Ministry of Justice

The Government recognises the important role that mediation can play in resolving commercial disputes and promoting access to justice, alongside other dispute resolution methods such as litigation and arbitration.

The UK signed the United Nations Convention on International Settlement Agreements Resulting from Mediation (known as the Singapore Convention) in May 2023. The Government is currently consulting stakeholders in the UK legal and mediation sectors, and other experts, on how the Convention could be implemented in domestic law. We are committed to ratifying the Convention once all the necessary domestic implementing measures are in place.

This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We have had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold data on releases by constituency. However, we have published SDS40 release data alongside the quarterly Offender Management Statistics: Standard Determinate Sentence 40 (SDS40) : September 2024 to March 2025 - GOV.UK.

This Government takes prolific offending extremely seriously and we are determined to ensure that the criminal justice system has the right tools to deal with them.

We are expanding the availability of Intensive Supervision Courts to tackle the causes of prolific offending. We know these problem-solving approaches cut crime, with a 33 percent decrease in the rate of arrests compared to offenders who receive standard sentences. We are also introducing new orders to hit offenders where it hurts – limiting their freedoms in the community and ensuring punishment outside of prison does exactly that. These will include banning offenders from attending pubs, bars and clubs, as well as public events such as football matches and concerts.

For more serious prolific offending, we are clear that custody has a crucial role to play as a robust backstop, within the maximum penalties set out in statute. Previous convictions are a statutory aggravating factor and Sentencing Guidelines are clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions.

The information requested is provided in the tables attached and includes further notes.

This Government takes prolific offending extremely seriously and we are determined to ensure that the criminal justice system has the right tools to deal with them.

We are expanding the availability of Intensive Supervision Courts to tackle the causes of prolific offending. We know these problem-solving approaches cut crime, with a 33 percent decrease in the rate of arrests compared to offenders who receive standard sentences. We are also introducing new orders to hit offenders where it hurts – limiting their freedoms in the community and ensuring punishment outside of prison does exactly that. These will include banning offenders from attending pubs, bars and clubs, as well as public events such as football matches and concerts.

For more serious prolific offending, we are clear that custody has a crucial role to play as a robust backstop, within the maximum penalties set out in statute. Previous convictions are a statutory aggravating factor and Sentencing Guidelines are clear that sentencers must consider the nature and relevance of previous convictions.

The information requested is provided in the tables attached and includes further notes.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on prosecutions for a wide range of offences, including causing death by dangerous driving in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.

The Ministry of Justice does not centrally hold information on those who pleaded exceptional hardship. This information may be held in court records but to examine individual court records would be of disproportionate costs.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on prosecutions for a wide range of offences, including dangerous driving, driving under the influence, and causing serious injury or death by careless and dangerous driving in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.

It is not possible to identify those who were convicted of an offence and had been previously convicted for failing to produce either a driving licence, an MOT certificate or insurance certificates. This information may be held in court records but to examine individual court records would be of disproportionate costs.

We are maintaining investment in the annual recruitment of about 1,000 judges and tribunal members across all jurisdictions. Annual recruitment requirements are determined by business need and judicial departures.

Since July 2024, 50 fee-paid Employment Judges (EJs) have been appointed, whilst 19 salaried EJs were appointed throughout 2024. Recruitment for up to 36 salaried EJs commenced in March 2025 and recruitment for 50 fee-paid EJs will commence in early 2026. As reported in the 2025 Judicial Diversity Statistics, there were 165 salaried and 143 fee-paid EJs in post in England and Wales as of 1 April 2025.

Since July 2024, we have also appointed an additional 6 caseworkers (legal officers) to support Employment Tribunals. There are currently just over 32 FTE legal officers in post.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on completed court cases for a wide range of offences in England and Wales within the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal Justice Statistics.

However, data centrally held does not identify whether offences were committed by Palestine Action activists. Whilst this information may be held in court records, examining individual records would be of disproportionate cost.

This Government inherited a record and rising courts backlog. The last government promised to reduce the Crown Court backlog to 53,000 by March 2025. Instead, the backlog increased to 76,957 by March 2025.

We have taken immediate action including funding a record-high allocation of 110,000 Crown Court sitting days this financial year to mitigate the backlog. We committed to investing up to £92 million more a year in criminal legal aid solicitors and boosted Magistrates’ sentencing powers from 6 to 12 months.

However, such steps can only mitigate the growth of the backlog. More fundamental reform is necessary to see the backlog reduce in absolute terms. That is why the Government asked Sir Brian Leveson to propose once-in-a-generation reform that will improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.  We are committed to creating a more stable and sustainable criminal justice system, in which victims and the public can have confidence.

Part one of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts has been published. We are considering Sir Brian’s proposals and will publish a government response in short order . Part two of the Review, considering how the criminal courts can operate as efficiently as possible, is expected to be finalised later this year. We intend to introduce legislation in the second session as soon as parliamentary time allows to implement the necessary reforms.

The legal profession and regulation of the profession in England and Wales operates independently of government. This framework is set out in the Legal Services Act 2007. Regulation of the sector is carried out by independent regulators, overseen by the Legal Services Board (LSB). The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) is responsible for regulating the professional conduct of solicitors and law firms in England and Wales, while the Bar Standards Board (BSB) regulates barristers.

An independent legal services sector is a pillar of the rule of law. Accordingly, it would not be appropriate for ministers or their officials to seek to influence how individual solicitors or barristers are regulated.

Nevertheless, while ministers do not play any role in individual disciplinary matters, the Ministry of Justice maintains regular dialogue with the legal regulators in respect of their statutory functions. This ensures that regulatory independence is respected while also supporting the wider objective of protecting consumers and maintaining public confidence in the justice system.

Solicitors advising clients during police interviews or throughout court proceedings are bound by professional duties, as set out in the SRA’s Code of Conduct. Barristers are bound by the BSB Handbook, which requires them to act with honesty, integrity, and independence. Both regulators have powers to investigate allegations of professional misconduct and to take disciplinary action where necessary. For solicitors, this includes sanctions such as fines or referral to the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal, which can suspend or strike a solicitor off the roll. The BSB can refer cases of professional misconduct to the independent Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service, whose Disciplinary Tribunal has powers to impose sanctions, including suspension or disbarment.

Data on timeliness and ineffective trials (including judge/magistrate availability) at the criminal courts is available here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: January to March 2025 - GOV.UK.

There is no evidence to suggest that judicial vacancies have a significant impact on the timeliness of hearings in the Crown Court.

The Ministry of Justice, working in partnership with HMCTS and the judiciary, continuously monitor judicial capacity across the justice system. We are continuing to invest in regular judicial recruitment of around 1,000 judges and tribunal members each year across all jurisdictions.

There is no evidence that sitting days were lost due to judicial or recorder shortage in the last 12 months.

Data on timeliness and ineffective trials (including judge/magistrate availability) at the criminal courts is available here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: January to March 2025 - GOV.UK.

There is no evidence to suggest that judicial vacancies have a significant impact on the timeliness of hearings in the Crown Court.

The Ministry of Justice, working in partnership with HMCTS and the judiciary, continuously monitor judicial capacity across the justice system. We are continuing to invest in regular judicial recruitment of around 1,000 judges and tribunal members each year across all jurisdictions.

There is no evidence that sitting days were lost due to judicial or recorder shortage in the last 12 months.

To support HM Courts & Tribunals Service's (HMCTS) ability to recruit, we have invested in programmes to reach a diverse demographic and increase our ability to fill critical roles. We use marketing platforms to help reach more candidates for harder to fill positions, this h has had positive results against critical roles such as Legal Advisors. We have taken a strategic approach to legal recruitment, running annual campaigns to target trainee Legal Advisors with career pathways to improve retention of talent.

We have established a dedicated HMCTS jobs microsite, with focused content designed to reach more wider audiences. This compliments our centralised recruitment model, which aids our ability to successfully recruit by placing resourcing experts at the centre, leading and developing recruitment strategy, and resourced to enable us to run recruitment at pace. This has had a direct positive impact on average time to hire (ATTH). HMCTS’ ATTH is currently amongst the lowest in government, with a 12-month average of 50 working days.

Regarding HMCTS’ ability to retain staff, the HMCTS Strategic Plan for 2025-2030 sets out our commitment to our people to invest in them to perform at their best.Our retention strategies will look to develop and continuously improve management and leadership training programmes and continuously improve our training offer for colleagues to ensure organisational capability can meet business needs, developing career pathways for our roles, with opportunities for continuous professional development.

We know that pay is a constraint on retention. As an Executive Agency of the Ministry of Justice, HMCTS has the same terms and conditions as Ministry of Justice staff. The 2025 Pay Offer provided uplifts to all pay range minima and maxima, enabling the majority of employees (98%) to receive an award equivalent to 3.75% or more of their salary; targeting the offer at Admin Assistant to Admin Officer grades to ensure a higher than headline award for staff in these grades and improving the position of the lowest paid of between 4% and 6.1%.

This award continues to improve the competitiveness of the department’s pay ranges with other government departments. The 2025 Pay Offer recognised the unique challenges associated with Bailiff and Bailiff Manager roles, with an allowance increase that doubled to £2,000 for Bailiffs and an increase to £1,000 for Bailiff Managers.

Our future pay strategy will continue to address pay and reward, and will seek to establish a modern, sustainable and competitive pay and benefits offer to attract and retain the best people that improves colleague satisfaction, underpinned by a higher retention rate for our skilled workforce.

All this work is having a positive impact on our attrition rates. HMCTS overall attrition has decreased steadily over the past 12 months. September 2024 saw overall attrition at 12.6%, since then there has been a month-on-month reduction to 10.5% in July 2025. Across core operational grades AA/AO we have also seen a steady reduction in attrition over the last year, 15% in September 2024 down to 12.2% in July 2025.

Data on trial effectiveness at the criminal courts is available here: Criminal court statistics quarterly: January to March 2025 - GOV.UK

While HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice records and publishes data on reasons for ineffective hearings, including reasons where the court is responsible, there is no data on staff shortages (clerks, ushers, or administrative staff) contributing to trial ineffectiveness.

All courts and tribunals budgets are set as a consequence of the annual Concordat process through which Ministers and the independent judiciary agree key decisions on funding and operational capacity of HM Courts and Tribunals Service. This process is supported by analysis that aims to ensure that funding is used efficiently and that all areas of resourcing, including for staffing, are sufficient to support operational capacity at the agreed level.

The Ministry of Justice does not carry out projections for length of time between charge and trial for specific offences.

The Ministry of Justice publishes end-to-end timeliness data each quarter, including for sexual offences, which enables users to calculate average length of time at various stages of the process. Link to publication: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/685c1091c07c71e5a870984f/timeliness_tool.xlsx.

The Ministry of Justice does not carry out projections for length of time between charge and trial for specific offences.

The Ministry of Justice publishes end-to-end timeliness data each quarter, including for sexual offences, which enables users to calculate average length of time at various stages of the process. Link to publication: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/685c1091c07c71e5a870984f/timeliness_tool.xlsx.

The Ministry of Justice does not hold information on the number or proportion of those awaiting trial for a motoring offence who go onto commit a further offence whilst waiting.

The Deputy Prime Minister has already reached out to a number of European member States and will also be holding meetings with Council of Europe representatives, to discuss reform. Governments across Europe face the same pressures as us and conversations on reform are necessary to ensure the Convention remains strong and relevant.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has accepted all eight recommendations set out in His Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate’s (HMCPSI) report, along with the implementation timeframe proposed by the Inspectorate. The CPS full response to the report is published on its public website and includes the projected implementation date for each recommendation. The latest of these dates is July 2026: https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/crown-prosecution-service-response-hmcpsi-inspection-early-advice-and-pre-charge.

Following his recent appointment as Secretary of State for Justice, the Deputy Prime Minister looks forward to meeting with the Attorney General, the CPS and the police, to discuss their progress on implementing the recommendations made in the HMCPSI report.

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has accepted all eight recommendations set out in His Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate’s (HMCPSI) report, along with the implementation timeframe proposed by the Inspectorate. The CPS full response to the report is published on its public website and includes the projected implementation date for each recommendation. The latest of these dates is July 2026: https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/crown-prosecution-service-response-hmcpsi-inspection-early-advice-and-pre-charge.

Following his recent appointment as Secretary of State for Justice, the Deputy Prime Minister looks forward to meeting with the Attorney General, the CPS and the police, to discuss their progress on implementing the recommendations made in the HMCPSI report.

We recognise the importance of utilising technology to improve the efficiency of criminal and civil court proceedings. That is why, in May 2025, HM Courts & Tribunals Service published its Remote Participation Approach, setting out its principles for enabling remote attendance at hearings where appropriate: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hmcts-remote-participation-approach/hmcts-remote-participation-approach.

Additionally, as part of the second phase of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts, Sir Brian Leveson is reviewing court processes to consider how both new and established technologies could be used to enhance productivity and efficiency in the criminal courts. We expect Sir Brian to finalise his report later this year. Virtual hearings are extensively used in civil courts as well. For example, as part of the Virtual Region initiative judges with spare capacity from outside of the London and Southeast remotely hear cases from London and Southeast helping reduce pressure on judiciary in those regions and enable cases to be determined quicker.

We are working closely with the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) and other Departments through the Inter-Ministerial Group on Homelessness and Rough Sleeping to develop a new long-term cross-government strategy to put us back on track to ending homelessness.

We are continuing to expand our Community Accommodation Service 3 (CAS3) to support more prison leavers at risk of homelessness each year. Our CAS3 service supports prison leavers who are subject to probation supervision, by offering up to 12 weeks of basic transitionary accommodation to provide a stable base on release. This programme has been gradually rolled out nationwide since July 2021 and since then has supported over 23,100 prison leavers who would otherwise have been homeless. We have also employed 50 Strategic Housing Specialists to support prisons in their response to reducing homelessness by working in partnership with probation and Local Authorities to identify suitable accommodation for those released to the area, regardless of the prison they are released from.

We know that a cross-agency and cross-government approach is required to address the challenge of securing long-term accommodation. That is why we are working closely with MHCLG, health partners and other departments at a national and local level, to address barriers to accommodation for prison leavers, drawing on learning from partnership efforts – including the Changing Futures programme – to take a holistic, trauma-informed approach to supporting individuals with multiple unmet needs.

Expenditure relating to deportation and removal appeals is published as part of the Legal Aid Agency’s Official Statistics as part of its ‘detailed civil data’ collection. Due to the way information is recorded it is not possible to distinguish between costs relating to deportation matters and those relating to removal matters. The total legal aid expenditure for financial year 24/25 relating to deportation and removal matters is £1,007,833, which represents 0.05% of total legal aid expenditure in the same period.

Advice and representation in connection with an appeal against deportation is not within the scope of services funded under Schedule, 1 Part 1 to the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO) unless the applicant is claiming asylum. This means many deportation cases would not be funded under legal aid. Where legal aid is available this would be subject to an assessment of the merits of the case and the individual’s financial eligibility for legal aid.

The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) aims to register lasting powers of attorney (LPA) within eight weeks, including a legally required four-week notice period for objections.

A backlog that built up during the COVID-19 pandemic was successfully cleared by November 2024. From then until March 2025, OPG consistently met the 40-day registration target.

Due to sustained increases in demand and an isolated and local power outage in March 2025, registration is currently taking slightly longer than the OPG target. OPG is addressing this through recruitment efforts, overtime, and new scanning systems to improve efficiency.

Plans to modernise LPAs will allow LPAs to be fully made and registered online for the first time, with paper option retained. Digitisation will improve accessibility, reduce errors, and shorten processing times.

The number of days that a retired judge can sit is governed by HM Treasury’s abatement policy which ensures that pension benefits and ongoing income do not exceed a judge’s pre-retirement income. Abatement applies to pension benefits from the final salary legacy schemes. The newer judicial pension schemes are career-average revalued earnings schemes, and abatement and sitting day limits do not apply to those schemes.

This Government recognises that legal aid is a vital part of the justice system. It enables those individuals who need it most to have access to publicly funded legal assistance, in order to uphold their legal rights.

This Government has made a significant investment towards criminal legal aid, as part of which we continue to consider the amount and nature of that funding. In December 2024, we announced that criminal legal aid solicitors will receive up to £92 million more a year, subject to consultation, to help support the sustainability of the criminal legal aid sector. The consultation has now closed, and we will publish the response in due course. This is in addition to our response to the Crime Lower consultation, confirming an uplift to the lowest police station fees, introducing a new Youth Court fee scheme, and paying for travel in certain circumstances. Together, these changes provided a £24 million investment for criminal legal aid providers. Since the Criminal Legal Aid Independent Review (CLAIR), funding for defence advocates has increased by 17%.

The Ministry of Justice engages closely with representatives from the legal profession through the Criminal Legal Aid Advisory Board (CLAAB). Its purpose is to provide independent advice on the operation and structure of the existing and future criminal legal aid schemes, and to assess how these schemes can support the overall sustainability, diversity, and efficiency of the system.

The Commonwealth countries which continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) as their final court of appeal are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Brunei, Cook Islands and Niue, Grenada, Jamaica, Kiribati, Mauritius, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Tuvalu.

The Department has not had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for JCPC jurisdiction. The JCPC relies on the continuing consent of independent countries for its jurisdiction in those countries. These independent states, which have a historical connection with the United Kingdom, are free to make a pragmatic judgement on whether they derive benefit from what the JCPC has to offer.

The JCPC is funded from the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) budget. The Lord Chancellor has an obligation under section 50 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to ensure the UKSC is provided with the resources appropriate to carry on its business, but under the Department’s concordat with the UKSC, the court’s chief executive, as accounting officer, negotiates with HM Treasury directly. The court’s bid for funding is shared with the Lord Chancellor, who may comment on it without altering it. The Lord Chancellor then submits it to HM Treasury for consideration.

The Commonwealth countries which continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) as their final court of appeal are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Brunei, Cook Islands and Niue, Grenada, Jamaica, Kiribati, Mauritius, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Tuvalu.

The Department has not had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for JCPC jurisdiction. The JCPC relies on the continuing consent of independent countries for its jurisdiction in those countries. These independent states, which have a historical connection with the United Kingdom, are free to make a pragmatic judgement on whether they derive benefit from what the JCPC has to offer.

The JCPC is funded from the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) budget. The Lord Chancellor has an obligation under section 50 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to ensure the UKSC is provided with the resources appropriate to carry on its business, but under the Department’s concordat with the UKSC, the court’s chief executive, as accounting officer, negotiates with HM Treasury directly. The court’s bid for funding is shared with the Lord Chancellor, who may comment on it without altering it. The Lord Chancellor then submits it to HM Treasury for consideration.

The Commonwealth countries which continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) as their final court of appeal are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Brunei, Cook Islands and Niue, Grenada, Jamaica, Kiribati, Mauritius, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Tuvalu.

The Department has not had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for JCPC jurisdiction. The JCPC relies on the continuing consent of independent countries for its jurisdiction in those countries. These independent states, which have a historical connection with the United Kingdom, are free to make a pragmatic judgement on whether they derive benefit from what the JCPC has to offer.

The JCPC is funded from the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) budget. The Lord Chancellor has an obligation under section 50 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to ensure the UKSC is provided with the resources appropriate to carry on its business, but under the Department’s concordat with the UKSC, the court’s chief executive, as accounting officer, negotiates with HM Treasury directly. The court’s bid for funding is shared with the Lord Chancellor, who may comment on it without altering it. The Lord Chancellor then submits it to HM Treasury for consideration.

By the nature of their roles, HMPPS staff can come into contact with some of the most challenging and dangerous people in our society. We want to ensure all staff, whether they are based in prisons or probation, feel proud to work for HMPPS and feel supported to carry out their challenging roles.

By the end of September, mandatory Protective Body Armour will be rolled out for use in Close Supervision Centres, Separation Centres, and Segregation Units in the Long-Term High Security Estate. These units hold some of the most dangerous and challenging prisoners.  We are trialling the use of Conductive Energy Devices, known as “tasers”, by specialist staff to assist them in dealing with the most serious incidents in adult male prisons

Within prisons, the Enable Programme aims to transform prisons over the medium term, through a series of workforce and regime changes that will change how HMPPS trains, develops, leads and supports prison staff to ensure that they feel safe, supported, valued and confident in their skills and their ability to make a difference.

We continue to invest in probation, and plan to onboard 1,300 trainee probation officers by March 2026 in addition to the 1,057 already onboarded last year. We are committed to ensuring that workloads for probation staff are sustainable and ensure protection of the public. That is why we have commissioned the ‘Our Future Probation Service’ Programme to deploy new technologies, reform processes, and ensure prioritisation of probation staff time.

Within HMPPS, we provide extensive mental health support, including a 24-hour helpline, confidential counselling, and online wellbeing services. Our Trauma Risk Management practitioners and Care Teams provide further support following any incidents while on duty. The Employee Assistance Programme (EAP) offers confidential 24/7 telephone helpline for counselling and provides a range of wellbeing and health promotion workshops. Critical incident support is available to staff onsite within two hours of the incident taking place. EAP also delivers reflective sessions which are a proactive mental ill health preventative intervention. The sessions focus on the impact of traumatic events at work, helping employees to develop coping strategies and preventing an adverse impact on their professional and private life.

A new well-being support model has been established across HMPPS, with staff support and wellbeing leads for both prison and probation. Their role includes promoting and coordinating wellbeing services, reviewing Peer Support Services, and liaising with HR and other key stakeholders.  Area wellbeing plans are in place, concentrating on workplace wellbeing interventions. HMPPS is retendering Occupational Health (OH) and EAP contracts, prompting a full review of staff support services. There is current provision of comprehensive OH and EAP services to proactively and reactively address the impact of work on health.

This Government recognises the vital importance of legal aid and the need to ensure an adequate supply of suitably qualified criminal barristers and solicitors. Since 2022, funding for defence advocates has increased by 17%. In December 2024, we also announced that criminal legal aid solicitors will receive up to £92m more a year, subject to consultation, to help support the sustainability of the criminal legal aid sector. The consultation has now closed, and we will publish the response in due course. This is in addition to our response to the earlier Crime Lower consultation on solicitor fees, confirming an uplift to the lowest police station fees, introducing a new Youth Court fee scheme, and paying for travel in certain circumstances. Together, these changes provided a £24m investment for criminal legal aid providers .This is a significant investment to reflect the valuable and tough work undertaken by advocates criminal legal aid practitioners, helping to make sure that justice is served.

The Ministry of Justice runs a Data Sharing Project with the Law Society, Bar Council, Legal Aid Agency, and Crown Prosecution Service to monitor the criminal legal services provider base. Latest data shows that overall criminal barrister numbers appear to be stabilising. The number of “self-declared full practise barristers”, those whose workload is at least 80% criminal work, was 2,726 in 23/24 compared to 2,424 in 20/21.

Recruitment and retention remain crucial to maintain a sustainable, diverse workforce, and a pipeline through to the judiciary. The Government is committed to working with the Bar leadership through the Criminal Legal Aid Advisory Board to understand the market, priorities and opportunities for reform, to support the sustainability of the barrister profession.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill introduces changes to the way judicial reviews are handled for National Policy Statements and development consent orders relating to nationally significant infrastructure projects. It removes the paper permission stage, meaning applications will go directly to an oral permission hearing in the High Court. In addition, where the High Court decides at that hearing that a case is “totally without merit,” the claimant will not have a right of appeal.

The Government intends to commence these provisions as soon as practicable after Royal Assent, once the necessary procedural changes are in place.

Listing is a judicial responsibility. The judiciary deploy measures, including the concentration of judicial and court resources to hear a specific cohort of cases over a defined period, as part of ongoing efforts to maximise throughput. HMCTS officials support the operation of such activity and ensure appropriate and effective coordination across wider criminal justice partner agencies – such interventions, where appropriate, can be effective short-term measures.

Part two of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts will consider how the criminal courts can operate as efficiently as possible. We have asked Sir Brian to consider the end-to-end process, from charge to acquittal. We expect Sir Brian to finalise his report later this year.

His Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) takes sexual harm in prisons very seriously. This year we have created specialist roles to address sexual harm across HMPPS, and we are developing a system-wide approach to prevent all forms of sexual harm in prisons as we implement Jennifer Rademaker’s review of HMPPS Professional Standards.

The requested information can be found in the table below. Information filterable by financial year, legal aid provider, and type of legal aid can be viewed on the Provider explorer dashboard of the Legal aid provider completions and starts statistics data visualisation tool.

Duncan Lewis is the largest Legal Aid provider in the UK, currently operating across 29 offices.

Legal aid is only available in respect of immigration cases which are within the scope of legal aid as set out under Schedule 1, Part 1 of the Legal Aid and Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 and is subject to both financial eligibility and merits tests.

To protect the public, prisons must hold prisoners securely to prevent further crime, maintain order and provide an environment conducive to reform.

The Department is committed to taking every possible measure to strengthen prison security.

Whilst we cannot share our full range of countermeasures, our approach is continually evolving, and includes working closely across Government, with law enforcement, and also the private sector to identify and mitigate emerging threats. This includes mitigating any threats from geocoding services.

For example, in this 2025-26 financial year we are investing over £40 million in physical security across 34 prisons. This includes circa £10 million on anti-drone measures such as secure windows and robust netting at 15 prisons.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

Data on the total number of random mandatory drug tests carried out is published as part of the HMPPS Annual Digest. The most recently released version confirms that in the 12 months to March 2025, there were 53,341 random mandatory drug tests, however, the data is currently not sufficient to robustly estimate the percentage positive. The Digest can be accessed via the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hmpps-annual-digest-april-2024-to-march-2025.

Statistics regarding needs, rather than use, are included in the 'Identified offender needs, custody and community, 31 October 2024'. This shows the level of drug misuse need amongst the prison population. It can be accessed via the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/identified-offender-needs-custody-and-community-31-october-2024/identified-needs-of-offenders-custody-and-community-31-october-2024.

We conduct targeted drug testing in custody to help keep people safe and identify individuals who may benefit from a treatment referral, or inform disciplinary action.

To drive down demand for drugs and support recovery, there are also 85 prisons with Incentivised Substance Free Living Units. These provide a dedicated, supportive environment for any prisoner who wants to live drug-free in prison. To bring together this rehabilitative and security focused approach to tackling drug use, 54 Drug Strategy Leads in key prisons are working to ensure that local drug strategies are effectively implemented.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

Data on the total number of random mandatory drug tests carried out is published as part of the HMPPS Annual Digest. The most recently released version confirms that in the 12 months to March 2025, there were 53,341 random mandatory drug tests, however, the data is currently not sufficient to robustly estimate the percentage positive. The Digest can be accessed via the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/hmpps-annual-digest-april-2024-to-march-2025.

Statistics regarding needs, rather than use, are included in the 'Identified offender needs, custody and community, 31 October 2024'. This shows the level of drug misuse need amongst the prison population. It can be accessed via the following link: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/identified-offender-needs-custody-and-community-31-october-2024/identified-needs-of-offenders-custody-and-community-31-october-2024.

We conduct targeted drug testing in custody to help keep people safe and identify individuals who may benefit from a treatment referral, or inform disciplinary action.

To drive down demand for drugs and support recovery, there are also 85 prisons with Incentivised Substance Free Living Units. These provide a dedicated, supportive environment for any prisoner who wants to live drug-free in prison. To bring together this rehabilitative and security focused approach to tackling drug use, 54 Drug Strategy Leads in key prisons are working to ensure that local drug strategies are effectively implemented.

Prisoners held in open conditions can be re-categorised to higher security conditions at any time if their risk increases, if there is a material change in circumstances that impacts security risk, or information (including existing information not considered before) is identified that indicates that the prisoner cannot safely be managed in the current security conditions. The purpose of categorisation is to ensure that those sentenced to custody are assigned the lowest security category appropriate to managing their risk.

Prisoners may be accommodated in more than one open prison during the course of a sentence. The data that would need to be collated to calculate the average length of time in open conditions is not held centrally and could not be obtained without incurring disproportionate cost.

We have maintained regular and structured engagement with staff and their recognised trade union representatives on this matter. All prison governors in the open estate routinely hold local staff engagement forums, providing frontline officers with the opportunity to raise concerns or share feedback. His Majesty’s Prison & Probation Service (HMPPS) ensures that the safety statistics, which are published, reviewed, and discussed quarterly with recognised trade unions, including the POA. These meetings form part of HMPPS’s formal engagement and allow unions to raise concerns on safety matters.

There are also more frequent open-estate trade union stocktakes to provide additional engagement opportunities on this issue, and other matters of concern to members.

HMPPS headquarters officials meet every two weeks with governors of open prisons, and convene quarterly forums specifically focused on open prison operations, where safety is a standing agenda item. These engagements reflect our continuing commitment to transparency, collaboration, and continuous improvement in custodial safety.

A formal assessment has not yet been made. This will form part of the operational implementation planning over the coming months.

Prisons of different categories shape their rehabilitation offer to meet the needs of the prisoner cohorts they accommodate.

In open prisons, the intention is for carefully risk-assessed prisoners to participate in activities in the community under Release on Temporary Licence. Suitable, risk assessed prisoners may be allowed out during the day to work, attend college, attend an interview or re-establish links with their family. This helps them develop responsibility and gain valuable skills.

Before moving to the open estate, prisoners will have spent time in prisons of other categories, so it is not straightforward to compare the quality of rehabilitation and attribute outcomes (for example education achievement, employment after release or reoffending rates) to the services in any one prison.