Asked by: Kim Johnson (Labour - Liverpool Riverside)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of people serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection were recalled to custody having not committed a further offence in each of the last three reporting years.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The power to recall is a vital public protection measure. Where an offender serving an IPP sentence is recalled to custody, it is because the Probation Service has assessed that the offender’s risk has escalated to the point where the offender may no longer be safely managed in the community and has evidence that the offender’s behaviour is similar to the behaviour at the time of the offending which attracted the IPP sentence. This means that an IPP offender does not have to have committed a further offence to be recalled.
Successive thematic reviews conducted by HM Chief Inspector of Probation have found that the Probation Service is using recall appropriately and for public protection purposes.
Table 1: Number and Proportion of IPP Recalls Not Involving a Charge for a Further Offence, 2023-2025 [note 1]
Category | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
Number not facing further charge | 463 | 449 | 329 |
Proportion not facing further charge | 70% | 73% | 77% |
With regards to the cost of Parole Board hearings relating to people serving an IPP sentence who had been recalled to custody having not committed a further offence, the data are not routinely available to provide a reasonable estimate, and the work to collate it could not be completed without incurring disproportionate costs.
Table 3: Number and proportion of Parole Board IPP recall review outcomes of release and open conditions from completed cases, 2022/23 to 2024/25 [note 2] [note 3]
Review Outcome | 2022/23 | 2023/24 | 2024/25 |
Open | 18 | 23 | 33 |
Release | 294 | 426 | 405 |
Open proportion of completed cases | 4% | 3% | 5% |
Release proportion of completed cases | 61% | 63% | 60% |
Table 4: Number and proportion of Parole Board IPP recall review outcomes of release and open conditions from completed cases, where the offender was not facing a charge for a further offence, 2022/23 to 2024/25 [note 2] [note 3] [note 4]
Review Outcome | 2022/23 | 2023/24 | 2024/25 |
Open | 15 | 22 | 25 |
Release | 207 | 329 | 296 |
Open proportion of completed cases | 5% | 5% | 5% |
Release proportion of completed cases | 65% | 68% | 63% |
We may not disclose the number of recalled IPP prisoners in custody as of 30 April 2026 as the data are a subset of data scheduled to be published at the end of July.
Table notes:
[note 1] The proportions are of total number of IPP recalls. An offender can be recalled multiple times in a year or across years.
[note 2] The outcomes are the final outcomes of each review and do not include intermediate decisions that were subsequently remade such as through reconsideration mechanism.
[note 3] Completed cases are cases that resulted in one of release, knockback and open conditions.
[note 4] Offenders not facing a charge of further offence are those who were not facing a charge of further offence at the point of their recall prior to the recall review.
Asked by: James Cleverly (Conservative - Braintree)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, whether his Department has undertaken any assessment of whether rules on fast food outlets in the National Planning Policy Framework are being applied by local planning authorities in respect of applications to open new branches of (a) Pret a Manger, (b) Subway, (c) Greggs, or (d) fish and chip shops.
Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
I refer the Rt Hon. Member to the answer given to Question UIN 122204 on 1 April 2026.
Asked by: Andrew Rosindell (Reform UK - Romford)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on a) local and b) national infrastructure improvements in the context of the Universal United Kingdom Resort.
Answered by Stephanie Peacock - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
DCMS has been working closely with the Department for Transport on delivering the infrastructure that will bring visitors to the park as well as provide benefits for both local communities and those travelling through Bedford. This includes upgrades on the A421 and a new station at Wixams, both of which will facilitate visits to the resort and improve access in the local area for residents.
The investment from Comcast NBCUniversal is this Government’s Modern Industrial Strategy in action, and DCMS is working closely with the Department for Business and Trade to make Universal United Kingdom Resort a success.
I was delighted to visit the site on 3 June alongside the Chancellor, where I met the first of the new employees who will be based in Bedford, and have an essential role in delivering this transformational project.
Asked by: James Wild (Conservative - North West Norfolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 June 2026 to Question 3327 on Prisoners' Release, in which part of the referenced data the figures can be found for the number of prisoners who (a) have been returned to prison and (b) remain at large.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Where an individual is deemed unlawfully at large and subject to rearrest, any information held on such cases is used for prison and police operational purposes.
As this information is not part of a routine, quality-assured statistical collection, it is not included in published statistics.
A joint protocol between HMPPS and the National Police Chiefs’ Council ensures timely communication between partner agencies when an individual is released in error and is unlawfully at large.
The protocol sets out steps to re-arrest the individual as quickly as possible. Further work is underway to strengthen the protocol further and improve victim communication, following Dame Lynne Owens’ independent review.
Asked by: Mike Wood (Conservative - Kingswinford and South Staffordshire)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the answer of 23 April 2026 to Question 124822 on Proof of Identity: Digital Technology, how much will participants of the People’s Panel be paid in terms of (a) expenses and (b) direct payment.
Answered by James Frith - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
Participants of the People’s Panel are paid to recognise the time they are giving up to take part. Payments are aligned to each workshop they attend, so may vary depending on attendance, and include expenses such as travel, meals and accommodation and any additional caring requirements (if needed).
Asked by: Lorraine Beavers (Labour - Blackpool North and Fleetwood)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what steps he is taking to develop the Access to Work Scheme.
Answered by Stephen Timms - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
As set out in the Written Statement made by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 19 May (HCWS34), to increase the efficiency and reduce waiting times for the scheme we will recruit an additional 480 case staff to process the higher volume of applications. When recruitment is complete, we will have more than twice as many staff working on Access to Work as in March 2024. The recruitment process has already begun, and new case managers will receive extensive training to handle complex applications with confidence. This will ensure disabled people, and people with health conditions can receive timely support to secure and sustain employment.
We also welcome the National Audit Office’s report on AtW and are carefully considering its recommendations. In addition to this, we have consulted and collaborated widely with disabled people along with employers and representative bodies to gather evidence. These insights will help inform our work and shape any changes to Access to Work.
We will also draw on the outcomes of the Green Paper consultation and the Collaboration Committees to inform and help shape the future direction of Access to Work.
The announcement delivered on 19 May set out our commitment to deliver an AtW that is timely, efficient, and can meet new levels of demand. It will help to restore confidence in the capability of the Scheme to award the right support at the right time and sets a pathway towards further improvements.
Asked by: Lee Dillon (Liberal Democrat - Newbury)
Question to the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government:
To ask the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, what assessment his Department has made on the relative speed of deposit returns and alternative dispute resolution rates between insured and custodial tenancy deposit schemes.
Answered by Matthew Pennycook - Minister of State (Housing, Communities and Local Government)
My Department receives data from Tenancy Deposit Protection (TDP) providers regarding the speed of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in respect of both custodial and insured schemes.
My Department also receives information about how quickly a deposit is returned to a tenant upon conclusion of ADR, and for the custodial scheme it receives data on how quickly a deposit is returned if there is no dispute.
Due to the nature of the insured scheme, where the landlord or agents keeps possession of deposit monies, if no dispute is raised there is no official record of how long it takes for the deposit monies to be returned to tenants. Based on recent Key Performance Indicator (KPI) figures for the custodial schemes, over 95% of disputed or undisputed deposits are returned to tenants within two days of notification of the conclusion of a dispute or agreement of any deductions.
However, a recent report from Citizens Advice states that 55% of tenants surveyed reported waiting longer than two weeks to have all or some of their deposit returned. Given the most recent KPI data shows custodial deposit returns are shorter than this, we have concluded that the insured scheme can create unnecessary delays to the detriment of tenants.
Asked by: Andrew Snowden (Conservative - Fylde)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what discussions he has had with local authorities in Lancashire on the deployment of community battery storage schemes.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Department for Energy Security and Net Zero recognises the potential for community batteries to help households access cheaper, clean electricity, including low‑income households without the up‑front capital for a home battery, those living in flats, and homes without suitable space for installation.
The Department has launched a Call for Evidence to gather views from a wide range of stakeholders, including local authorities, on the benefits, barriers to delivery and safety of these schemes. The department has not yet discussed these issues with local authorities in Lancashire, however officials would be happy to do so as part of this process.
Asked by: Andrew Snowden (Conservative - Fylde)
Question to the Department for Energy Security & Net Zero:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, what assessment he has made of the potential for community battery schemes to reduce energy bills for households in Fylde constituency.
Answered by Michael Shanks - Minister of State (Department for Energy Security and Net Zero)
The Department recognises the potential for community batteries to help households access cheaper, clean electricity, including those without the up-front capital required for a home battery, those living in flats, and households that lack the space needed for installation.
Evidence from existing schemes suggests that community batteries can reduce energy bills by reducing peak electricity use and enabling export to the grid.
However, the Department has not made a final assessment of the scale of these savings. It has therefore launched a Call for Evidence to gather further information on this and other issues.
Asked by: Joshua Reynolds (Liberal Democrat - Maidenhead)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department's proposed underwriting of the 2027 Invictus Games is contingent on Invictus UK 2027 Ltd securing funding from other sources.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
The 2024 Labour Party manifesto committed to delivery of the Invictus Games, recognising the Games' vital role in recovery, rehabilitation, and reintegration.
The Invictus Games are delivered by a host nation entity under the Invictus Games Foundation, with funding models varying by country. To support the bid for the 2027 Games in Birmingham, a charitable entity, IUK27, was established, and the UK Government agreed to underwrite £26 million of the costs as a contingency, specifically to ensure delivery of the Games if sufficient commercial sponsorship was not secured. A proportion of this underwrite has been set aside over three grants to be released incrementally.
Officials meet regularly with the Invictus Games 2027 Ltd team to discuss the planning and delivery of the Games.