Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what representations has he received from (a) barristers, (b) solicitors, and (c) legal aid providers regarding the Legal Aid Agency data breach on 23 April 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
We acknowledge and appreciate the constructive way that providers have worked with us following the serious criminal attack on the Legal Aid Agency’s (LAA) digital systems. They have continued to do vital work in challenging circumstances.
The LAA and Ministers have proactively engaged with representative bodies throughout to address any concerns regarding the criminal attack on LAA systems. Our focus was first to maintain access to justice and then to ensure providers had access to the cash flow that they needed. The LAA sought views and feedback from provider representative bodies to help shape contingency measures and supporting guidance in a way which supports legal aid providers most effectively. Regular updates have been provided to legal aid providers via email and published on the LAA’s dedicated cyber incident webpage and FAQ page.
The Department has worked around the clock to ensure that digital services were restored as swiftly and safely as possible. The LAA Portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). We worked closely with providers to test functionality before bringing providers back onto our systems in a careful, phased approach. We are now in a position where all our civil systems accessible via SiLAS are operational alongside our crime systems, which were restored in September.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department has taken to restore Legal Aid Agency digital services since the data breach on 23 April 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
We acknowledge and appreciate the constructive way that providers have worked with us following the serious criminal attack on the Legal Aid Agency’s (LAA) digital systems. They have continued to do vital work in challenging circumstances.
The LAA and Ministers have proactively engaged with representative bodies throughout to address any concerns regarding the criminal attack on LAA systems. Our focus was first to maintain access to justice and then to ensure providers had access to the cash flow that they needed. The LAA sought views and feedback from provider representative bodies to help shape contingency measures and supporting guidance in a way which supports legal aid providers most effectively. Regular updates have been provided to legal aid providers via email and published on the LAA’s dedicated cyber incident webpage and FAQ page.
The Department has worked around the clock to ensure that digital services were restored as swiftly and safely as possible. The LAA Portal has been replaced by a new, secure single sign-in tool for LAA online services (SiLAS). We worked closely with providers to test functionality before bringing providers back onto our systems in a careful, phased approach. We are now in a position where all our civil systems accessible via SiLAS are operational alongside our crime systems, which were restored in September.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps he is taking to improve access to legal aid in short notice cases.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
We recognise that in certain circumstances individuals may need to access legal aid services urgently and the Government provides specific support to facilitate this.
In criminal legal aid, those who are to be interviewed under caution by the police are entitled to advice and assistance from a solicitor, which is arranged through the Defence Solicitor Call Centre on a 24/7 basis. Court duty solicitors are available to provide immediate advice to individuals on a first appearance in the magistrates’ court, except for certain minor offences such as summary motoring offences.
We have committed up to £92 million per year additional investment for criminal legal aid solicitors. As part of that, we are harmonising the fixed fee for all police station schemes at £320 excluding VAT. This is above the current highest fee paid, meaning all police station attendance fee schemes will see an uplift. In addition, we are uplifting magistrates’ court fees by 10%. This significant investment will support duty solicitors who work on short notice cases, and the sustainability of the profession.
In civil legal aid, providers can apply to the Legal Aid Agency for Emergency Legal Representation to cover emergency legal advice if individuals need urgent representation in court.
In public family proceedings, legal aid is available means-free for parents and those with parental responsibility in most public family law special Children Act 1989 cases, including for interim care orders and emergency protection orders. A light-touch merits test is applied, so that only the need for representation is considered.
An eligibility waiver is available for victims of domestic abuse applying for urgent protection. This means they can receive legal aid even if they would not otherwise pass the means test, though they may then have to pay a financial contribution towards their legal costs.
For people facing the loss of their home, in-court advice and representation is available on the day of the possession hearing via the Housing Loss Prevention Advice Service.
Individuals held in Immigration Removal Centres and immigration detainees held in prisons are provided with a 30-minute triage appointment through the Detained Duy Advice Scheme. This initial appointment supports detained individuals to make contact with a legal provider that may provide further advice (subject to merits and eligibility).
We are uplifting legal aid fees for immigration and housing work, injecting an additional £20 million per year, which will support swift access to legal aid in these areas, including for short notice cases.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what progress his Department has made in assisting law enforcement agencies responding to the Legal Aid Agency data breach on 23 April 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
Since the serious criminal attack on the Legal Aid Agency’s digital portal was identified, we have worked closely with the National Crime Agency (NCA) and the police. As sensitive investigations remain ongoing, it would not be appropriate to comment on the nature or detail of this engagement.
We take the security of people’s personal data extremely seriously. An injunction has been put in place to prohibit sharing of this data. Anyone who does so could be sent to prison. We are continuing to work with the NCA to monitor the dark web. As far as we are aware, no data has been shared or put out in the public domain. If it is identified that a specific individual is at risk, action will be taken to try to contact them.
Asked by: Caroline Johnson (Conservative - Sleaford and North Hykeham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of (a) named day questions and (b) ordinary written questions were responded to by his Department within the required timescale in (i) May 2025, (ii) June 2025, (iii) July 2025, (iv) August 2025, (v) September 2025, (vi) October 2025 and (vii) November 2025.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Government recognises the importance of the effective and timely handling of written parliamentary questions (PQs).
The following table provides the information requested:
| % of Named Day PQs answered on time | % of Ordinary PQs answered on time |
May 2025 | 80% | 93% |
June 2025 | 79% | 84% |
July 2025 | 89% | 95% |
August 2025 | - | - |
September 2025 | 96% | 89% |
October 2025 | 98% | 98% |
November 2025 | 95% | 93% |
Please note that these figures have been pulled from the Ministry of Justice’s internal data and may not be a fully accurate representation of the Department’s timeliness. No Commons PQs were due for answer in August, so no data has been given.
The House of Commons Procedure Committee monitors departmental PQ performance and publishes a report of the Government’s consolidated PQ data following the end of each session.
Asked by: Helen Maguire (Liberal Democrat - Epsom and Ewell)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of making case conferences before trial mandatory for victims and survivors of sexual abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Victims and witnesses in sexual offence cases can request in advance of trial to observe proceedings remotely once they have given evidence. Courts will make every effort to accommodate these requests, which may include re-listing the trial in a courtroom with suitable technology. However, remote observation cannot be guaranteed in every case, as it depends on the availability of appropriate facilities and resources.
The listing of Ground Rules Hearings (GRHs) is a matter for the judiciary. GRHs are typically held in cases involving vulnerable witnesses, such as children or individuals with communication difficulties, to ensure they are questioned in a fair and appropriate way during trial. However, judges also have discretion to direct a GRH for intimidated witnesses, including complainants in sexual offence cases, where they consider it appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
Asked by: Helen Maguire (Liberal Democrat - Epsom and Ewell)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will take steps to enable victims and survivors of sexual abuse to observe their trial without sitting in the public gallery.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Victims and witnesses in sexual offence cases can request in advance of trial to observe proceedings remotely once they have given evidence. Courts will make every effort to accommodate these requests, which may include re-listing the trial in a courtroom with suitable technology. However, remote observation cannot be guaranteed in every case, as it depends on the availability of appropriate facilities and resources.
The listing of Ground Rules Hearings (GRHs) is a matter for the judiciary. GRHs are typically held in cases involving vulnerable witnesses, such as children or individuals with communication difficulties, to ensure they are questioned in a fair and appropriate way during trial. However, judges also have discretion to direct a GRH for intimidated witnesses, including complainants in sexual offence cases, where they consider it appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
Asked by: Jess Asato (Labour - Lowestoft)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when statutory guidance will be produced on the duty to collaborate under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024; and what plans the Government has to ensure its implementation following the decision to abolish PCCs and the upcoming changes to integrated care boards.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We will work closely with the Home Office and the Department for Health and Social care as Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and Integrated Care Board reforms unfold and this will inform our consideration of implementation of the Duty to Collaborate under the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024. The Ministry of Justice has recently announced that it will be investing £550 million in victim support services over the next three years – the biggest investment in victim support services to date.
We are taking this opportunity to review and strengthen the commissioning and delivery of victims’ services. In light of the announcement to abolish the PCC function in May 2028, we will also explore changes to the delivery of victims funding to ensure this is delivered in the best way in the future.
Asked by: Helen Maguire (Liberal Democrat - Epsom and Ewell)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of implementing a whole-system criminal justice strategy for rape and sexual abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice is committed to a high standard, whole system approach to cases of rape and sexual abuse. This is supported by the expertise of our Independent Advisor on the Criminal Justice Response to Sexual Violence.
We will soon be publishing our cross-government Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) Strategy. This will set out strategic direction and concrete actions to prevent violence and abuse, pursue perpetrators, and support victims, including across the criminal justice system. This strategy will work in tandem with the recently published Crown Prosecution Service VAWG strategy, which sets out how they will work with partners to ensure a consistent, best practice response to VAWG.
Asked by: Helen Maguire (Liberal Democrat - Epsom and Ewell)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will extend Operation Soteria into the Crown Court.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Operation Soteria transformed how the police and the Crown Prosecution Service work together to investigate rape cases, promoting partnership working and ensuring a focus on the suspect’s behaviour and evidence, not the victim’s lifestyle, their choices or their character. This focus should continue in the court room. That is why we have announced new legislation to stop evidence which has the sole aim of undermining the victim – such as about their past sexual behaviour, previous allegations of assault, or compensation claim – being admitted to the courtroom unless it is absolutely necessary and clearly relevant.