Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of his Department’s (a) advertising and (b) marketing expenditure was on (i) local newspapers in print and online, (ii) national newspapers in print and online, (iii) social media, (iv) search engines, (v) broadcast and on-demand television and (vi) other channels in the most recent year for which data is available.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Over financial year 2022/23, the Ministry of Justice’s communications team delivered highly cost-effective marketing campaigns to support operational and policy priorities, such as our Prison and Probation Service recruitment campaigns.
As requested, we have outlined the proportion of the marketing and advertising budget that was spent on advertising broken down in percentages. The categories vary slightly due to the way the data is collected. It is worth noting that due to 2023/24 accounts still being in reconciliation, we are unable to provide data for year 2023/24.
| Proportion |
Local Print (advertising) | 0.04% |
National Print (advertising) | 0.52% |
Online job sites (advertising) | 54.24% |
Online Media Search advertising | 15.69% |
Broadcast and on-demand television (advertising) | 0% |
Other | 13.58% |
Social media (advertising) | 15.94% |
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the adequacy of the condition of crown court (a) buildings and (b) other infrastructure.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The general condition of Crown Court buildings and other infrastructure is adequate, but I recognise that improvements are needed in some locations.
That is why we are investing £220 million in the two years to March 2025 for essential modernisation and repair work across the court and tribunal estate. This will minimise disruptions, retain the heritage of the estate, and ensure it is fit for the future.
We are working to ensure that those buildings most in need of investment are prioritised, providing a step forward in improving the quality of the court estate.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what (a) algorithmic and (b) other automated decision making systems his Department uses; and for what purposes.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice is still at the early stages of assessing where the uses of algorithmic models and automated decision-making tools might help drive greater efficiency and deliver maximum value for the taxpayer, as part of the Government’s digital transformation journey.
Work done to date has primarily been around the use of Actuarial Risk Assessment Instruments (ARAIs) in HM Prisons & Probation Service to assess the risks posed by, and needs of, an offender by combining actuarial methods of prediction with structured professional judgement.
The Ministry of Justice recognises that the use of AI in the justice system raises important ethical considerations, such as bias in the data used to train algorithms and the potential for automated decision-making to perpetuate existing inequalities. Therefore, any implementation of AI in the UK Ministry of Justice must be done carefully and transparently, with appropriate safeguards in place.
Any use of automated decision making will be done in compliance with provisions in GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, including the right of individuals to request a new decision is made that is not based solely on automated processing.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the oral contribution of the Minister for Data and Digital Infrastructure of 14 June 2023 at Topical Questions, T7, Official Report, column 286, what plans his Department has to (a) utilise the provisions in Part 3 of the Data Protection and Digital Information (No. 2) Bill and (b) use smart data in new sectors.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
There is exciting potential to explore Smart Data in further sectors, beyond Open Banking. Government, regulators and industry experts are working together via the Smart Data Council to ensure that the UK continues to be at the forefront of developments in this space.
Before committing to utilise the provisions in Part 3 of the Data Protection and Digital Information (No.2) Bill in any given sector, there is work to be done to understand how Smart Data can empower consumers and turbo charge competition, which is the case within my Department.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the shortest wait time was for probate to be granted for applications made in (a) 2021 and (b) 2022.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The average wait for all grant types to be granted in 2021 was 6.9 weeks and 7.1 weeks for July to September 2022.
The longest wait time for Probate to be granted in 2021 was 87.3 weeks and 38.3 weeks in 2022. Cases can be delayed where more information is needed from the applicant, a caveat is in place or where cases are complex.
The shortest wait time for Probate to be granted is 0 days in 2021 and 2022 (i.e. applied for and granted in the same day).
Data provided are for grants issued up to the end of September as is published in the Family Court Statistics Quarterly National Statistics bulletin. This will be updated on 30 March 2022 with data to the end of 2022.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the longest wait time was for probate to be granted for applications made in (a) 2021 and (b) 2022.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The average wait for all grant types to be granted in 2021 was 6.9 weeks and 7.1 weeks for July to September 2022.
The longest wait time for Probate to be granted in 2021 was 87.3 weeks and 38.3 weeks in 2022. Cases can be delayed where more information is needed from the applicant, a caveat is in place or where cases are complex.
The shortest wait time for Probate to be granted is 0 days in 2021 and 2022 (i.e. applied for and granted in the same day).
Data provided are for grants issued up to the end of September as is published in the Family Court Statistics Quarterly National Statistics bulletin. This will be updated on 30 March 2022 with data to the end of 2022.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how long the average wait time was for probate to be granted in (a) 2021 and (b) 2022.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The average wait for all grant types to be granted in 2021 was 6.9 weeks and 7.1 weeks for July to September 2022.
The longest wait time for Probate to be granted in 2021 was 87.3 weeks and 38.3 weeks in 2022. Cases can be delayed where more information is needed from the applicant, a caveat is in place or where cases are complex.
The shortest wait time for Probate to be granted is 0 days in 2021 and 2022 (i.e. applied for and granted in the same day).
Data provided are for grants issued up to the end of September as is published in the Family Court Statistics Quarterly National Statistics bulletin. This will be updated on 30 March 2022 with data to the end of 2022.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of the length of sentences for theft of items which are essential to a person’s livelihood.
Answered by James Cartlidge - Minister of State (Ministry of Defence)
An assessment of the adequacy of the length of sentences for theft of items which are essential to a person’s livelihood has not been carried out. Data on items stolen when a theft offence has been committed is not centrally held.
Sentencing is entirely a matter for our independent courts. When deciding what sentence to impose the courts take into account the circumstances of the offence, the offender and any aggravating and mitigating factors, in line with any relevant sentencing guidelines – which are issued by the independent Sentencing Council. The sentencing guideline for theft makes it clear that the value of items stolen to the loser, regardless of monetary worth, and any consequential financial harm to victims or others must be considered when determining the sentence.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to plans outlined in the Veterans’ Strategy Action Plan 2022-24 to develop a fast-track recruitment scheme for service leavers and veterans to become prison officers, how his Department plans to measure and evaluate the success of those plans.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
'Advance into Justice,’ the Ministry of Justice fast-track scheme to support service leavers and veterans to become prison officers, was launched on 24 January 2022. The campaign closed on 14 February 2022 and candidates were assessed in March 2022. Those successful at assessment centre are currently progressing through the offer and hire process.
The scheme was promoted in several ways including proactive social media communications in advance of the launch; dedicated candidate webinars to provide information on the role and the assessment process; active outreach at ex-Armed Forces’ recruitment fairs; and working collaboratively with the Career Transition Partnership (CTP) to engage service leavers as they transition from the military into civilian life.
The campaign has received dedicated support from Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS). A specific funding line to deliver campaign marketing, candidate outreach and assessment delivery was not needed as we were able to meet the costs as part of the broader Prison Officer recruitment budget. HMPPS provided operational resources to deliver the assessment centres and funding to support successful applicants with relocation or home to work travel costs is being met from existing budgets up to the advertised thresholds of £12,000 per candidate. The total cost of the campaign will be dependent upon the number of successful candidates who take up post and their agreed individual resettlement needs.
A thorough evaluation review and lessons learnt exercise with key stakeholders will be completed to identify successes and challenges, as well as analysing feedback collected from candidates. In addition, analysis will be conducted to identify any differences in terms of selection performance by those on the scheme, compared to the national prison officer recruitment process, alongside evaluating fairness towards protected characteristic groups. This will be supported by our Occupational Psychology Team.
In the short-term, success will be measured by the number of applications and those who progress to an assessment centre and the number of hires in our target prisons. In the longer-term, we will monitor the retention levels of those appointed via this route as well as their performance in role.
Asked by: Stephanie Peacock (Labour - Barnsley East)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what funding has been allocated to developing a fast-track recruitment scheme for service leavers and veterans to become prison officers.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
'Advance into Justice,’ the Ministry of Justice fast-track scheme to support service leavers and veterans to become prison officers, was launched on 24 January 2022. The campaign closed on 14 February 2022 and candidates were assessed in March 2022. Those successful at assessment centre are currently progressing through the offer and hire process.
The scheme was promoted in several ways including proactive social media communications in advance of the launch; dedicated candidate webinars to provide information on the role and the assessment process; active outreach at ex-Armed Forces’ recruitment fairs; and working collaboratively with the Career Transition Partnership (CTP) to engage service leavers as they transition from the military into civilian life.
The campaign has received dedicated support from Her Majesty’s Prison and Probation Service (HMPPS). A specific funding line to deliver campaign marketing, candidate outreach and assessment delivery was not needed as we were able to meet the costs as part of the broader Prison Officer recruitment budget. HMPPS provided operational resources to deliver the assessment centres and funding to support successful applicants with relocation or home to work travel costs is being met from existing budgets up to the advertised thresholds of £12,000 per candidate. The total cost of the campaign will be dependent upon the number of successful candidates who take up post and their agreed individual resettlement needs.
A thorough evaluation review and lessons learnt exercise with key stakeholders will be completed to identify successes and challenges, as well as analysing feedback collected from candidates. In addition, analysis will be conducted to identify any differences in terms of selection performance by those on the scheme, compared to the national prison officer recruitment process, alongside evaluating fairness towards protected characteristic groups. This will be supported by our Occupational Psychology Team.
In the short-term, success will be measured by the number of applications and those who progress to an assessment centre and the number of hires in our target prisons. In the longer-term, we will monitor the retention levels of those appointed via this route as well as their performance in role.