Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, how much her Department has spent on (a) social media promotions, (b) influencer marketing and (c) online advertising in the last 12 months.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
Commercial sensitivities exist around aspects of this spend which could prejudice commercial interests. All spend in these areas are subject to the standard value for money assessments.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, what guidance the Crown Prosecution Service provides to prosecutors when considering whether to charge people who have used force in self-defence within their own home.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
Charging decisions in cases regarding householders and the use of force against intruders in England and Wales are made independently by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
Reasonable force may be used by homeowners to protect themselves or others if a crime is taking place inside their home. This means individuals can protect themselves ‘in the heat of the moment’ - this includes using an object as a weapon or to stop an intruder running off - for example by tackling them to the ground. There is no specific definition of ‘reasonable force’ as this will depend on each individual circumstance. A homeowner does not have to wait to be attacked before defending themselves in their home. If a homeowner has acted in reasonable self-defence and the intruder dies, they will still have acted lawfully.
However, a prosecution could follow if, for example, the attack on an intruder continues after the danger has passed or a trap has been pre-planned for an individual rather than informing and involving the police.
Guidance regarding householders and the use of force against intruders can be found at Householders and the use of force against intruders | The Crown Prosecution Service.
The CPS does not hold any data which shows the number of defendants who were homeowners prosecuted for using unreasonable or excessive force to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. To establish whether defendants were homeowners using excessive force against an intruder would require a manual review of case files and with over 440,000 defendants prosecuted by the CPS during 2024, this would be at disproportionate cost.
Data is held from 2015 showing the number offences of murder, attempted murder, and manslaughter charged by way of common law (or the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 in respect of attempted murder) in which a prosecution commenced and reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ courts. From 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2024, 12,418 such offences were charged. This figure relates to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants. It can be the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence against the same complainant. No data is held showing the final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, how many homeowners have been prosecuted for using force against individuals unlawfully present in their homes in the last 10 years.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
Charging decisions in cases regarding householders and the use of force against intruders in England and Wales are made independently by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
Reasonable force may be used by homeowners to protect themselves or others if a crime is taking place inside their home. This means individuals can protect themselves ‘in the heat of the moment’ - this includes using an object as a weapon or to stop an intruder running off - for example by tackling them to the ground. There is no specific definition of ‘reasonable force’ as this will depend on each individual circumstance. A homeowner does not have to wait to be attacked before defending themselves in their home. If a homeowner has acted in reasonable self-defence and the intruder dies, they will still have acted lawfully.
However, a prosecution could follow if, for example, the attack on an intruder continues after the danger has passed or a trap has been pre-planned for an individual rather than informing and involving the police.
Guidance regarding householders and the use of force against intruders can be found at Householders and the use of force against intruders | The Crown Prosecution Service.
The CPS does not hold any data which shows the number of defendants who were homeowners prosecuted for using unreasonable or excessive force to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. To establish whether defendants were homeowners using excessive force against an intruder would require a manual review of case files and with over 440,000 defendants prosecuted by the CPS during 2024, this would be at disproportionate cost.
Data is held from 2015 showing the number offences of murder, attempted murder, and manslaughter charged by way of common law (or the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 in respect of attempted murder) in which a prosecution commenced and reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ courts. From 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2024, 12,418 such offences were charged. This figure relates to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants. It can be the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence against the same complainant. No data is held showing the final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, what steps she is taking to ensure that people who act in good faith to protect themselves or others from intruders are not prosecuted.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
Charging decisions in cases regarding householders and the use of force against intruders in England and Wales are made independently by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS).
Reasonable force may be used by homeowners to protect themselves or others if a crime is taking place inside their home. This means individuals can protect themselves ‘in the heat of the moment’ - this includes using an object as a weapon or to stop an intruder running off - for example by tackling them to the ground. There is no specific definition of ‘reasonable force’ as this will depend on each individual circumstance. A homeowner does not have to wait to be attacked before defending themselves in their home. If a homeowner has acted in reasonable self-defence and the intruder dies, they will still have acted lawfully.
However, a prosecution could follow if, for example, the attack on an intruder continues after the danger has passed or a trap has been pre-planned for an individual rather than informing and involving the police.
Guidance regarding householders and the use of force against intruders can be found at Householders and the use of force against intruders | The Crown Prosecution Service.
The CPS does not hold any data which shows the number of defendants who were homeowners prosecuted for using unreasonable or excessive force to protect themselves against an intruder in their home. To establish whether defendants were homeowners using excessive force against an intruder would require a manual review of case files and with over 440,000 defendants prosecuted by the CPS during 2024, this would be at disproportionate cost.
Data is held from 2015 showing the number offences of murder, attempted murder, and manslaughter charged by way of common law (or the Criminal Attempts Act 1981 in respect of attempted murder) in which a prosecution commenced and reached a first hearing in the magistrates’ courts. From 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2024, 12,418 such offences were charged. This figure relates to the number of offences and not the number of individual defendants. It can be the case that an individual defendant is charged with more than one offence against the same complainant. No data is held showing the final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, if her Department will make an assessment of the potential merits of fast-tracking Crown Prosecution Service advice in (a) politically sensitive and (b) time-critical investigations.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
It is vital that the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which is rightly operationally independent from Government, makes decisions as quickly as possible after a careful consideration of all relevant facts. As Solicitor General, I review and monitor CPS performance including timeliness of charging decisions on a quarterly basis. All prosecution decisions are taken in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, and the CPS must always aim to make their decisions as quickly and efficiently as possible.
It is right that any case review is undertaken with the utmost care and, whereas some cases may be straightforward, others will have large volumes of evidence that can take time for investigators to identify and gather, often with the support of investigative advice from the prosecutor. That evidence then needs to be reviewed by the prosecutor, often with complex legal issues to resolve. While every case will be different, prosecutors must be even-handed in their approach, and they have a duty to protect the rights of suspects and defendants, while providing the best possible service to victims.
This Government is committed to reducing delays across the system and driving forward wider improvements and efficiencies to improve outcomes and secure swift and effective justice for victims, witnesses, suspects, defendants and the public.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, if they will make it their policy to not provide (a) translation and (b) interpretation for speakers of non-UK languages for services provided by their Department.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
Language service needs and spend are assessed to ensure these services offer good value for money for taxpayers while maintaining high standards of service delivery.
Regarding services provided by my department in particular, the Attorney General’s Office does not provide (a) translation and (b) interpretation for speakers of non-UK languages.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, whether their Department plans to amend its policies on access to (a) toilets, (b) changing facilities and (c) other single-sex spaces in (i) Departmental buildings and (ii) other buildings within their Department’s remit following the Supreme Court judgement in the case of For Women Scotland v The Scottish Ministers of 16 April 2025.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
The Supreme Court ruling made it clear that the provision of single-sex spaces is on the basis of biological sex. Providers should note and follow the ruling.
It is important that we ensure dignity and respect for all. Trans people should have access to services they need but in keeping with the ruling.
The Equality & Human Rights Commission, as Britain’s Equalities watchdog, is developing updated guidance to support service providers. Ministers will consider the EHRC’s updated draft once they have submitted it following further work in light of this ruling.
The Government is considering the implications of the Court’s judgment, including what this means for Government buildings.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, if she will publish the total cost to the public purse for the provision of diversity, equality and inclusion courses for staff in her Department in 2024.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) remains committed to making the step changes required to create a more inclusive environment, enabling all staff, irrespective of background, to deliver high quality work at the Department.
Equality, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in learning and development training is understood to refer to anything with the objective of improving EDI in the AGO, regardless of whether it is called EDI or not.
The AGO conducted a training course on bullying, discrimination and harassment in August 2024. Nine members of staff attended, and the cost of the course was £2,475.98. It referred to types of discrimination related to protected characteristics under the Equalities Act 2010 and employers’ responsibilities.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, what estimate she has made of the cost to her Department of the proposed increase in employer National Insurance contributions for financial year 2025-26.
Answered by Lucy Rigby - Solicitor General (Attorney General's Office)
The Government will provide support for departments and other public sector employers for additional Employer National Insurance Contributions costs only. This funding will be allocated to departments in the usual way, in line with the approach taken under the previous Government’s Health and Social Care Levy.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Independent - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Attorney General:
To ask the Solicitor General, if she will make an assessment of the potential merits of reviewing the Crown Prosecution Guidance on the definition of online hate speech in the context of protecting freedom of speech.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government is committed to tackling all forms of hate crime, and ensuring that police and prosecutors can spend their time dealing with the issues that matter most to our communities.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has existing guidance on communications offences. As with all guidance, they keep that guidance under regular review. This guidance explains the relevant law and how the CPS applies that law, including to offences committed online which constitute hate crime. It includes clear protections and provisions for the fundamental right of freedom of speech.