Attorney General

The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) uses Microsoft Copilot as its approved artificial intelligence tool. AGO staff are provided access to Copilot through arrangements managed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), which provides IT services to the AGO.

The AGO does not hold separate contracts for Microsoft Copilot. As a small ministerial department, its IT services, including access to approved AI tools, are provided through the CPS as the AGO’s shared service provider.

The Government is committed to adopting artificial intelligence in a way that is transparent, responsible and accountable to the public.

The information requested can be found at https://questions-statements.parliament.uk.

The information requested is detailed in the following table:

* Full Time Equivalent

The Division’s staffing and budget (which covers staffing and wider operational costs) was increased in 2025-26 to strengthen its ability to recover criminal assets, including the creation of a new asset confiscation enforcement team.

The annual budget and total headcount for the Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate (SEOCID) for each of the years 2022-23 up to 2025-26 are as follows:

During 2025, my office reviewed more than 1,000 sentences. Of these, 14 featured youth sentences imposed for sexual offences. So far during the first half of 2026, my office has already reviewed 9 youth sentences for sexual offences, and we are set to exceed last year’s figures.

The ULS scheme continues to be effective by allowing the victims of the most serious Youth sexual offences to have a voice in the sentencing of their cases.

The Crown Prosecution Service does not collate or publish specific data on categories of offender such as individuals who have returned to the UK following participation in any conflicts overseas.

The Attorney General’s Office (AGO) does not permit civil servants employed in the UK to work from overseas.

Since the 4^th July 2024:

The AGO has bought no lanyards.

The SFO have bought 250 SFO lanyards, for a total cost of £251.50.

The GLD have bought 400 lanyards, for a total cost of £454.20.

The CPS have bought 3405 lanyards, for a total cost of £5,117.59.

Witnesses are eligible to apply for special measures to support them to give their best evidence during criminal proceedings.

Special measures, under the YJCEA, include:

• Screens to prevent the witness seeing or being seen by the defendant
• Video link to enable the witness to give live evidence from outside the trial courtroom
• Evidence given in private
• Removal of wigs and gowns to make proceedings less intimidating
• Video-recorded interviews used as evidence-in-chief
• Pre-recorded cross-examination
• Intermediaries to assist with communication
• Communication aids such as symbol boards

Special Measures play an important role in facilitating access to justice for vulnerable and intimidated witnesses. The Crown Prosecution Service will support witnesses by making an application for the most beneficial special measures when it is appropriate to do so.

I refer the Hon Member to the Government’s statement and release of information on 1st June, providing an update on the response to the Humble Address. The documents published in the first and second tranches contain the entirety of the documents the Government has available for disclosure, except those being withheld at the request of the Metropolitan police.

The Law Officers’ Convention applies to advice which may or may not have been given by, or requested of, the Law Officers. It can be found at paragraph 21.27 of Erskine May:

“By long-standing convention, observed by successive Governments, the fact of, and substance of advice from, the law officers of the Crown is not disclosed outside government. This convention is referred to in paragraph [5.14] of the Ministerial Code [updated on 6 November 2024]. The purpose of this convention is to enable the Government to obtain frank and full legal advice in confidence.”

Indicating whether or not the Law Officers have recused themselves from a particular matter would itself breach the Law Officers’ Convention.

As has previously been set out to the house both in January 2025 and in June 2025, there is an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.

This process also sits alongside the established system in place for declaration Ministerial Interests. I confirm that my relevant interests have been published for the public record, including my previous employment at Matrix Chambers.

As has previously been set out to the house both in January 2025 and in June 2025, there is an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.

This process also sits alongside the established system in place for declaration Ministerial Interests. I confirm that my relevant interests have been published for the public record, including my previous employment at Matrix Chambers.

There have been no finalised prosecutions by the Crown Prosecution Service against defendants where offences of providing false or misleading information offences under Section 92 of the Care Act 2014 have been charged since it became law.

The Attorney General’s Office does not permit the use of external generative artificial intelligence tools of the type referenced in the Question, unless they have been formally approved and assessed as meeting the required security and data protection standards.

The CPS does not have any internal guidance relating to public commentary on public policy matters.

Whilst the Law Officers sit on the Parliamentary Business and Legislation Committee, the Attorney General’s Office does not, itself, have legislation that falls within its areas of policy responsibility. Questions as to the commencement of legislation should be directed to the Government departments with policy responsibility.

The Office of the Advocate General, along with supporting the Advocate General as a Law Officer, is the Scottish legal team for other UK Government departments.  Decisions about the implementation of uncommenced legislation are made by the UK Government department with responsibility for the legislation in question

As has previously been set out to the house both in January 2025 and in June 2025, there is an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest.

If a Law Officer were to publicly confirm specific matters where they were recused, this would infer that legal advice had been requested by the Government on a specific matter, which would risk a breach of the Law Officers’ Convention.

This process also sits alongside the established system in place for declaration Ministerial Interests. I confirm that my relevant interests have been published for the public record, including my previous employment at Matrix Chambers.

The AI tool was developed to identify reporting and consultation duties in the statute book. The tool does not indicate whether the duties are useful, or unnecessary. It was tested on a small data set across the statute book. The dataset included legislation from multiple departments and performed with very high accuracy, rather than being piloted on a single department. The tool has since been applied to the wider statute book.

By long-standing convention, observed by successive Governments, the fact of, and substance of advice from, the law officers of the Crown is not disclosed outside government. This convention is referred to in paragraph [5.14] of the Ministerial Code [updated on 6 November 2024]. The purpose of this convention is to enable the Government to obtain frank and full legal advice in confidence.

As I set out to the house in January 2025, there has always been an established rigorous system in place within the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that a Law Officer would not be consulted on any matter that could give rise to a potential conflict of interest. That process sits against the backdrop of every lawyer’s professional obligation to be alert to, and actively manage, any situation that might give rise to a potential or actual conflict.

This process also sits alongside the declaration of interest system overseen by the Prime Minister’s Independent Adviser on Ministerial Standards.

The Solicitor General has not issued any guidance to Departments on whether former Ministers should be consulted before internal Ministerial papers are shared with the courts.

The public sector duty regarding socio-economic inequalities is not yet in force in England. Once in force, the duty will require public authorities (including the Law Officers), when making decisions of a strategic nature about how to exercise their functions, to have due regard to the desirability of exercising them in a way that is designed to reduce the inequalities of outcome which result from socio-economic disadvantage.

The Attorney General’s Guidance on legal risk is intended to assist lawyers and others advising on lawfulness and legal risk in government, by setting out a common framework to assess risk. At such time that the duty comes into force, the Law Officers will have due regard to it in deciding whether any updates to this guidance are required.

The new departmental accountability framework has been launched to permanent secretaries for the year 2026-27 and they have started to set objectives against it, taking into account the Prime Minister’s Priorities. The Cabinet Office, led by the Cabinet Secretary, will be responsible for assessing departmental performance against the new framework.

The new departmental accountability framework has been launched to permanent secretaries for the year 2026-27 and they have started to set objectives against it. The Cabinet Office, led by the Cabinet Secretary, will be responsible for assessing departmental performance against the new framework.

The AI tool has been developed centrally by Cabinet Office and No.10 to identify consultation and reporting duties. We expect all departments to use the tool to identify existing disproportionate reporting and consultation duties, unless there is a justifiable reason not to. Timelines and next steps will be announced in due course.

Consultation should only be used when it is the most effective tool for good policymaking, including where fairness requires it, and not used for other reasons. Reporting requirements should not disproportionately slow down delivery. Decisions remain the purview of ministers.

The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 sets out new consumer protection rules for subscription contracts. Once the rules are in force, traders will have to provide clear information about subscription contracts before a consumer signs up, ensure that arrangements to exit the contract are straightforward, and provide a 14-day cooling-off period after a 12month+ contract or trial auto-renews.

The government has recently published its response to the Consultation on the Implementation of the new Subscription Contracts Regime: Consultation on the implementation of the new subscription contracts regime - GOV.UK.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) and local Trading Standards can take enforcement action against breaches of consumer protection law, including breaches of the existing and new subscription rules once they are in force. The DMCCA gives the CMA new powers to impose fines of up to 10% of global turnover on businesses who infringe consumer protection law. We will continue to engage with the CMA ahead of new regulations commencing.

The Government is committed to identifying existing disproportionate reporting and consultation duties that are slowing down delivery. All options are currently being considered to facilitate the removal of unnecessary consultation requirements.

The new approach has taken account of existing legal principles, as will any future changes. Parliament will have the opportunity to scrutinise and challenge any changes to consultation requirements where they are legislative.

The Attorney General’s Guidance on legal risk neither precludes nor requires consultation. Its role is to assist lawyers and others advising on lawfulness and legal risk in government, by setting out a common framework to assess risk.

The annual budget and number of staff for the Crown Prosecution Service Proceeds of Crime Division in each of the last five years are as follows:

*Historical figures from the CPS financial planning system Anaplan do not date back to FY22

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) cannot provide the annual budget and number of staff for the Specialist Fraud Division (SFD) in each of the last five years. Some organisational restructuring to meet the challenges posed by the evolving nature of crime was required at the end of 22/23, leading to SFD becoming subsumed by the multidisciplinary Serious Economic, Organised Crime and International Directorate (SEOCID).

The Law Officers have made applications to the High Court under s.42 Senior Courts Act 1981 in each of the last five years as follows:

2021 – 1

2022 - none

2023 - none

2024 – 2

2025 – 2 (3 further applications lodged with directions/hearing dates pending)

These dates relate to when the applications were made at a court hearing.

A list of individuals subject to an order under s.42 and the date the order was made is available online: Vexatious litigants - GOV.UK

No civil servant in the AGO was found to have broken the Civil Service Code in 2024 or 2025.

The AGO is committed to thorough performance management and has in place robust processes to ensure that those who fall below the expected standards are supported to improve in a timely manner.

Data has been withheld where disclosure could risk identifying individuals, and rigorous suppression rules have been applied to each year’s figures, including suppressing any proportions based on fewer than five employees. As a result, no disclosable proportions can be published for these years.

The AGO places strong emphasis on early intervention, regular feedback and development, with formal performance management processes used only where necessary and, on a case ‑by ‑case basis.

Where performance does not improve despite this additional support, dismissal may ultimately be considered.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) collects data to assist in the effective management of its prosecution functions. This data is derived from structured data fields completed by front line staff on individual case records held in the Case Management Information System (CMS) and reported in the Management Information System (MIS).

Within CMS management information (MI) is recorded at the level of defendants in a set of proceedings rather than against the individual offence or offences a defendant may be charged. This includes defendants charged with offences of s58 and s59 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and s1 of the Infant Life (Preservation) Act 1929. To identify the prosecution outcomes of offences would require a manual review of case records which would be at disproportionate cost.

The CPS is replacing its current Case Management System. This replacement provides opportunities to design improved management information capabilities to meet future reporting requirements.

The SFO is a relatively small, highly specialised government department that is permitted by law to investigate only the most serious and complex cases of fraud, bribery and corruption affecting the UK. Decisions on which cases to investigate are taken independently by the SFO, with the Director determining whether to authorise an investigation in accordance with the criteria set out in the Director’s Statement of Principle.

To assist with my oversight of the Serious Fraud Office, I hold regular superintendence meetings with the SFO’s executive team to keep me appraised of relevant SFO casework matters.

The Government Legal Department’s (GLD) Legal Trainee Scheme is a two‑year programme. Accordingly, the year of completion reflects cohorts who began their training contracts two years earlier.

The number of trainee solicitors who undertook a training contract with the GLD and left upon completion of the two‑year scheme in each of the past five years is as follows:

• Out of the 37 trainee solicitors that completed the scheme, 2 trainee solicitors left upon completion in 2021.
• Out of the 36 trainee solicitors that completed the scheme, 3 trainee solicitors left upon completion in 2022.
• Out of the 37 trainee solicitors that completed the scheme, 2 trainee solicitors left upon completion in 2023.
• Out of the 33 trainee solicitors that completed the scheme, 2 trainee solicitors left upon completion in 2024.
• Out of the 36 trainee solicitors that completed the scheme, 1 trainee solicitor left upon completion in 2025.

The Government Legal Department’s (GLD) Legal Trainee Scheme lasts for two years in total. Those who join the GLD as pupil barristers qualify as barristers at the end of Year 1 of the Training Scheme (the pupillage period). They then remain on the Training Scheme for a further 12 months, during which they gain wider experience of GLD’s legal work.

The number of pupil barristers who left upon completion of the two‑year Training Scheme in each of the past five years is as follows:

• Out of the 5 pupil barristers that completed the scheme, 3 pupil barristers left upon completion in 2021.
• Out of the 5 pupil barristers that completed the scheme, no pupil barristers left upon completion in 2022.
• Out of the 5 pupil barristers that completed the scheme, 1 pupil barrister left upon completion in 2023.
• Out of the 3 pupil barristers that completed the scheme, 2 pupil barristers left upon completion in 2024.
• Out of the 3 pupil barristers that completed the scheme, 1 pupil barrister left upon completion in 2025.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has established policies and procedures in place to identify, declare and manage actual, potential or perceived conflicts of interest, including where members of staff hold external roles or appointments.

The CPS Code of Conduct requires employees to seek written permission from their Head of Area Operations/HQ Business Manager before taking up any second employment or other engagement, whether paid or unpaid, and to ensure that any such work does not conflict with the performance of their duties, create a conflict of loyalty or interest, or damage (or potentially damage) public confidence in the CPS.

The CPS Conflicts of Interest Policy and Procedure requires staff to declare relevant outside interests as they arise and to keep declarations under review. Declarations are assessed by management, and decisions (including any mitigations required to address any real or perceived risks) are recorded to ensure an appropriate audit trail.

Where a declared interest raises particular reputational or propriety concerns, the policy provides for advice to be sought as appropriate, and for steps to be taken to remove or mitigate any conflict. Failures to declare relevant interests, or breaches of the Code of Conduct or Conflicts of Interest policy, may be considered under the CPS disciplinary procedures.

As a matter of longstanding practice, it is not appropriate to comment on the employment details of individual members of staff. Any external role or appointment is considered on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the CPS policies set out above.

The total value of severance payments is set out in the department’s Annual Report and Accounts, which are available for the last three years.

After careful consideration, the Solicitor General gave permission to Ellen Roome to make an application to the High Court for a fresh inquest into Jools' death. The Solicitor General believes there is a reasonable prospect the High Court will order one and wrote to Ellen Roome’s legal representative on the 13th of March to confirm this.

The Home Office publishes official statistics on religious hate crimes recorded by the police in England and Wales by targeted religion, including Jewish people. The latest statistical bulletin containing this information can be found here: Hate crime, England and Wales, year ending March 2025 - GOV.UK

Information on whether the offence was targeted at a place of worship or not, or the ethnicity, nationality or faith of the offender for these offences is not centrally held.

The CPS does not maintain a central record of the number of offences committed against Jewish people or the location of the offending, such as a place of worship. Nor is any central record kept of the nationality or faith of defendants prosecuted. To establish the number of prosecutions where these circumstances applied would require a manual review of case files and this would be at disproportionate cost.

The Law Officers’ Convention applies to advice which may or may not have been given by the Law Officers, or requested of the Law Officers, and the Convention applies to your question.

The Law Officers’ Convention can be found at paragraph 21.27 of Erskine May:

“By long-standing convention, observed by successive Governments, the fact of, and substance of advice from, the law officers of the Crown is not disclosed outside government. This convention is referred to in paragraph [5.14] of the Ministerial Code [updated on 6 November 2024]. The purpose of this convention is to enable the Government to obtain frank and full legal advice in confidence.”

The Public Office (Accountability) Bill, will fundamentally alter the relationship between those who govern and the people they serve.

The Bill, once passed into law, will introduce substantial changes, including a new professional and legal Duty of Candour for public officials, meaning they must act with honesty and integrity at all times, or be met with criminal sanctions for serious breaches.

This Bill will bring forth the biggest expansion in legal aid in a generation, by making provision for publicly funded legal representation for bereaved families at inquests in which the state is an interested party.