Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment his Department has made of the potential impact of experts unregulated by the Health and Care Professions Council (a) diagnosing parental alienation and (b) advising courts on residence transfers on the outcomes of (i) general cases and (ii) where (A) mothers and (B) children have alleged abuse.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government does not recognise the concept of “parental alienation” syndrome and does not think it is capable of diagnosis. Having reviewed relevant family court judgments and published guidance by various organisations, the Government recognises that there is a need to review the role of unregulated experts in the family courts.
The Government is already taking action on concerns about unregulated experts in family court proceedings. We are working with the Family Procedure Rule Committee on this issue to make changes to the Family Procedure Rules and their associated Practice Directions to restrict the instruction of these experts.
There are existing mechanisms within the family court system for a case to be reconsidered. A parent may apply to the family court to have an existing order varied or discharged. The court will consider all of the circumstances of the case and make any decision based on the welfare of the child, which is its paramount consideration.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if his Department will take steps to review the outcomes of Family Court cases where experts unregulated by the Health and Care Professions Council were used; and to ensure that children removed from their mothers based on their diagnosis can be returned.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Government does not recognise the concept of “parental alienation” syndrome and does not think it is capable of diagnosis. Having reviewed relevant family court judgments and published guidance by various organisations, the Government recognises that there is a need to review the role of unregulated experts in the family courts.
The Government is already taking action on concerns about unregulated experts in family court proceedings. We are working with the Family Procedure Rule Committee on this issue to make changes to the Family Procedure Rules and their associated Practice Directions to restrict the instruction of these experts.
There are existing mechanisms within the family court system for a case to be reconsidered. A parent may apply to the family court to have an existing order varied or discharged. The court will consider all of the circumstances of the case and make any decision based on the welfare of the child, which is its paramount consideration.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what estimate she has made of the number of unfilled magistrate vacancies on 9 July 2025.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
We do not have a set number of magistrate vacancies. Magistrate recruitment targets are set on an annual basis covering 1 April to 31 March. As of 1 April 2025, there were 14,636 magistrates in post. We are aiming to recruit around 2,000 magistrates in 2025/26, and we are currently considering our ongoing resourcing needs in light of the planned reform of the criminal courts.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps she is taking to ensure that the Victims' Code is enforceable; and what mechanisms are available to victims to ensure that criminal justice agencies comply with that code.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We are committed to ensuring that victims receive the service they deserve under the Code. This is why earlier this year we commenced the new statutory obligation from the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, which requires those who provide Code services to comply with the Code unless there is a good reason not to. We have also commenced other measures from the 2024 Act that will help the Victims’ Commissioner to hold bodies to account for how they are delivering for victims, including by placing a duty on certain authorities to respond to the Commissioner’s recommendations and to cooperate with reasonable requests from the Commissioner.
We are building on these powers through the Victims and Courts Bill, which will provide the Victims’ Commissioner with new tools to drive systemic change. We will also consult on a new Code in due course to make sure we get the foundations for victims right.
If victims feel that they have not received the service they can expect as set out in the Victims’ Code, there are formal complaints processes that service providers are required to provide. If victims are not happy with a service provider’s complaint response, they can now complain directly to the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman without going through an MP.
The Government is committed to ensuring that victims can access the information and support they need. The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 created a framework to monitor criminal justice agencies' compliance with the Victims' Code, including legislative duties for agencies to collect and share information on Code compliance.
The framework has not yet been commenced - preparatory work is underway, for example actively engaging with criminal justice agencies on the underlying data that will support the development of the framework.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, when she plans to commence section 8 of the Victims and Prisoners Act 2025; and what steps she is taking produce the framework to review compliance with the Victims Code.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
We are committed to ensuring that victims receive the service they deserve under the Code. This is why earlier this year we commenced the new statutory obligation from the Victims and Prisoners Act 2024, which requires those who provide Code services to comply with the Code unless there is a good reason not to. We have also commenced other measures from the 2024 Act that will help the Victims’ Commissioner to hold bodies to account for how they are delivering for victims, including by placing a duty on certain authorities to respond to the Commissioner’s recommendations and to cooperate with reasonable requests from the Commissioner.
We are building on these powers through the Victims and Courts Bill, which will provide the Victims’ Commissioner with new tools to drive systemic change. We will also consult on a new Code in due course to make sure we get the foundations for victims right.
If victims feel that they have not received the service they can expect as set out in the Victims’ Code, there are formal complaints processes that service providers are required to provide. If victims are not happy with a service provider’s complaint response, they can now complain directly to the Parliamentary Health Service Ombudsman without going through an MP.
The Government is committed to ensuring that victims can access the information and support they need. The Victims and Prisoners Act 2024 created a framework to monitor criminal justice agencies' compliance with the Victims' Code, including legislative duties for agencies to collect and share information on Code compliance.
The framework has not yet been commenced - preparatory work is underway, for example actively engaging with criminal justice agencies on the underlying data that will support the development of the framework.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what information her Department holds on the number and proportion of applications for the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme made to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority outside the two-year time limit for which discretion was applied in (a) 2020, (b) 2021, (c) 2022, (d) 2023, (e) 2024 and (f) 2025.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below shows the number and proportion of resolved applications in each calendar year where the two-year time limit was extended.
Column A: Calendar year of decision | Column B: Total resolved applications | Column C: Resolved applications received outside time limit | Column D: Resolved applications where time limit was extended | Column E: Resolved applications where time limit was extended as a proportion of all applications received outside the time limit |
2020 | 27,866 | 4,139 | 3,615 | 87.3% |
2021 | 28,471 | 5,223 | 4,391 | 84.1% |
2022 | 33,843 | 6,352 | 5,257 | 83.8% |
2023 | 36,783 | 6,846 | 5,279 | 77.1% |
2024 | 35,279 | 7,102 | 4,750 | 66.9% |
2025 to date | 14,207 | 3,235 | 1,971 | 60.9% |
The above information relates to applications made to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 (the Scheme) only. For minor applicants, the two-year time limit depends on when the incident was reported to the police. We have taken that into account in the above response.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, in what proportion of cases in which an applicant to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme had a criminal conviction did the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority apply discretion in (a) 2020, (b) 2021, (c) 2022, (d) 2023, (e) 2024 and (f) 2025.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below shows the number and proportion of resolved applications in each calendar year where the applicant had an unspent conviction and the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) applied discretion to make an award.
Calendar year of decision | Resolved applications where the applicant had an unspent conviction and the CICA applied discretion to make an award |
2020 | 315 (1.1% of total resolved applications) |
2021 | 269 (0.9% of total resolved applications) |
2022 | 277 (0.8% of total resolved applications) |
2023 | 265 (0.7% of total resolved applications) |
2024 | 254 (0.7% of total resolved applications) |
2025 (to date) | 97 (0.7% of total resolved applications) |
The above information relates to applications made to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 (the Scheme) only.
We cannot provide the total number of applications where the applicant had an unspent conviction. This information is only recorded where the unspent conviction results in a refusal decision or a reduced award.
Annex D to the Scheme provides that an award will not be made to an applicant with an unspent conviction of a prescribed type. Where the applicant has an unspent conviction of a different type, Annex D provides that an award will be withheld or reduced unless there are exceptional reasons not to withhold or reduce it.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what the average processing time was for applications to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme by people living in Rotherham in each of the last five years.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The table below shows the average time for decisions to be made on applications* for criminal injuries compensation by people resident in Rotherham**.
Financial Year of CICA decision | Average time (days) |
2020-21 | 292 |
2021-22 | 337 |
2022-23 | 463 |
2023-24 | 363 |
2024-25 | 367 |
* The table does not include archived bereavement applications because the address of the applicant is not retained. In most cases, applications are archived three years after the case has been closed.
** The above table includes all awards where the applicant named Rotherham as the town in their home address in their application.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what training is available for family court judges on child sexual abuse.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Lady Chief Justice has statutory responsibility for the training of the courts judiciary in England and Wales, which is exercised through the Judicial College. The judiciary and professional staff in the College are responsible for the design, content and delivery of judicial training.
All judicial office holders receive induction training on appointment and before sitting in a new jurisdiction and complete regular continuation training thereafter. Training on child sexual abuse is integral to judicial training in public and private family law, including dealing with allegations of child sexual abuse and how best to receive evidence from children and young people in a way which seeks to minimise distress whilst protecting the integrity of the court process.
Family magistrates and their legal advisers also complete training in child sexual abuse and other forms of domestic abuse.
Asked by: Sarah Champion (Labour - Rotherham)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps she is taking to improve data capture on the (a) number of private law proceedings that involve allegations of child sexual abuse and (b) outcomes of these cases.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
HM Courts and Tribunals Service will be introducing a new case management system for private law children‘s cases, Manage Cases. This system will identify each type of abuse or harm allegation made by an applicant, including child sexual abuse. This will support data capture of the number of proceedings in which child sexual abuse is a factor and the outcome of these cases. The national roll out of the new digital system is expected to begin later this year.