Asked by: Samantha Niblett (Labour - South Derbyshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Answer of 8 December 2025 to Question 97022, how much and what proportion of his Department's expenditure on Microsoft Software licenses and services was allocated to (a) new service implementations and (b) renewal or maintenance of existing system; and how this compares to the previous year’s expenditure in each category.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The information requested is not held centrally.
Asked by: Lord Bradley (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many prisoners serving (1) determinate, and (2) indeterminate, sentences were granted compassionate release from prison on the grounds of ill health in 2023 and 2024.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Secretary of State may release a serving prisoner at any point in the sentence if he is satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist which justify the prisoner’s release on compassionate grounds.
The following table shows the number of prisoners released early on compassionate grounds for reasons of ill health, in 2023 and 2024, broken down by sentence type.
| 2023 | 2024 |
Determinate | 5 | 5 |
Indeterminate | 2 | 1 |
1. The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large-scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Public protection remains the priority and prisoners will be released early on compassionate grounds only if exceptional circumstances can be evidenced and if they are assessed to be safely manageable in the community.
Asked by: Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Timpson on 10 December (HL12375), what assessment they have made of the planned level of tuition for young offenders by the Shaw Trust compared to the number of hours delivered.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Shaw Trust is programming the required learning hours; delivery is affected by restrictions on mixing between certain children, which limit the number of learners who can be accommodated in a classroom at any one time. These restrictions arise from conflicts that have transferred into custody from the community. The establishment is actively addressing this by working to resolve these conflicts, enabling greater classroom integration and maximising access to education.
The action plan prepared in response to the joint Ofsted/HMIP thematic report The Quality of Education in Young Offender Institutions was published on 15 November 2024.
Asked by: Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Timpson on 10 December (HL12375), what action they are taking at Feltham Prison and Young Offenders Institution to increase the number of hours of tuition delivered by the Shaw Trust.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Shaw Trust is programming the required learning hours; delivery is affected by restrictions on mixing between certain children, which limit the number of learners who can be accommodated in a classroom at any one time. These restrictions arise from conflicts that have transferred into custody from the community. The establishment is actively addressing this by working to resolve these conflicts, enabling greater classroom integration and maximising access to education.
The action plan prepared in response to the joint Ofsted/HMIP thematic report The Quality of Education in Young Offender Institutions was published on 15 November 2024.
Asked by: Lord Storey (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government whether the youth custody service improvement plan has been published.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Shaw Trust is programming the required learning hours; delivery is affected by restrictions on mixing between certain children, which limit the number of learners who can be accommodated in a classroom at any one time. These restrictions arise from conflicts that have transferred into custody from the community. The establishment is actively addressing this by working to resolve these conflicts, enabling greater classroom integration and maximising access to education.
The action plan prepared in response to the joint Ofsted/HMIP thematic report The Quality of Education in Young Offender Institutions was published on 15 November 2024.
Asked by: Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat - Twickenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to tackle family court backlogs in London.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government remains committed to reducing the outstanding caseload within the Family Court and is working closely with system partners to drive forward a cross-cutting programme of work to achieve this. At a national level the Family Justice Board has agreed system-wide targets for 2025/26, with a continued focus on reducing delay.
In London, a dedicated Family Justice Strategy has been implemented, which brings together key partners across the three London Family Court areas. This work has included targeted investment over 2025/26 to tackle the outstanding private law caseload by providing additional court capacity and ensuring that courts follow the Public Law Outline, with clear arrangements for overseeing performance. These measures have already delivered a reduction in delays and the London model is being evaluated with a view to applying lessons learned in other regions.
Asked by: Lord Hain (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask His Majesty's Government how many Palestine Action protestors are (1) in prison, (2) in prison awaiting trial, (3) serving prison sentences, (4) on hunger strike and awaiting trial, and (5) on hunger strike and serving prison sentences.
Answered by Lord Timpson - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
As of 12 December, 29 Palestine Action protestors are in prison; seven are on hunger strike and awaiting trial. None are serving prison sentences. Six are currently being tried and the remainder are awaiting trial.
Asked by: Max Wilkinson (Liberal Democrat - Cheltenham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his department has made of the potential merits of recognising humanist marriages using existing powers.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government announced on 2 October that it intends to reform weddings law when parliamentary time allows. The reforms reflect a commitment to making weddings law fairer, simpler and more modern, whilst also protecting the solemnity and dignity of marriage. We want to create a level playing field for all groups, including allowing Humanist weddings to be legally recognised for the first time. We will be consulting on the details early next year.
The Government is of the view that using the existing order-making power under section 14 of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act 2013 legally to recognise Humanist weddings would mean introducing new inequalities into existing law. This is because Humanists would gain more freedoms in relation to how they marry than those available to most religious groups. The Government has decided to enable Humanist weddings as part of comprehensive reform that ensures all groups are treated fairly.
Asked by: Wendy Morton (Conservative - Aldridge-Brownhills)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Written Statement entitled Criminal Court Reform, published on 2 December 2025, HCWS1123, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of expanding judge-only trials to a wider class of offences, including fraud cases and triable-either-way cases involving likely sentences of up to three years, on the right to a fair trial and jury participation in the justice system; and what safeguards he intends to put in place to ensure transparency, accountability and public confidence in verdicts reached without a jury.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a record and rising open caseload of nearly 80,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard and too many victims waiting years for justice. One of the first priorities of this Government has been to tackle this crisis, which is why we asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake his independent review. On 2 December, the Deputy Prime Minister responded to the first part of that review and set out why reform is necessary, alongside investment and modernisation.
The removal of the defendants’ right to elect is compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR. Whilst jury trial will remain an important feature of the criminal justice system following these reforms, it is important to recognise that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial.
As you will be aware, the vast majority of criminal trials in this country are conducted fairly, without a jury. 90% of all criminal cases are dealt with by magistrates and only around 3% of all criminal trials are heard by a jury. It is the obligation of Government to guarantee everybody a fair trial and timely justice is fundamental to fairness. But the status quo is not working for victims, defendants, or anyone involved in the justice system.
The new ‘swift courts’ will operate within the existing Crown Court framework, following the same process and procedures. Safeguards will be in place, including the existing appeals procedure, and judges in the ‘swift courts’ will be required to provide reasoned judgments when delivering decisions to convict or acquit. An impact assessment will accompany our legislative measures, as is usual practice.
Asked by: Wendy Morton (Conservative - Aldridge-Brownhills)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Written Statement entitled Criminal Court Reform, published on 2 December 2025, HCWS1123, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of removing the option for defendants to elect for trial by jury in certain triable-either-way cases on (a) the constitutional role of juries, (b) defendants’ right to a fair trial and (c) public confidence in the criminal justice system.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a record and rising open caseload of nearly 80,000 criminal cases waiting to be heard and too many victims waiting years for justice. One of the first priorities of this Government has been to tackle this crisis, which is why we asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake his independent review. On 2 December, the Deputy Prime Minister responded to the first part of that review and set out why reform is necessary, alongside investment and modernisation.
The removal of the defendants’ right to elect is compatible with Article 6 of the ECHR. Whilst jury trial will remain an important feature of the criminal justice system following these reforms, it is important to recognise that there is no constitutional right to a jury trial.
As you will be aware, the vast majority of criminal trials in this country are conducted fairly, without a jury. 90% of all criminal cases are dealt with by magistrates and only around 3% of all criminal trials are heard by a jury. It is the obligation of Government to guarantee everybody a fair trial and timely justice is fundamental to fairness. But the status quo is not working for victims, defendants, or anyone involved in the justice system.
The new ‘swift courts’ will operate within the existing Crown Court framework, following the same process and procedures. Safeguards will be in place, including the existing appeals procedure, and judges in the ‘swift courts’ will be required to provide reasoned judgments when delivering decisions to convict or acquit. An impact assessment will accompany our legislative measures, as is usual practice.