Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to his Department's research entitled Alcohol monitoring on licence: process and interim impact evaluation, published 30 October 2025, what assessment his Department have made of the adequacy of alcohol monitoring readings from people on Alcohol Monitoring Licence orders whose tags were later removed due to potentially incorrect fittings.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Alcohol monitoring on licence was introduced in Wales in 2021 and England in 2022 and enables probation to include an additional licence condition banning or restricting the consumption of alcohol, where a criminogenic need related to alcohol misuse is identified as an increase to risk. The alcohol monitoring on licence: process and interim impact evaluation was published on 30 October 2025: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alcohol-monitoring-on-licence-process-and-interim-impact-evaluation. A further impact evaluation exploring reoffending will be published in due course which will measure longer-term outcomes than the existing published evaluation. The sample size is not confirmed but we expect it to be broadly similar.
The process and interim impact evaluation of Alcohol Monitoring on Licence scheme was based on a sample of the overall tagged population. The process evaluation reported some instances where tag wearers experienced pain or discomfort and had the tag changed or removed. These issues did not indicate widespread concerns about the reliability of alcohol tag readings.
Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to his Department's research entitled Alcohol monitoring on licence: process and interim impact evaluation, published 30 October 2025, whether he plans to repeat research on the impact of the Alcohol and Monitoring on Licence scheme with larger sample group sizes.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Alcohol monitoring on licence was introduced in Wales in 2021 and England in 2022 and enables probation to include an additional licence condition banning or restricting the consumption of alcohol, where a criminogenic need related to alcohol misuse is identified as an increase to risk. The alcohol monitoring on licence: process and interim impact evaluation was published on 30 October 2025: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/alcohol-monitoring-on-licence-process-and-interim-impact-evaluation. A further impact evaluation exploring reoffending will be published in due course which will measure longer-term outcomes than the existing published evaluation. The sample size is not confirmed but we expect it to be broadly similar.
The process and interim impact evaluation of Alcohol Monitoring on Licence scheme was based on a sample of the overall tagged population. The process evaluation reported some instances where tag wearers experienced pain or discomfort and had the tag changed or removed. These issues did not indicate widespread concerns about the reliability of alcohol tag readings.
Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 21 November 2024 to Question 14399 on Offenders: Electronic Tagging, what assessment his Department has made of the effectiveness of alcohol monitoring tags in reducing the level of alcohol related reoffending.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department keeps the use of alcohol monitoring under review and has commissioned a programme of evaluations to assess impact on compliance and reoffending. For community sentences, compliance with court‑imposed alcohol bans is high. Published statistics show a compliance rate with the ban of over 97% for days monitored, since introduction, as shown here: Electronic Monitoring MI Publication, June 2025 - GOV.UK.
For post‑custody use, we published the Alcohol Monitoring on Licence (AML) process and interim impact evaluation in October 2025, linked here: Alcohol monitoring on licence: process and interim impact evaluation - GOV.UK.
Enforcement decisions are recorded within individual probation case management records and are taken on a case‑by‑case basis by supervising practitioners. To collate this locally held information could only be done at a disproportionate cost. Non‑compliance can lead to proportionate enforcement ranging from further engagement with the person on probation through formal warnings and breach action, up to recall where risk or persistent non‑compliance warrants it.
We publish regular Alcohol Monitoring Statistics. The latest publication sets out statistics on AAMR orders and the use of AML orders from 31 July 2025 to 30 November 2025 and can be found here: Ad-Hoc Alcohol Monitoring Statistics Publication, Dec 2025 - GOV.UK.
Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many alerts were triggered by alcohol monitoring tags in December 2024; and what proportion of those alerts resulted in enforcement action, including recall to prison and return to court.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department keeps the use of alcohol monitoring under review and has commissioned a programme of evaluations to assess impact on compliance and reoffending. For community sentences, compliance with court‑imposed alcohol bans is high. Published statistics show a compliance rate with the ban of over 97% for days monitored, since introduction, as shown here: Electronic Monitoring MI Publication, June 2025 - GOV.UK.
For post‑custody use, we published the Alcohol Monitoring on Licence (AML) process and interim impact evaluation in October 2025, linked here: Alcohol monitoring on licence: process and interim impact evaluation - GOV.UK.
Enforcement decisions are recorded within individual probation case management records and are taken on a case‑by‑case basis by supervising practitioners. To collate this locally held information could only be done at a disproportionate cost. Non‑compliance can lead to proportionate enforcement ranging from further engagement with the person on probation through formal warnings and breach action, up to recall where risk or persistent non‑compliance warrants it.
We publish regular Alcohol Monitoring Statistics. The latest publication sets out statistics on AAMR orders and the use of AML orders from 31 July 2025 to 30 November 2025 and can be found here: Ad-Hoc Alcohol Monitoring Statistics Publication, Dec 2025 - GOV.UK.
Asked by: James McMurdock (Independent - South Basildon and East Thurrock)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the total cost was of procuring, fitting, and monitoring alcohol tags in each of the last three years.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Financial records allow us to provide the direct contractual costs of alcohol monitoring which include the cost of the tag purchases and system monitoring but do not distinguish between case type for Electronic Monitoring in terms of tag installation or physical monitoring and therefore the table below excludes these costs for the three years. Costs also exclude probation and other criminal justice system partners’ resource supporting EM in the community.
As a result of our record investment in electronic monitoring, we are tagging more offenders than ever before. The technology is playing a significant role in the Government’s mission to take back our streets from alcohol-fuelled harm, which the National Audit Office estimate costs the UK economy £21 billion a year. Evidence is increasingly proving the effectiveness of tags, with offenders banned from drinking alcohol staying sober for 97% of the days they were tagged.
| 2023/24 | 2024/25 | 2025/26 |
(Actual) | (Actual) | (Actual) | |
Procurement and System Monitoring of Alcohol Monitoring tags | £8.1m | £12.5m | £15.2m |
Asked by: Andy Slaughter (Labour - Hammersmith and Chiswick)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to ensure the effectiveness of the proposed expansion of electronic monitoring of offenders in helping to (a) reduce reoffending and (b) support rehabilitation.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
In support of the Sentencing Bill, the Ministry of Justice will significantly expand the use of electronic monitoring as a vital tool for probation to ensure offenders are managed safely in the community.
This expansion builds on the Department’s long-standing commitment to building the evidence base for electronic monitoring. Our evaluations, alongside external research commissioned by the Department, have provided clear evidence that targeted electronic monitoring conditions can reduce reoffending and support reintegration by providing an effective alternative to custody. A recent study has found that curfew tags reduce reoffending by 20% when used as part of a community sentence. Further to this, our Acquisitive Crime pilot evaluation shows that burglars, robbers, and thieves given a constant whereabouts monitoring condition with a GPS tag were around 20% less likely to reoffend while on the tag.
Asked by: Pam Cox (Labour - Colchester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what was the rate of compliance for people fitted with an alcohol monitoring device after their release from prison, in each year since 2021.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
We are unable to provide compliance rates by year for those released from custody and subject to alcohol monitoring. However, our published research for this cohort has shown around four out of five prison leavers with an alcohol monitoring condition added to their licence during 2023 did not violate their order. Of those who did violate their order, most only received a single violation. The Department’s published research can be found here - AML: Process and Interim Impact Evaluation.
The compliance rate of alcohol monitoring imposed by the court as part of a Community Order or Suspended Sentence Order, which imposes a total ban on drinking alcohol for up to 120 days, showed from the introduction of the technology in October 2020 through to 6 June 2025, the devices did not register a tamper or alcohol alert for 97.3% of the days worn. Anyone who does break the rules, risks being returned to custody.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 14 May 2025 to Question 46823 on Electronic Tagging: Standards, what reason was given for the 10,438 untagged cases audited by probation between January and March 2025.
Answered by Nicholas Dakin - Vice Chamberlain (HM Household) (Whip, House of Commons)
The 10,438 offenders reported as untagged is misleading. It includes duplicates and errors that have not been corrected through our audit and quality assurance processes which are currently underway.
The information requested through the PQ could only be obtained at disproportionate cost due to data quality issues.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 May 2025 to Question 46823, on Electronic Tagging: Standards, what estimate she has made of the number of offenders who were not tagged because the Probation Service held an incorrect address for them in the last two years.
Answered by Nicholas Dakin - Vice Chamberlain (HM Household) (Whip, House of Commons)
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost due to data quality issues.
Asked by: Bell Ribeiro-Addy (Labour - Clapham and Brixton Hill)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 May 2025 to Question 46823, on Electronic Tagging: Standards: what recent estimate she has made of the number of offenders not tagged as a result of the Probation Service holding an incorrect address for the offender in each of the last five years.
Answered by Nicholas Dakin - Vice Chamberlain (HM Household) (Whip, House of Commons)
The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.