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 plans he has to publish recordings made of trials heard without a jury; and what safeguards will govern the use of those recordings for (a) scrutiny and (b) appeals.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Transcription services are available for all Crown Court cases. We are exploring the potential use of AI to produce transcripts more quickly and cost effectively.
As recommended by Sir Brian Leveson in his Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, the Government will introduce audio recording equipment in magistrates’ courts. This measure supports our changes to the appeals process in magistrates’ courts, to mirror the current process in the Crown Court, which will ensure that victims and witnesses are no longer required to go through the trauma of a full re-hearing.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will review the statutory time limit of six months for summary offences.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
Proceedings for summary-only offences must be commenced within six months of the date of the offence. The Government is satisfied that that this time limit, as set out in Section 127 of the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980, is an important safeguard which ensures that less serious offences are dealt with promptly. The limit applies to both criminal and civil proceedings, supporting the efficient operation of the courts and maintaining fairness for all parties.
Reviews are done for specific offences and exceptions have been carved out in statute where appropriate, for example for the common assault offence in domestic abuse cases. Where there is a clear need for flexibility, the Government has acted and will continue to act to introduce targeted exceptions, such as recent amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill, which extend the time limit for intimate image abuse. These changes recognise the particular challenges victims face in reporting such offences and ensure that perpetrators can still be brought to justice.
The Government’s Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy, published on 18 December 2025, includes a commitment to exploring options to improve access to justice for victims of domestic abuse, including reviewing the time limits for charging domestic abuse-related summary offences.
The Government is confident that the existing legislation clearly outlines when these limits apply. As a result, the Government does not intend to introduce further guidance at this time.
Asked by: Tim Roca (Labour - Macclesfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to tackle the backlog of court cases in Cheshire.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Chester Crown Court has been allocated an additional 232 sitting days in-region to increase hearing capacity and improve throughput of cases. Additional Legal Advisor recruitment is underway to facilitate an increase in court hearing capacity in Cheshire Magistrates’ Courts.
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. Investment alone is not enough - that is why this Government asked Sir Brian Leveson to undertake his Independent Review of the Criminal Courts. 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.
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 Answer of 9th December 2025 to Question 96041, on Reoffenders: Sentencing, what assessment he has made of how frequently courts depart from sentencing guidelines on the basis that it is in the interest of justice to do so.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
All sentencing courts in England and Wales must follow any sentencing guidelines which are relevant to the offender’s case, unless it is in the interests of justice not to do so (by virtue of section 59 of the Sentencing Code).
Whilst there is a high bar for departing from the guidelines, it is necessary, in the interests of justice, that courts retain the discretion to do so, where the individual case and circumstances warrant it. If a court departs from the guidelines, it must give reasons for doing so.
As mentioned in my previous response, the Sentencing Council has a statutory duty to monitor and evaluate all definitive guidelines to assess their impact on sentencing outcomes and ensure they operate as intended. Analysis conducted by the Council between 2010 and 2015 demonstrated that the vast majority of sentences imposed for offences for which there were offence-specific guidelines were within the sentence range set out in the guidelines. The findings are presented in the Council’s annual reports for 2010/11 through 2014/15 which are available on its website. As part of its ongoing monitoring of the use of guidelines, the Council conducts quantitative and qualitative research to determine how the guidelines are being used and the effect they are having on sentencing practice. These evaluations will highlight any issues if departures from guidelines are commonplace for a particular offence(s) or aspect of sentencing.
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 assessment he has made of whether the discretion for courts to depart from sentencing guidelines in the interests of justice affects the (a) consistency and (b) effectiveness of sentencing outcomes.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
All sentencing courts in England and Wales must follow any sentencing guidelines which are relevant to the offender’s case, unless it is in the interests of justice not to do so (by virtue of section 59 of the Sentencing Code).
Whilst there is a high bar for departing from the guidelines, it is necessary, in the interests of justice, that courts retain the discretion to do so, where the individual case and circumstances warrant it. If a court departs from the guidelines, it must give reasons for doing so.
As mentioned in my previous response, the Sentencing Council has a statutory duty to monitor and evaluate all definitive guidelines to assess their impact on sentencing outcomes and ensure they operate as intended. Analysis conducted by the Council between 2010 and 2015 demonstrated that the vast majority of sentences imposed for offences for which there were offence-specific guidelines were within the sentence range set out in the guidelines. The findings are presented in the Council’s annual reports for 2010/11 through 2014/15 which are available on its website. As part of its ongoing monitoring of the use of guidelines, the Council conducts quantitative and qualitative research to determine how the guidelines are being used and the effect they are having on sentencing practice. These evaluations will highlight any issues if departures from guidelines are commonplace for a particular offence(s) or aspect of sentencing.
Asked by: Pam Cox (Labour - Colchester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of prisoners have been released with a resettlement passport in each month since their introduction.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Government is committed to ensuring individuals have plans in place before release, identifying needs early, and linking people to the right support, such as housing, employment, and health services, to help reduce reoffending. No prisoners have left with a resettlement passport as formal introduction of a digital tool is yet to take place. However, development work has marked important progress in testing approaches to improve pre-release planning across the estate.
This testing, carried out in ten prisons and four probation regions, has gathered valuable insight and learning throughout, including a comprehensive understanding of current practice and identification of gaps and opportunities in service delivery. It has also provided insight relevant to ARNS (Assess, Risks, Needs and Strengths), supporting its development as part of HMPPS’s wider digital transformation strategy. ARNS is designed to modernise offender assessments by moving towards a more dynamic, collaborative, and strength-based approach to resettlement planning, offender management, and risk assessment.
These findings will feed into work to improve the operational processes to support preparation for release, to support delivery of recommendations from the Independent Review of Sentencing.
Asked by: Pam Cox (Labour - Colchester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what progress has been made to introduce resettlement passports for prison leavers.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Government is committed to ensuring individuals have plans in place before release, identifying needs early, and linking people to the right support, such as housing, employment, and health services, to help reduce reoffending. No prisoners have left with a resettlement passport as formal introduction of a digital tool is yet to take place. However, development work has marked important progress in testing approaches to improve pre-release planning across the estate.
This testing, carried out in ten prisons and four probation regions, has gathered valuable insight and learning throughout, including a comprehensive understanding of current practice and identification of gaps and opportunities in service delivery. It has also provided insight relevant to ARNS (Assess, Risks, Needs and Strengths), supporting its development as part of HMPPS’s wider digital transformation strategy. ARNS is designed to modernise offender assessments by moving towards a more dynamic, collaborative, and strength-based approach to resettlement planning, offender management, and risk assessment.
These findings will feed into work to improve the operational processes to support preparation for release, to support delivery of recommendations from the Independent Review of Sentencing.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of parole board hearings on victims and their families in Surrey Heath constituency.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
We recognise that parole hearings can be distressing for victims and their families, which is why dedicated Victim Liaison Officers provide support throughout the process. Victims can explain the effect of the offence, and the ongoing impact it has on them, through a Victim Personal Statement, which may be read aloud during the hearing. They can also request specific licence conditions are put forward for the Parole Board to consider applying if an offender is released.
Since April, we have made it possible for victims to apply to observe hearings if they wish, to help them understand how the Parole Board considers evidence and assesses risk. We understand how challenging this process can be and we want to ensure that victims and their families are given the support, information and opportunities they need to help them through it.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to improve prisoner rehabilitation in (a) Surrey and (b) Surrey Heath constituency.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
HM Prison and Probation Service rehabilitation services take many forms, ranging from accredited programmes and interventions that are aimed at giving people skills to change their attitudes, thinking and behaviour, to enabling a person to access education, healthcare, substance misuse support, suitable accommodation, and the means to earn a living pro-socially.
Some rehabilitative activity is delivered in-house, and some via our partner organisations. We keep our work under constant review to ensure we are acting in line with the available evidence whilst also meeting the rehabilitative needs of the people we work with.
Asked by: Pam Cox (Labour - Colchester)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prisons and Young Offender Institutions currently have (a) an Incentivised Substance Free Living Unit operating, (b) a Drug Recovery Wing operating, and (c) a Drug Strategy Lead in post.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
HM Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) has funded Incentivised Substance Free Living Units in 85 prisons, and six currently have abstinence-based Drug Recovery Wings. To support delivery of HMPPS’ Drug and Alcohol Strategy, 54 prisons have a dedicated Drug Strategy Lead. All remaining prisons, including Young Offender Institutions, have a designated point of contact for Drug and Alcohol Strategy work.
In addition, HMPPS has recruited 17 Group Drug and Alcohol Leads providing regional leadership, assurance, and co-ordination of drug and alcohol work for all the establishments in their Prison Group. They align activity at establishment level with national drug and alcohol strategy and policies which aim to restrict supply, reduce demand and support recovery. They also support local and regional partnerships with healthcare providers to support a range of issues including continuity of care on release.