Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 April 2026 to Question 123531 on Prisons: Meat, what sum his Department spent on providing multi-choice, pre-select menus for (a) lunchtime and (b) evening meals in prisons in each year since 2020.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.
All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, pursuant to the Answer of 1 April 2026 to Question 123531 on Prisons: Meat, what the annual cost of meat served in prisons has been in each year since 2020, broken down by individual prison.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.
All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when were prisons required to provide the option of a (a) vegan dish, (b) vegetarian dish, and (c) Halal dish for their lunch and evening meal menus.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Department does not hold information on the cost of specific food items, including meat, or on expenditure associated with multi -choice or pre-selected menus. Prison expenditure on food is recorded at an aggregate level in management accounts as total prisoner food costs: it is not broken down by individual prisons, food types, menu options or dietary components. Food budgets are managed locally by Governors in the public estate, or Directors in privately managed prisons, who have flexibility within their overall allocations to meet the needs of their prison population, including religious, cultural and medical dietary requirements.
All prisons across England and Wales provide prisoners with a choice of at least five meal options at both lunch and for the evening meal. As a minimum, these options include one meat dish, one vegan dish, one vegetarian dish, one Halal dish, and one additional alternative option. This requirement was established under PSO 5000 (Prison Catering Services), and was subsequently re-affirmed in its successor policy, PSI 44/2010 Catering: Meals for Prisoners, which came into effect in October 2010.
Asked by: Joy Morrissey (Conservative - Beaconsfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance is issued to Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service officers on ensuring neutrality between parents in family court proceedings.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.
As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.
Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.
In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.
Asked by: Joy Morrissey (Conservative - Beaconsfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many complaints have been made against CAFCASS in each of the last five years alleging (a) discrimination and (b) bias against fathers; and how many such complaints were upheld.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Cafcass does not record structured data in its complaints case management system to enable reporting on how many complaints have been made against Cafcass in each of the last five years alleging (a) discrimination and (b) bias against fathers; and how many such complaints were upheld.
This information is not recorded centrally, and the data would only be available from individual case file review at a disproportionate cost.
Asked by: Joy Morrissey (Conservative - Beaconsfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what training is provided to staff of CAFCASS on unconscious bias, with particular reference to fathers in family court proceedings.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.
As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.
Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.
In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.
Asked by: Joy Morrissey (Conservative - Beaconsfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how CAFCASS ensures that safeguarding considerations are balanced with the rights of both parents to maintain meaningful relationships with children.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Cafcass provides learning for all colleagues on recognising and reflecting on bias as part of its wider approach to equality, diversity and inclusion. All colleagues are required to complete mandatory Equality, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) e‑learning, alongside training entitled Exploring the Impact of Bias, which supports reflection on how personal assumptions and bias can affect professional judgement in work with children and families.
As with all considerations within the Family Court, Cafcass’s primary focus is the best interests and welfare of the child, rather than the interests or viewpoints of parents. Cafcass guidance and practice therefore focuses on assessing what is safe and promotes a child’s welfare, rather than balancing parental rights or perspectives or seeking neutrality between parents.
Cafcass works through a relationship‑based practice framework, Together with Children and Families, which prioritises and values the development of trusting relationships to enable sensitive and complex work with children and families. The framework encourages listening, understanding, clear reasoning, respect and integrity.
In all advice to the Family Court, Family Court Advisers are required to observe Cafcass’s statutory responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of children in family proceedings. This includes assessing children’s safety, understanding the harm they have experienced and the risk of further harm in existing and future contact arrangements. The advice provided to the court and the report that is filed are based on this assessment and what is safe and in the best interests of the child.
Asked by: Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative - Chingford and Woodford Green)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the proven reoffending rate is for the adult cohort convicted of shoplifting offences who had been given a suspended sentence or any other non-custodial sentence within the last five years.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.
The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.
Asked by: Iain Duncan Smith (Conservative - Chingford and Woodford Green)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the proven reoffending rate is for the adult cohort convicted of shoplifting offences who had been sentenced to immediate custody within the last five years.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The proven reoffending rate for adult offenders with an index offence of shoplifting between 2019/20 and 2023/24 are provided in the attached Excel spreadsheet. This includes the overall adult cohort, as well as breakdowns for adults released from custody, and adults given non-custodial sentences or cautions between 2019/20 and 2023/24.
The proven reoffending rate is calculated using a 12-month follow-up period, allowing an additional 6 months for offences to be proven in court.
Asked by: Rupert Lowe (Restore Britain - Great Yarmouth)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, to publish a list of all external organisations, including women’s, men’s, and specialist advocacy groups, that received funding, consultancy fees, or formal engagement contracts during the development of revised domestic‑abuse guidance and safeguarding processes in private‑law children cases; and to set out the total expenditure associated with this work.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Under this Government the Ministry of Justice has not provided funding, paid consultancy fees, or entered into formal engagement contracts with external organisations in developing revised domestic abuse guidance or safeguarding processes in private law children cases.