Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many prison officers have been (a) arrested, (b) charged, and (c) prosecuted for having illicit relationships with prison inmates in each year since 2020, broken down by offence group.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The table below shows the number of prison officers at Bands 3-5 convicted in each of the last five years of an offence of misconduct in public office, where the offence related to an inappropriate relationship with a prisoner.
| 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 | 2024 | 2025 |
Misconduct in Public Office | 0 | 3 | 5 | 12 | 6 | 15 |
An inappropriate relationship is defined as any relationship that compromises a staff member’s ability to appropriately perform their duties.
The figures in this table 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.
Asked by: Ben Maguire (Liberal Democrat - North Cornwall)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what recent steps he has taken towards beginning the process of ratifying the Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer, including any regulatory blocks that have led to the current delay; and what his planned timetable is for ratification.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The UK was proud to be among the first signatories to the Convention for the Protection of the Profession of Lawyer in May 2025, demonstrating our strong and longstanding commitment to the rule of law, the independence of the legal profession, and access to justice.
My Department is considering our next steps to prepare for ratification. This includes ongoing work across Government to assess the steps required to ensure compliance with the Convention’s provisions, including its application across the UK’s jurisdictions as well as any potential extension to the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories, in line with usual treaty practice.
Asked by: Nick Timothy (Conservative - West Suffolk)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many (a) defendants and (b) witnesses have requested translation services in each year since 2020 broken down by (i) ethnicity and (ii) nationality.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice does not hold information on the number of defendants or witnesses that have requested translation services. The booking portal does not collect information on whether the individual making the request is a defendant or witness and also does not collect information on the ethnicity and nationality of the requestor.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps the he is taking to help ensure transparency in Court of Protection proceedings while safeguarding the privacy of vulnerable individuals.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We do not hold data on the average costs incurred by individuals subject to professional deputy orders.
The Court of Protection sets strict rules about what deputies can charge, which are governed by specific practice directions and rules. Practice Direction 19B (PRACTICE DIRECTION 19B – FIXED COSTS AND DEPUTY REMUNERATION IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION) sets out the responsibilities of deputies in ensuring costs are justified, reasonable, and in P’s best interests. The Practice Direction provides a schedule of fees (fixed costs) that deputies, either solicitors or public authority officeholders, can charge when they have been authorised to act for P.
If professional deputies choose not to take fixed costs, they can have their costs assessed by the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO). The Office of the Public Guardian and the Senior Courts Costs Office have produced guidance to ensure costs charged to vulnerable individuals’ estates are reasonable, proportionate, and fully justified as well as maintaining public confidence through transparency, accountability, and consistent standards: Professional Deputy Costs - GOV.UK
Court of Protection proceedings involve personal, sensitive matters and enable decisions made in the best interests of the person who lacks the mental capacity to make those decisions themselves. A transparency order in the Court of Protection restricts the publication and communication of information from proceedings. They support the principle of open justice by allowing court of protection hearings to be heard in public whilst protecting the privacy of vulnerable individuals.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate has been made of the average costs incurred by individuals subject to professional deputyship orders in the last five years.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We do not hold data on the average costs incurred by individuals subject to professional deputy orders.
The Court of Protection sets strict rules about what deputies can charge, which are governed by specific practice directions and rules. Practice Direction 19B (PRACTICE DIRECTION 19B – FIXED COSTS AND DEPUTY REMUNERATION IN THE COURT OF PROTECTION) sets out the responsibilities of deputies in ensuring costs are justified, reasonable, and in P’s best interests. The Practice Direction provides a schedule of fees (fixed costs) that deputies, either solicitors or public authority officeholders, can charge when they have been authorised to act for P.
If professional deputies choose not to take fixed costs, they can have their costs assessed by the Senior Courts Costs Office (SCCO). The Office of the Public Guardian and the Senior Courts Costs Office have produced guidance to ensure costs charged to vulnerable individuals’ estates are reasonable, proportionate, and fully justified as well as maintaining public confidence through transparency, accountability, and consistent standards: Professional Deputy Costs - GOV.UK
Court of Protection proceedings involve personal, sensitive matters and enable decisions made in the best interests of the person who lacks the mental capacity to make those decisions themselves. A transparency order in the Court of Protection restricts the publication and communication of information from proceedings. They support the principle of open justice by allowing court of protection hearings to be heard in public whilst protecting the privacy of vulnerable individuals.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what avenues of redress are available to family members who believe there has been maladministration in the handling of a deputyship case.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Family members who believe there has been maladministration in the handling of a deputyship case have several avenues of redress.
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is responsible for supervising deputies and will investigate concerns raised about a deputy’s conduct or the way they are carrying out their duties. These investigations are undertaken to ensure that the deputy is acting in the best interests of the person lacking capacity and fulfilling their responsibilities in line with the authority set out in their court order.
Separately, the OPG’s internal complaints process allows individuals to challenge the OPG’s own administrative handling of a case. Once internal processes are complete, if a customer remains unhappy, concerns may be referred to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman via a Member of Parliament.
Where an issue relates to a judicial decision, such as the making or discharging of a deputyship order, this must be addressed through the Court of Protection. Complaints about the professional standards of a deputy may also be taken to the relevant regulatory body.
Asked by: John Cooper (Conservative - Dumfries and Galloway)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many apprentices his Department recruited in each year since 2022.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
The Ministry of Justice recruited the following number of new entrants directly into apprenticeship programmes in each year since 2022.
Time period | Number of new joiners through apprenticeship recruitment |
January 2022 – December 2022 | 2 |
January 2023 – December 2023 | 12 |
January 2024 – December 2024 | 15 |
January 2025 – December 2025 | 35 |
These figures relate to new joiners recruited via apprenticeship pathways and do not include existing employees who have undertaken apprenticeships as part of their development.
Asked by: Lee Anderson (Reform UK - Ashfield)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to improve support in the court system for victims of (a) rape and (b) sexual violence.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
To ensure that victims, including those of rape and sexual violence, receive the right and timely support, the Ministry of Justice has announced record investment of £550 million in victim support services over the next three years of this Spending Review period.
In addition, this Government is also taking decisive action to address long-standing issues that impact victims of rape and sexual violence. This includes:
Funding a record number of sitting days and uncapping Crown Court sitting days in 26/27, so that more rape and other sexual offence cases can be heard.
Introducing the Courts & Tribunals Bill to drive down the Crown Court caseload and reduce delays.
Introducing a package of legislative measures to protect victims of sexual violence in particular from unnecessary and intrusive cross-examination about their personal lives at court.
Announcing that we will introduce free Independent Legal Advisors this year, for victims and survivors of adult rape to help them to understand their legal rights.
Testing the Operation Soteria model in courtrooms, to ensure rape cases focus on suspects, not victims.
Rolling out trauma-informed training for all court staff, so that those who come into contact with victims at court understand how best to support their experience.
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 the long-term adequacy of using early release measures to manage prison capacity.
Answered by Jake Richards - Assistant Whip
This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe.
Without the changes this Government made, courts would have had to halt trials and the police cancel arrests, undermining public safety and leading to a disastrous impact on public confidence in the criminal justice system.
We regularly publish data on release from prison, including on forms of early release – for example we publish SDS40 data alongside the quarterly Offender Management statistics: Standard Determinate Sentence (SDS40) release data - GOV.UK.
Whilst measures like the SDS40 change provided the intended medium-term relief to the system, this was only ever a temporary change as a bridge to a more sustainable solution. That is why the Sentencing Act has now been passed, to ensure we never run out of prison space again and to deliver a more sustainable solution to the prison capacity crisis.
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 his Department’s press release entitled Children to get swifter justice as new family court approach expands nationally, published on 17 March 2026, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the Pathfinder model on the level of ability of parents to present evidence and challenge decisions in court.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Child Focused Courts introduce a streamlined, problem-solving approach in relevant private law proceedings that ensures early identification of needs and risks, enabling the court to make safe decisions without delay. Under the model, the proportion of children seen by social workers more than doubles and parents who are victims of domestic abuse are able to access additional support through Independent Domestic Violence Advisers (IDVAs). Communication with families can improve their understanding of, and engagement in, the court process and the Child Impact Report provides an opportunity for parents and parties to share their views on the recommendations made to the court.
Key metrics from existing pilot areas show backlogs have reduced by more than fifty percent and cases are being resolved up to seven and a half months faster, thereby reducing delays and improving outcomes for children and families. Nationally, information on open caseload and average case duration is routinely published through Family Court Statistics and HMCTS management information. In addition, we have published additional management information demonstrating the effectiveness of the Child Focused Courts and have also published a process evaluation and a research report exploring the experience of children and families.
Following the announcement of national rollout, a phased approach will see the model operating across the whole of England and Wales by 2029. Launch dates in court areas beyond those already announced will be agreed with operational partners in due course.
The funding announced in the Deputy Prime Minister’s Statement of 17 March includes a permanent increase in social worker capacity for Cafcass and Cafcass Cymru, in recognition of the additional resources required to deliver the model, and for new domestic abuse specialists to work in the family courts.
During the implementation period, we are providing funding for additional court staff to support preparation activity, such as reducing outstanding legacy cases, and to support transition to the new model. The evaluation of the pilot areas shows that cases are being resolved earlier and the number of open cases is decreasing, indicating that the model uses existing court capacity more efficiently and that no additional judicial, magistrates, or court staff will be needed once the model is fully implemented in a court area. Judicial training is the responsibility of the Judicial College, which operates independently from the Government.