it evolves to remain resilient to emerging threats and is supported by a security operations capability. While no system can be entirely risk free, we are confident that we have taken the right steps to protect the service and its users.

Responsibility for disaster recovery planning for digital systems lies with Justice Digital rather than the LAA. Prior to the cyber- attack there was no digital disaster recovery plan in place. However, had we had a fully funded disaster recovery system, any immediate restoration would have simply restored the systems without resolving the vulnerabilities that enabled the cyber- attack to occur. Justice Digital now have a new Service Owner structure in place where clear Service Standards will be defined and monitored. This will include digital disaster recovery plans for each digital product.

Prior to the cyber- attack the LAA had in place prepared business continuity plans for business-critical processes and services to ensure that access to justice could be maintained in the event of a system outage. These plans were tried and tested, and we were confident that the measures would be effective for our initial response. These measures gave us sufficient time to design and implement longer term measures to meet the specific needs of the incident that were introduced in June 2025.

At every stage, we have acted to protect public access to justice and to support providers in delivering legal aid. We have achieved this without affecting court backlogs or police station activity.

Our business continuity planning was effective in maintaining access to justice from the outset of the attack and the need to have longer term options in place is one of the lessons that we have taken from this incident.

A formal lessons learned approach will systematically analyse lessons from the Ministry of Justice’s and LAA’s preparation for and response to the cyber-attack. This work will cover pre-incident risk management and the response to the incident itself. This will inform future resilience planning, governance improvement and risk mitigation strategies across the Ministry of Justice and its agencies.

Legal Aid Agency: Cybersecurity
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Tuesday 23rd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the the Legal Advice Agency data breach in April 2025, whether his Department and the LAA had a prepared disaster recovery plan prior to the breach.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously.

Firstly, to ensure transparency about the cyber- attack and that we reached as many potentially impacted individuals as possible, the Ministry of Justice published a notice shortly after it became aware of the criminal cyber-attack at 08:15 on 19 May on GOV.UK

The notice provided information about the cyber-attack and directed concerned members of the public to the National Cyber Security Centre’s webpage, which contained information on how to protect against the impact of a data breach.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also set up dedicated Customer Services support via a telephone line and email for providers and clients who had concerns regarding the data breach. We did not write to all clients, to all the addresses that we had, because some of those addresses would no longer be current, and that would potentially create another data breach in itself.

The published statement referred to above sets out information about who may have been impacted and the nature of the information which may have been accessed. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.

In the interests of security, we cannot confirm the method by which unauthorised access was gained to the LAA’s online digital systems or details about specific steps taken or measures implemented to protect LAA systems against any future cyber-attacks.

Security of the new systems has been paramount as we have rebuilt the LAA’s digital systems following the attack. The compromised digital portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). SiLAS has been designed and built in line with UK government and industry best practice for secure development. Security has been included from the ground up, including multi factor authentication, with independent testing activities to validate that the appropriate security controls are in place.

A dedicated team will monitor and update the service to ensure it evolves to remain resilient to emerging threats and is supported by a security operations capability. While no system can be entirely risk free, we are confident that we have taken the right steps to protect the service and its users.

Responsibility for disaster recovery planning for digital systems lies with Justice Digital rather than the LAA. Prior to the cyber- attack there was no digital disaster recovery plan in place. However, had we had a fully funded disaster recovery system, any immediate restoration would have simply restored the systems without resolving the vulnerabilities that enabled the cyber- attack to occur. Justice Digital now have a new Service Owner structure in place where clear Service Standards will be defined and monitored. This will include digital disaster recovery plans for each digital product.

Prior to the cyber- attack the LAA had in place prepared business continuity plans for business-critical processes and services to ensure that access to justice could be maintained in the event of a system outage. These plans were tried and tested, and we were confident that the measures would be effective for our initial response. These measures gave us sufficient time to design and implement longer term measures to meet the specific needs of the incident that were introduced in June 2025.

At every stage, we have acted to protect public access to justice and to support providers in delivering legal aid. We have achieved this without affecting court backlogs or police station activity.

Our business continuity planning was effective in maintaining access to justice from the outset of the attack and the need to have longer term options in place is one of the lessons that we have taken from this incident.

A formal lessons learned approach will systematically analyse lessons from the Ministry of Justice’s and LAA’s preparation for and response to the cyber-attack. This work will cover pre-incident risk management and the response to the incident itself. This will inform future resilience planning, governance improvement and risk mitigation strategies across the Ministry of Justice and its agencies.

Legal Aid Agency: Cybersecurity
Asked by: Marie Rimmer (Labour - St Helens South and Whiston)
Tuesday 23rd December 2025

Question to the Ministry of Justice:

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the adequacy of disaster recovery planning at the Legal Aid Agency prior to the cyber-attack of April 2025.

Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)

We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously.

Firstly, to ensure transparency about the cyber- attack and that we reached as many potentially impacted individuals as possible, the Ministry of Justice published a notice shortly after it became aware of the criminal cyber-attack at 08:15 on 19 May on GOV.UK

The notice provided information about the cyber-attack and directed concerned members of the public to the National Cyber Security Centre’s webpage, which contained information on how to protect against the impact of a data breach.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) also set up dedicated Customer Services support via a telephone line and email for providers and clients who had concerns regarding the data breach. We did not write to all clients, to all the addresses that we had, because some of those addresses would no longer be current, and that would potentially create another data breach in itself.

The published statement referred to above sets out information about who may have been impacted and the nature of the information which may have been accessed. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.

In the interests of security, we cannot confirm the method by which unauthorised access was gained to the LAA’s online digital systems or details about specific steps taken or measures implemented to protect LAA systems against any future cyber-attacks.

Security of the new systems has been paramount as we have rebuilt the LAA’s digital systems following the attack. The compromised digital portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). SiLAS has been designed and built in line with UK government and industry best practice for secure development. Security has been included from the ground up, including multi factor authentication, with independent testing activities to validate that the appropriate security controls are in place.

A dedicated team will monitor and update the service to ensure it evolves to remain resilient to emerging threats and is supported by a security operations capability. While no system can be entirely risk free, we are confident that we have taken the right steps to protect the service and its users.

Responsibility for disaster recovery planning for digital systems lies with Justice Digital rather than the LAA. Prior to the cyber- attack there was no digital disaster recovery plan in place. However, had we had a fully funded disaster recovery system, any immediate restoration would have simply restored the systems without resolving the vulnerabilities that enabled the cyber- attack to occur. Justice Digital now have a new Service Owner structure in place where clear Service Standards will be defined and monitored. This will include digital disaster recovery plans for each digital product.

Prior to the cyber- attack the LAA had in place prepared business continuity plans for business-critical processes and services to ensure that access to justice could be maintained in the event of a system outage. These plans were tried and tested, and we were confident that the measures would be effective for our initial response. These measures gave us sufficient time to design and implement longer term measures to meet the specific needs of the incident that were introduced in June 2025.

At every stage, we have acted to protect public access to justice and to support providers in delivering legal aid. We have achieved this without affecting court backlogs or police station activity.

Our business continuity planning was effective in maintaining access to justice from the outset of the attack and the need to have longer term options in place is one of the lessons that we have taken from this incident.

A formal lessons learned approach will systematically analyse lessons from the Ministry of Justice’s and LAA’s preparation for and response to the cyber-attack. This work will cover pre-incident risk management and the response to the incident itself. This will inform future resilience planning, governance improvement and risk mitigation strategies across the Ministry of Justice and its agencies.



Early Day Motions Signed
Monday 15th December
Marie Rimmer signed this EDM on Tuesday 16th December 2025

Union of Agricultural Work Committees in the Occupied West Bank

29 signatures (Most recent: 18 Dec 2025)
Tabled by: Steve Witherden (Labour - Montgomeryshire and Glyndwr)
That this House condemns the raid carried out on 1 December 2025 by Israeli forces on the offices of the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), a Palestinian non-governmental organisation, in Ramallah and Hebron in the Occupied West Bank; notes that soldiers reportedly physically assaulted, tied up and blindfolded people …
Monday 1st December
Marie Rimmer signed this EDM on Tuesday 16th December 2025

Independent Office for Police Conduct findings on Norman Bettison

42 signatures (Most recent: 16 Dec 2025)
Tabled by: Ian Byrne (Labour - Liverpool West Derby)
That this House notes the findings of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) investigations relating to Sir Norman Bettison and the circumstances surrounding his application for the post of Chief Constable of Merseyside in 1998; further notes the IOPC view that had Sir Norman Bettison still been serving, he …



Marie Rimmer mentioned

Live Transcript

Note: Cited speaker in live transcript data may not always be accurate. Check video link to confirm.

15 Dec 2025, 6:52 p.m. - House of Commons
" Marie Rimmer. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker, the use of foreign lawyers by both prosecution and lawyers by both prosecution and defence is a long established tradition in Hong Kong. Yet, Mr. "
Ms Marie Rimmer MP (St Helens South and Whiston, Labour) - View Video - View Transcript


Select Committee Documents
Friday 12th December 2025
Formal Minutes - Formal minutes 2024-25

Backbench Business Committee

Found: Forster: Retrospective accountability of the construction industry • Sir Iain Duncan Smith, Ms Marie Rimmer