Oral Answers to Questions

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Tuesday 8th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Adam Jogee (Newcastle-under-Lyme) (Lab)]

7. What steps her Department is taking to reduce the Crown court backlog.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

The Government inherited a record and rising courts backlog. We are investing more than the Conservatives ever did, and funding a record allocation of Crown court sitting days—110,000 days this year, which is 4,000 more than during the last Government—but we must reform, too. Sir Brian Leveson will soon present his recommendations for delivering once-in-a-generation reform and swifter justice for victims.

[Chris Vince]

In Essex, 20% of cases are stopped after a defendant has been charged because victims are dropping out and withdrawing their support. With some waiting years for their case to get through the courts, is it any wonder that they give up on justice? Does the Secretary of State agree that we need radical action now to stop the backlog from getting any bigger in places like my constituency of Harlow?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. Victims on many occasions feel retraumatised by the criminal justice system because of the long delays. Defendants know that cases are taking too long to be heard; too many of them think that they can game the system, and that if they wait long enough, victims will drop out. That is why we are determined to deliver swifter justice for victims. It is why we have delivered a record number of sitting days in the Crown court this year, and it is why we will do once-in-a-generation reform of our courts after Sir Brian publishes his review.

[Jim Dickson]

Thanks to the massive court delays inherited from the Conservatives, as the Secretary of State said, residents in Dartford continue to face huge delays in getting cases involving them to court. What assurance can she give that the delays will reduce, and that for my constituents, it will not continue to be a case of “justice delayed is justice denied”?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right that the old adage, “justice delayed is justice denied”, has come true. We know that we need bold reform. We have to get the backlog down, and we have to deal with the rising and record demand coming into the system as well. That is why we have made a record allocation of Crown court sitting days, but we also need bold, once-in-a-generation reforms. His constituents and the country deserve nothing less.

[Adam Jogee]

The people of Newcastle-under-Lyme want thugs and criminals to be held to account and to feel the full force of the law, and victims of crime to get the justice they deserve. In the west midlands—my home region and the Lord Chancellor’s—the Crown court backlog has increased by over 3,000 cases since 2016. It is clear that we need an overhaul of the system, and to speed up justice. Will the Lord Chancellor tell us two things? When does she expect the Leveson report to be published, and what may it mean for the future of jury trials?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The publication of Sir Brian Leveson’s review is due very soon. My hon. Friend will understand why I cannot give any the exact date, but once Sir Brian has published his findings, the Government will consider them in due course, and we will come to the House first with our full response.

Jury trials will remain a cornerstone of our justice system in the most serious cases, but we have to recognise that they take five times longer than cases heard in magistrates courts, and magistrates courts already hear 90% of all criminal trials. With victims waiting so long for their day in court, we must ask whether there are cases being heard by juries today that need not be heard by juries in future.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

The rise in the Crown court backlog in 2024 was 7,051 additional cases; that is 588 extra cases on the backlog every month. The figures for March 2025 show an additional rise over three months of 2,300; that is 769 additional cases on the backlog every month. Not only is the position getting worse under the Lord Chancellor’s leadership, but the rate at which it is getting worse is increasing. Can she explain to the House why the rate is getting worse, and why, when in November the Lady Chief Justice offered 6,500 additional sitting days, she did not accept every single one of those?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am rather surprised by that question from the hon. Gentleman, because he is normally across the detail. Let me tell him two points of detail that were missing from his question. First, he knows that the demand coming into the system is rising. We have record numbers of cases coming into the system, which is a good thing, because it means that victims are seeking justice, but the system has not been able to cope with that demand. Secondly, he should know that there is a difference between judicial capacity, which is what the Lady Chief Justice has spoken about, and system capacity. Unless he and the Conservatives have suddenly discovered a system that will 3D print new judges, lawyers, prosecutors and defence barristers overnight, I think he will recognise that there comes a point at which additional money does not buy us the ability to go faster. That is what I have to reckon with as Lord Chancellor. I have set the sitting days at 110,000 because that is the max for the system, and that is fully funded. We will consider once-in-a-generation reform to get to the bottom of this problem and fix it once and for all.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

Hannah contacted me for the first time in August last year after numerous stalking incidents, online abuse and violent threats from a member of her family. He is still at large almost a year on, despite four arrests. The court date keeps being put back due to the backlogs. There have been further breaches of the bail conditions and a restraining order issued, but we have heard that a fourth trial will be delayed until 2026 at the earliest. What is the Lord Chancellor able to do to help victims who are already in the system, and who continue to be abused by a perpetrator?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I will happily look at the details of the case that the hon. Lady raises. Some of that relates to charging and what the police and others are doing, but I will ensure that she gets a full response from across Government on some of the specifics. Let me observe that we make a whole range of victim support available to victims as they navigate the criminal justice system, and we will continue to do so; I recommend that she recommends some of those mechanisms to her constituent. We have made a record allocation of funding to the Crown courts, but we recognise that we need to go further, as we will after the publication of Sir Brian Leveson’s report.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

The Crown court backlog stands at approximately 73,000 cases annually, and rape and sexual assault trials in Leicester Crown court face delays of up to three years. What steps is the Department taking to reduce that backlog and ensure that serious offences are brought to trial more efficiently to prevent further trauma for victims and the miscarriage of justice?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Gentleman is right that the delays in the system and the long waits for trials are causing huge amounts of trauma to victims, who regularly tell me, him and other Members from across this House that they feel retraumatised by the criminal justice system when they seek justice. I am not willing to tolerate that, which is why I have made record funding available. I recognised right at the outset that the system cannot carry on as it has done for all these years. We need to ask a bigger question about the sorts of cases in our system that get a jury trial, and those that do not. This Government will pursue once-in-a-generation reform of our Crown courts.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Justice Committee.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

Last year, 839 magistrates court trials and 186 Crown court trials had to be cancelled because the defendant was not brought to court on time by prisoner escort contractors. We expect Sir Brian’s report very shortly, which will have a range of proposals on how to reduce the unprecedented backlog in the Crown courts. Does my right hon. Friend agree that however effective those reforms prove to be, they will be undermined from the start unless the performance of contractors such as Serco improves?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is right that the performance of contractors needs to improve. He and I have discussed that, and the issue regularly comes up in oral questions in relation to the contract for electronic monitoring. We monitor those contracts regularly. We are determined to pursue once-in-a-generation reform, but my hon. Friend will know that the whole system needs to become more productive and efficient. That is why there will be a second part to Sir Brian Leveson’s work, which will report later in the year, and which will look at productivity and efficiency across the criminal justice system. I regularly discuss these matters with the Criminal Justice Board as well.

[Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

One of the most important things we can do, as the Lord Chancellor seems to indicate, is reduce the number of cases going into the system by reducing reoffending where possible, including intergenerational reoffending. Given that 65% of boys with a parent in prison will go on to offend, what steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that the children of prisoners are properly identified and supported, so that they do not become the next generation of people in prison?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The right hon. Gentleman raises a really important point, and I am grateful to him for doing so. Focusing on the children of prisoners was a manifesto commitment of our party, because—exactly as he says—there is a cycle there that society needs to break, particularly for the children of male prisoners, and especially their sons. We are leading work on joining up information sharing across Government to make sure that those children are identified, properly supported, and able to break the cycle of offending in their family. We must do so in a way that does not stigmatise those children and push them away from those who want to help them. Sensitivity and delicacy are required, but the right hon. Gentleman is absolutely right to recognise the problem, which we are working on with colleagues in other bits of Government.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

The Liberal Prime Minister William Gladstone was right when he said,

“Justice delayed is justice denied”.

He would look on the inheritance that this Government received from the Conservative Government as a matter for great shame. While creative solutions are required to tackle the backlog, the jury trial—which we hear may be at risk for some—is a critical safeguard on state power, and is key to a liberal and free society. Ahead of the Leveson report, which is coming out very soon, can the Government tell us how they will increase the overall capacity of the courts system to dispense justice, as opposed to potentially undermining justice altogether?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for that question, but I would challenge him on two points. I do not think we are undermining justice in this country, when he himself recognises that justice delayed is justice denied. We are trying to properly think through, “What is a good system for us to proceed with in this country?” As he knows, 90% of all criminal cases already go to the magistrates court. That is why we will pursue the reforms that we have set out.

[Mr Joshua Reynolds (Maidenhead) (LD)]

3. What steps she is taking to ensure that private contractors delivering justice services are held to account.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

9. What steps her Department is taking to support victims of grooming gangs through the court system.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

The sexual exploitation and rape of children by grooming gangs is one of the darkest moments in this country’s recent history. In the Crime and Policing Bill, we have made grooming a statutory aggravating factor in sentencing for child sexual offences, and we have accepted all of Baroness Casey’s recommendations, including changing the criminal law to ensure that adults who penetrate children under 16 are charged with rape.

[John Lamont]

I am grateful to the Secretary of State for her response. Thousands of children across the UK have been abused by grooming gangs, yet charities still warn of victim blaming by police and those in authority. We should be clear that the problem is not children; it is those who prey on them. What are the Government doing to ensure that victims are properly supported and receive the justice they deserve?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Gentleman raises an incredibly important point that was picked up by the Casey report, all the recommendations of which the Government have accepted, and I have no doubt that the national inquiry will be very cognisant of the issues that he raises. Through the Criminal Justice Board, we will ensure that every part of the criminal justice system, from policing right through to prisons, probation and courts, is aware of how we deal with victims: with fairness and justice.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Shabana Mahmood]

The right hon. Gentleman will know that I cannot and will not comment on individual sentences. I urge him to live up to the responsibility of being the shadow Lord Chancellor, because commenting in the way that he regularly does on individual sentencing decisions, stripped of context and without all the information, is wrong. Those are independent decisions made by the independent judiciary in individual cases.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

10. What steps she is taking to increase prison capacity.

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Edwards (Tamworth) (Lab)]

13. What steps she is taking to improve prison security.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

This year, we are investing over £40 million in physical security across 34 prisons, which includes anti-drone measures to prevent drugs and other illicit items from entering prisons. Starting this month, we will trial the use of tasers by specialist staff, and we are increasing tactical staffing resource to strengthen prison security.

[Sarah Edwards]

There has been a spate of attacks at Swinfen Hall Prison, which holds young offenders, in my constituency. Drugs, phones and weapons are often dropped in by drone. The families of prisoners are concerned for their safety, and prison officers are at risk. What steps are the Government taking to prevent drones and to tackle the high levels of violence in our prisons?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank my hon. Friend for her question. Under the last Government, between 2019 and 2023, drone sightings around prisons increased by over 770%. As I have said, we are investing £40 million in bolstering security measures in our prisons, and we are currently trialling new anti-drone netting on the long-term, high-security estate to tackle drone incursions.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

Prison staff are facing record levels of violence and working in such a toxic environment that, according to the Rademaker review, workers are too afraid to raise complaints about bullying and harassment. Does the Lord Chancellor therefore welcome today’s relaunch of the updated “Safe Inside” prisons charter by the Joint Unions in Prisons Alliance, a coalition of 10 trade unions representing the vast majority of prison staff? If so, will she join us this evening to hear more about safer systems of working in prisons?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I believe the Prisons Minister may well be attending the event that the right hon. Member mentioned. I will happily pick that up in my regular conversations with trade union officials. She is right to highlight the scale of violence across our prison system. We are already taking measures, and I hope that the combination of sentencing reform and investment in our prisons will bring down the level of violence we are currently seeing.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

14. What steps she is taking to tackle the backlog in the courts.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)]

19. If she will make an assessment of the potential impact of deporting all foreign criminals on prison capacity.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

Removals under this Government have been higher over the past 12 months than under the Conservatives. We are going further by expanding the early removal scheme so that prisoners with no right to be in this country will be deported and banned from ever returning to the UK after serving 30% of their custodial sentence.

[Stuart Anderson]

UK prisons are at full capacity and 12% of prison places are occupied by foreign nationals. Will the Secretary of State look to deport all foreign nationals who commit offences in our country to free up that space?

[Shabana Mahmood]

As I say, we have already deported more people in the first year of this Government than was the case under the previous Government, so we are going faster on foreign national offender removals from our prison estate. The legal changes we are making will bring more offenders into scope earlier in their sentence, making them eligible for deportation.

[Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)]

Will the Lord Chancellor update the House on the conversation she had with international partners on the European convention on human rights during her recent visit to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I had very positive discussions with partner countries across Europe when I visited Strasbourg, where I made a speech about how the European convention on human rights is a living instrument and therefore must keep up with the times. That is a positive conversation, and one that this Government will be continuing in the coming months.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

20. What steps she is taking to improve the quality of prison education.

--- Later in debate ---

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

T1.   If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

It is a little over a year since this Government were elected, and ever since I have been clearing up the mess created by the previous Government, who left our prisons days from collapse. I am ensuring that we can never run out of space again. We have already opened around 2,500 new prison places, with the aim of creating 14,000 by 2031. We have accepted most of David Gauke’s sentencing review, and I will increase funding for the Probation Service by up to £700 million. In our courts, we are reversing 14 years of under-investment that left us with a record and rising courts backlog. I have funded a record number of Crown court sitting days—4,000 higher than the Conservatives managed—and Sir Brian Leveson will soon propose once-in-a-generation reform. Make no mistake: unlike those on the Conservative Benches, I will do what it takes to bring down the backlog and deliver swifter justice for victims.

[John Lamont]

Under the SNP, the number of suspected criminals in Scotland being let off with a slap on the wrist has increased by 28% in a year, according to the latest data. Now the Labour Government here seem to want to copy the SNP. Why will the Labour Government not put victims first, instead of doing what they are doing now—letting dangerous criminals off with short and weak sentences?

[Shabana Mahmood]

What absolute nonsense. Let me tell the House the definition of soft justice: it is what the Tory party did, building only 500 prison places in 14 years in office. That is why we are in this mess and that is the mess that I am cleaning up.

[Dr Marie Tidball (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Lab)]

T2. Last month, a devastating report by Women’s Aid revealed that a total of 67 children have been killed over a 30-year period by a known domestically abusive parent, in circumstances related to the courts’ use of the principle of the presumption of contact. Two of those children, Jack and Paul Sykes, are the sons of my formidable constituent, Claire Throssell. All these deaths were preventable. Will the Minister update the House on the progress of the Government’s review of the presumption of contact?

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Con)]

In the year since Labour took office, can the Justice Secretary tell us how many individuals have been prosecuted for smuggling people in on small boats?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I do not have those figures directly to hand, but I am sure that if they are available, I can write to him with the details.

[Robert Jenrick]

I asked the Justice Secretary a very simple question about one of the biggest challenges facing our country right now, and the whole House can see that she did not have a clue. This is about not just the pathetically low levels of prosecutions under her watch, but the fact that she has waved through guidelines to shorten sentences for immigration offences. Under the Nationality and Borders Act 2022, the most serious offence for facilitation carries a life sentence, but she is watering that down to between 10 and 16 years. Instead of smashing the gangs, she is slashing the sentences. Why will she not do something for once and stop this?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Honestly, the shadow Justice Secretary really ought to pay more attention to his day job—rather than to the job he is looking for, which the Conservative party might give him. First, had he paid any attention, he would know that prosecutions do not fall to the Ministry of Justice; they are dealt with independently through the Crown Prosecution Service. We will of course publish the statistics when we get them, and I will happily write to him with the details. We are making sure that, across Government, we are taking all the action necessary to protect our borders. He is misrepresenting what the immigration guidelines do; I have picked him up on that before. I will happily write to him again, but maybe he could actually read them and learn something.

[Brian Leishman (Alloa and Grangemouth) (Lab)]

T3. PeoplePlus has just won the contract for prison education in Scotland and England. PeoplePlus was sold to Talent International, a subsidiary of swipejobs, in which US and Australian-based venture capital firm Clearsign Capital has a 40% stake, according to the University and College Union. Can the Minister explain why venture capitalists are making money out of educating British prisoners?

--- Later in debate ---

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

I read a recent BBC article about an asylum seeker who had violently raped a teenage girl. He has been convicted and given a sentence of nine years in prison, followed by three years on licence, after which he will need to be deported. I am concerned that such individuals, during their period on licence, pose a risk to British women and girls. Does the Lord Chancellor agree, and will she ensure that people go straight from prison to deportation where appropriate?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank the hon. Lady for raising that important point. It is why we are reducing the threshold for the early removal scheme and looking carefully with the Home Office at the Gauke review’s recommendation of effectively sentencing to deportation, to deal with the very types of cases that she has raised.

[Juliet Campbell (Broxtowe) (Lab)]

I welcome the Government’s efforts to reform sentencing following the sentencing review. I am confident that those steps will end the chaos left behind by the previous Government. I am particularly interested in rehabilitation as a priority in sentencing. A troubling statistic remains: studies have shown that 30% of prisoners in the UK are diagnosed as dyslexic, and there are probably many more who are undiagnosed, meaning that the numbers are much higher. Will the Minister tell me what steps are being taken to support dyslexic people in prison and to prevent reoffending following release?

[Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)]

The Secretary of State will be aware of the deeply troubling revelations over the weekend of the so-called Halal bride website. Does she agree that such practices have absolutely no place in Britain?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The regulation of websites and content falls either within Home Office responsibilities for criminal law or with the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, and I will happily pick up with them the detail around the regulatory issues that are raised by that case.

[John Slinger (Rugby) (Lab)]

When I visited HMP Onley, the nearest prison to my constituency, I had the great privilege to be given a tour by the governor, Mark Allen and to see the excellent work of the staff. I wonder whether the Secretary of State would comment on the importance of offerings by organisations and companies such as Greene King which provide cafés and restaurants so that prisoners can be rehabilitated while they are in prison.

[Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)]

The Lord Chancellor rightly rejected murderer Alan Jermey’s Parole Board request for open conditions, for which his daughters and I are extremely grateful. I understand that Mr Jermey is now legally challenging the decision, so will the Lord Chancellor revisit my request for a meeting with her about this issue?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Member will know that, with a judicial challenge, there will be some constraints as to what I can say publicly, and indeed even privately in a meeting. I will take advice to ensure that nothing compromises the legal process.

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

The Sentencing Guidelines (Pre-sentence Reports) Act 2025 has now received Royal Assent and I congratulate the Lord Chancellor on her swift action, but it would never have been necessary if sentencing guidelines were not the preserve of an unelected, undemocratic quango in the form of the Sentencing Council. Does she agree that we need a democratic lock, or even a vote in this place, to approve new sentencing guidelines?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I have said many times at this Dispatch Box that that whole episode revealed a democratic deficit. I am reviewing the roles and powers and we will come forward with legislative changes in due course.

[Alex Easton (North Down) (Ind)]

In the light of the tragic loss of young mother Sarah Montgomery, who was seven months pregnant, due to violence, which has left two young girls without a mother and impacted the entire community of Donaghadee in my constituency, do the Government agree that early interventions, particularly through early education, are essential? Furthermore, can we look at intensifying our efforts to prevent domestic violence against women and young girls and at increasing sentences to deter that type of crime?

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

May I associate myself with your remarks, Mr Speaker, at the outset of these proceedings about the passing of Lord Tebbit? Lord Tebbit was a great friend of Northern Ireland, particularly of the many fellow victims of IRA terrorism.

May I return the Lord Chancellor to the subject of the backlogs in our Crown courts? In Northern Ireland, we have the worst of all records; it takes an average of 551 days to conclude a Crown court case. Murder trials have been stalled since last September with no new start date. We have a Minister of Justice locally who talks the talk but never walks the walk, and particularly does not walk the walk in settling the ongoing remuneration issue that is holding things up. Would the Lord Chancellor bring some pressure to bear on the local Justice Minister to sort this matter out?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. and learned Member will know that for devolved matters it would of course be deeply inappropriate for me to try to influence or put pressure on the Minister of Justice in Northern Ireland. On a cross-UK basis, we regularly meet our fellow Justice Ministers in the devolved Administrations, and I will happily pick up those conversations in a constructive way.

Oral Answers to Questions

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Tuesday 3rd June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

19. What steps her Department is taking to support victims of domestic abuse.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

The Government are taking action to support victims of domestic abuse and violence. We are ensuring stronger management of domestic abuse perpetrators through new domestic abuse protection orders and the increased multi-agency management of domestic abusers; that is being expanded to those convicted of coercive and controlling behaviour. In response to the sentencing review published last week, I committed to further protections for victims, including the roll-out of domestic abuse specialist courts and better identification of domestic abuse perpetrators.

[Sarah Green]

My constituent was subject to financial, physical and emotional abuse by her ex. She was also cyber-stalked; her social media accounts were hacked for details of her location, and for information about their children. Despite being granted a non-molestation order and a prohibited steps order, she was unable to compile sufficient evidence of the cyber-stalking to be granted a stalking protection order. Speaking to her, her fear is palpable. What steps is the Secretary of State taking to ensure that victims are supported in compiling the evidence that they need for a stalking protection order?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am very sorry to hear of the experiences of the hon. Lady’s constituent; it is clearly a horrifying case, and my sympathies are with her. Given that stalking protection orders are relatively new, there is a case for continually examining whether their roll-out is working as intended. They are primarily a Home Office responsibility, but there are amendments to the Crime and Policing Bill, which is going through the House, that are designed to strengthen these orders. If the hon. Lady will write to me, I will ensure that she has a meeting with the relevant Minister to talk through the specifics of the case that she has raised, and the lessons that can be learned as we strengthen these orders for everyone.

[Marsha De Cordova]

In April, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner warned that without additional funding, London will see a sustained increase in violence against women and girls. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has been working tirelessly to fix the broken system left by the Conservatives, but if we do not get that support in London, women will go unprotected. Will she commit to working with colleagues in the Home Office and the Treasury to ensure that the Met can keep women safe in my constituency and across London?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Of course, we work closely with colleagues in the Home Office and the Treasury. The Government will shortly publish the outcome of the spending review, but I can assure my hon. Friend that all colleagues across Government are committed to our mission to halve violence against women and girls, for victims not just in London but across the country. I will ensure that we engage with Members across the House on this matter as well.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

3. What steps her Department is taking to help to reduce reoffending by people on probation.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

We inherited a justice system in crisis, with prisons churning out better criminals, not better citizens, and we know that 80% of offenders are reoffenders. Last week, I announced measures to toughen up community punishment, which results in lower reoffending rates than short custodial sentences. We will also increase probation investment to manage offenders in the community safely.

[Warinder Juss]

Will the Lord Chancellor outline the steps being taken to recruit and retain probation officers, and to ensure that they have manageable caseloads and that their morale is improved? What programmes or partnerships are in place to help those on probation to access stable accommodation, and employment, training or education, so that they can go through the rehabilitation process and reduce their chances of reoffending?

[Shabana Mahmood]

We are investing in probation. Funding will increase by £700 million by the final year of the spending review. That is a 45% increase in annual budgets, which will fund further recruitment on top of the 1,300 officers we will recruit this year and the 1,000 officers we recruited in the previous year. That will support our investment in services that rehabilitate offenders and cut crime.

[Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

The Lord Chancellor admitted in a recent interview with The Times that her sentencing reforms will create “inevitable tensions” with the Government’s efforts to halve knife crime and rates of violence against women and girls. It sounds like she does not really believe in these reforms, which have been trotted out by David Gauke, the Prisons Minister in the other place and the Prison Reform Trust. Does the Lord Chancellor realise that none of them is elected, and that if this package fails to keep our streets safe and restore the criminal justice system, the country will hold her and this Government to account?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I think the country will hold to account those responsible for the absolute mess that this Government inherited. Nowhere in the right hon. Gentleman’s question did he acknowledge that under the Government of which he was a member and for which he campaigned, prisons were brought to the brink of collapse. These reforms are necessary. This Government will not allow our prisons to run out of places—the one thing everybody agrees we cannot allow to happen. The only reason that is a possibility is because of the Tory party.

[John Milne (Horsham) (LD)]

4. When the Minister of State for Courts and Legal Services plans to meet the hon. Member for Horsham’s constituent Andrew Turner to discuss locked child trust funds.

--- Later in debate ---

[Stuart Anderson (South Shropshire) (Con)]

8. If her Department will take steps to increase sentences for high street crime.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

This Government inherited a situation in which 10% of offenders account for 50% of all offences, with a small number of repeat offenders wreaking havoc in our communities and on our high streets. Cracking down on these offenders is a central part of any successful strategy to cut crime, and we will accept David Gauke’s recommendations, particularly on the further roll-out of intensive supervision courts. However, the hon. Member must accept the reality of the inheritance left by his Government, which included an increase in sentences although they delivered only 500 prison places over their 14 years in power.

[Stuart Anderson]

South Shropshire residents would expect high street crime to be dealt with, and proportionate sentencing and appropriate deterrents. How will removing short-term prison sentences achieve any of that?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Member should know that 60% of all people who are given a short custodial sentence go on to reoffend within the year, so clearly the system that we have does not work. We cannot simply sit back and keep doing things that we know result in increased reoffending in communities that we all want to protect. We have to look at interventions that will make a difference. Tough community punishment produces better reductions in reoffending than short sentences. We will consult Members across the House as we prepare our Bill in the coming weeks to make sure that we have a strong package of unpaid work and other measures designed to toughen up community punishment.

[Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)]

Does the Lord Chancellor agree that when it comes to sentencing, ancillary orders, including those banning offenders from shops and high streets, are part of the answer? We need the police, together with the Crown Prosecution Service, to apply for them, and when an offender appears in court, we need the courts to issue those orders when sentencing.

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend raises an important point. He is right that so-called ancillary orders, often referred to as travel bans, bans from seeing football and bans on the ability to go to particular areas, are an important part of the package of measures that the Gauke review has recommended. We have accepted those in principle and I look forward to working with my hon. Friend and other colleagues as we draw up our package of proposals for the upcoming sentencing Bill.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Dr Kieran Mullan (Bexhill and Battle) (Con)]

Whatever the sentence or offence, victims and families deserve a meaningful and fair route to appeal sentences that are unduly lenient. Twenty-eight days for people who have experienced deep trauma, when criminals get an unlimited time to appeal, is not meaningful or fair. Can the Lord Chancellor explain to campaigners such as Katie Brett and Ayse Hussein from Justice for Victims why she is not willing to give them more time?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The shadow Minister should know that the Law Commission is considering the whole area of unduly lenient sentencing. It is important that we let it do its work and that it is able to look at the measures in the round and think about the consequences across the whole criminal justice system. We will review those proposals once they are made and legislate if we need to.

[Dr Mullan]

I am afraid that that explanation will not wash. The Lord Chancellor knows that she is choosing to give the Government more time in her Bill ahead of the Law Commission’s decision. Why is she giving herself more time, but not victims?

[Shabana Mahmood]

If the shadow Minister ever did any homework, he would know that it is always the Attorney General who has to agree and sign off on unduly lenient sentencing referrals. Our proposals are there to make sure that the Attorney General always has a full 28-day period to consider and make rulings that often help victims. He will also know that the Law Commission is looking at that work. The Conservative Government had 14 years; why did they never do anything?

[Tim Roca (Macclesfield) (Lab)]

9. What steps her Department is taking to help support victims of sexual abuse.

--- Later in debate ---

[David Simmonds (Ruislip, Northwood and Pinner) (Con)]

16. What discussions she has had with the Sentencing Council on sentencing guidelines for immigration offences.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

Ministers meet regularly with the chair of the Sentencing Council. On the specific guidelines for immigration offences, the hon. Member will know that they set a minimum sentence, but no maximum. Judges can still sentence as they see fit within the limits of what the law allows, and foreign criminals can still be deported, even if they are sentenced to less than 12 months.

[David Simmonds]

As the shadow Justice Secretary heard when he visited on Friday, criminal gangs are imposing a significant cost on Hillingdon, which has the highest level of asylum seekers per capita of any local authority, because the council has to support asylum seekers who have been smuggled into the UK. What plans does the Justice Secretary have to ensure that we have tougher sentences that are fit for purpose, so that our communities do not face this burden in the future?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I and colleagues in the Justice Department are working closely with our colleagues in the Home Department to make sure that we have a joined-up approach to tackling the issues he has raised. He knows that asylum is primarily a policy issue for the Home Secretary, and I will make sure that she and her team are made aware of the specific problems in Hillingdon that he has raised today.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Justice Secretary.

[Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Con)]

For the first time, the Sentencing Council has published immigration sentencing guidelines. They water down sentences passed by Parliament, which means that hundreds of illegal migrants every year will avoid the threshold for automatic deportation. Once again, the Justice Secretary’s officials were in the meeting and waved the guidelines through, and I have the minutes to prove it. Has the Justice Secretary lost control of her Department once again, or is it the case that, as the Defence Secretary said on Sunday, this Government have simply “lost control” of our borders?

[Shabana Mahmood]

No; what this Government are doing is cleaning up the almighty mess left to us by the previous Government, of which the right hon. Gentleman was a member. He knows full well that I have already signalled an intention to review the powers of the Sentencing Council. We have an upcoming sentencing Bill, and I will take the action that he and his Government never did in 14 long years. [Interruption.] He has suddenly found his voice—he did not have it for a decade or more.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

17. What assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of the third report of the Justice Committee of Session 2022-23 on IPP sentences, HC 266, published on 22 September 2022.

--- Later in debate ---

[Susan Murray (Mid Dunbartonshire) (LD)]

T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

I know the House shares my anger at recent attacks against prison officers. After the awful events at HMP Frankland, I commissioned a review into the use of protective body armour, and today I can announce that I will mandate its use in close supervision centres, separation centres, and segregation units in the high security estate. That is my initial response to the review, but I will set out further action on body armour in due course. When Jonathan Hall’s independent review into the Frankland attacks reports, I will take any further steps necessary to protect our brave staff.

Crime must be punished, but on the rare occasions that a miscarriage of justice has taken place, the Criminal Cases Review Commission exists to uncover and rectify that injustice. In recent years the commission has lost the trust of the public. It must now win it back, so today I have appointed Dame Vera Baird, a former Victims’ Commissioner, to be its interim chair. She will review the commission, its governance and leadership, and ensure that it delivers once more for those who have been victims of injustice.

[Susan Murray]

What discussions have the Government had regarding the International Court of Justice’s 2024 judgment on Israel and Palestine?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Lady will know that that is a matter primarily for the Foreign Secretary. We keep under review all judgments of all courts, domestic and international, and adopt our policy position accordingly. I will ensure that her concerns, if there are any, are raised directly with the Foreign Secretary.

[Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)]

T4.   The 14,500 volunteer magistrates who deal with 95% of criminal cases are the backbone of our justice system. Will the Lord Chancellor meet me, the Magistrates’ Association, and a group of cross-party MPs who recently wrote to her, calling for a long-service medal to be established for justices, as well as discussing the Magistrates’ Association’s forthcoming report on how to recruit and retain magistrates, as she increases their powers and responsibilities?

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Jenrick (Newark) (Con)]

Brave prison officers are under attack, and I am warning again that, if the Government do not act now, an officer will be killed on the Justice Secretary’s watch. After the Southport killer, Axel Rudakubana, allegedly attacked an office with boiling water, he is now bingeing on treats such as Maltesers and Pringles. When will the Justice Secretary strip Rudakubana and monsters like him of those privileges and put them in solitary confinement? When will she finally have the backs of all our brave prison officers, by giving each and every one the protection that they need in the form of high-collar, stab-proof vests, and not just a privileged few in the most limited circumstances?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Let me give the shadow Secretary of State a much-needed education, because he appears not to know that under the Tory Government violence on staff in our prisons soared and experienced officers left in droves because of it. That is the inheritance I received, and that is the mess that this Government are clearing up. He will know that I have already acted on suspending the use of self-cook facilities, and Jonathan Hall is looking into the HMP Frankland attack. I have made the announcement on body armour, and I will not hesitate to take any further action, but unlike him I will not take “headline-grabbing” measures, just for the sake of a headline.

[Mr Speaker]

Order. Can I just say to both Front Benchers that Back Benchers also have to get in? Topical questions have to be short and punchy. Please, let us stick to the script. If the right hon. Member wants to ask longer questions, he should come in earlier—I could have picked the questions where he could have been brought in.

[Robert Jenrick]

Last month, nine countries wrote to the Council of Europe calling for urgent reform of the European convention on human rights to tackle the migration crisis. The UK was conspicuously absent, and instead the Attorney General has likened critics of the ECHR to the Nazis. The Justice Secretary is reported in the press to find Lord Hermer “very frustrating”, and “personally unbearable”. Well, Mr Speaker, we might have found an area of cross-party consensus, but why did the Justice Secretary not sign the letter? Are the Government irrelevant, or are she and the Prime Minister defending a broken system?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Again, if the shadow Secretary of State ever paid any attention to detail, he would know that that letter was sent by EU member states and we are no longer a member of the European Union. Let me assure him that I am absolutely committed to considering the wider picture of our human rights law and I will not hesitate to take action where I need to.

[Alex Baker (Aldershot) (Lab)]

T7.   The backlog of Crown court cases in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight reached an eight-year high last year, which has had a huge impact on victims and defendants in Aldershot and Farnborough who are struggling to get on with their lives. What steps is the Minister taking to reduce delays in local justice for my constituents?

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh Babarinde (Eastbourne) (LD)]

Does the Secretary of State agree with the chair of the Prison Governors’ Association that the Conservative proposal to arm prison officers with lethal weapons is just “headline-grabbing nonsense”? Does she agree that, on top of providing body armour, the serious means to protect prison officers is by ensuring that they get the years’ long training they deserve, not the weeks’ long crash course that the last Government left them with?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. Again, people who pay attention to the detail will know that there are already mutual aid agreements in place between prisons and local police forces to ensure that if an armed response is required, it is available.

[Mark Ferguson (Gateshead Central and Whickham) (Lab)]

T8. I am sure that hon. Members from all parties will be looking forward to Olivia’s law, in memory of Olivia Pratt-Korbel, coming into force, thanks to a huge amount of support from my hon. Friend the Member for Knowsley (Anneliese Midgley), Olivia’s family and other families. What else can be done to ensure that murderers, rapists and other violent criminals are forced to answer in court for their crimes?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Andrew Snowden (Fylde) (Con)]

T3. The Secretary of State recently announced that paedophiles will be castrated ahead of early release from prison, which turns out to be nothing more than taking some pills that may—I repeat “may”—reduce their libido. Will the Secretary of State confirm here and now that no paedophile prisoner will be released from prison early until it has been proven that the medication has effectively castrated them?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Chemical suppression is a mechanism used by other jurisdictions around the world, and it has been shown to work. The previous Government sat on a pilot for years on end and did nothing. I have said that I will pull every lever at our disposal to deal with sex offending once and for all.

[Jess Asato (Lowestoft) (Lab)]

A family court judge who would have made decisions in relation to many abused children was recently found guilty by the High Court of abusing their own adopted children. Does the Minister agree that protecting the anonymity of members of the judiciary who have abused their children, particularly when it relates so intimately to their own work in court, risks undermining public trust in our legal system?

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

T5. Lord Hermer says that we are not even trying to reform the convention. Why not?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I do not know what the right hon. Member is referring to, because the Government have already announced that we are considering the way in which our human rights laws are applied in immigration cases. I am the policy owner for the European convention on human rights, and I am considering its application within our domestic laws as well. I do not know what other reassurance he needs.

[Anneliese Midgley (Knowsley) (Lab)]

I welcome the Lord Chancellor’s commitment to tightening up exclusion zones. Knowsley has some of the highest rates of domestic abuse in the country, so that kind of action will be important for victims. Does she agree that an offender’s freedom should never come before a victim’s right to feel and be safe?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend raises such an important point. I have been struck by so many meetings with victims in which they feel that the exclusion zones, as currently constructed, effectively make them constrained, rather than the offenders. That is why I want to move to restriction zones for offenders, and we will bring forward our proposals in the upcoming sentencing Bill.

[Charlotte Cane (Ely and East Cambridgeshire) (LD)]

T6. Rural communities often find it even more difficult to access legal aid providers than in urban areas. What steps is the Minister taking to help to provide access to legal aid to people in rural areas?

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew Cooper (Mid Cheshire) (Lab)]

At just 12 years old, my constituent was subjected to horrific abuse by a family member who was ultimately convicted of nine offences, including four counts of rape. The offender was sentenced in youth court to just a three-year referral order and a two-year restraining order. My constituent cannot appeal this sentence under the unduly lenient sentence scheme simply because of the court in which the case was heard. Will the Minister review this deeply troubling case and consider extending the unduly lenient sentence scheme to include youth court rape convictions?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I hope that my hon. Friend heard the earlier answer on the unduly lenient sentence scheme and the review by the Law Commission, but if he writes to me with the specifics of that case, I will make sure that we look into it.

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

As of 1 May this year, there were seven biological males in HMP Downview, a women’s prison in my constituency. Can the Secretary of State confirm when they will be moved out?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Lady will be aware that those seven biological males are on E wing, which is a transgender-only facility. We will review the recent Supreme Court ruling and make sure that we are compliant in everything we do going forward. We have inherited a policy that we supported in opposition. It was a strong act by the last Government, but we will build on that following the Supreme Court’s recent ruling.

[Kim Johnson (Liverpool Riverside) (Lab)]

A recent freedom of information request showed that between January 2022 and March 2024, 52 prison staff were recommended for dismissal due to breaches of security. However, ten times that number resigned over similar breaches. What action has the Minister taken to strengthen training, oversight and accountability across the Prison Service to address this worrying trend and prevent further security failures?

--- Later in debate ---

[Sarah Pochin (Runcorn and Helsby) (Reform)]

Is the Justice Secretary content that her Department spends more than half a billion pounds every year locking up criminals who belong in other countries?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am content that this Government have deported more foreign national offenders than the previous Government. I am content that we have accepted the findings of the Gauke review, and we will be bringing the early removal scheme threshold from 50% down to 30% to make that sure more foreign offenders are eligible for removal from our country.

[Harpreet Uppal (Huddersfield) (Lab)]

Sadly, some of my constituents have experienced a double blow, not only from having defective cavity wall insulation installed, but from being pursued for adverse legal costs by firms such as SSB Law. Ministers have previously confirmed that the Solicitors Regulation Authority has opened an investigation. Will the Minister provide an update on that investigation and meet me to discuss how those affected can get redress?

--- Later in debate ---

[Carla Lockhart (Upper Bann) (DUP)]

Recently, I attended a service marking 40 years since William Heenan was murdered by the IRA for being a Protestant. While we honoured his memory, the self-proclaimed “First Minister for all” in Northern Ireland was visiting the newly erected statue of IRA terrorist Bobby Sands, glorifying the movement responsible for the cold-blooded murder of men such as William. Will the Minister agree to meet me and innocent victims from Northern Ireland regarding the review and improvement of the glorification of terrorism legislation that applies to Northern Ireland?

[Shabana Mahmood]

As I think the hon. Lady will be aware, that is primarily a policy area for our colleagues in the Northern Ireland Office, but I will make sure that we raise those issues with them.

[Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)]

Yesterday, a man was convicted of a public order offence after burning a Koran outside the Turkish embassy. The judge said that the fact that the man was attacked was proof that he was guilty of disorderly behaviour. This is grotesque, and means that in effect, we have a blasphemy law. Does the Justice Secretary believe that this should hold, or will the Government back my Bill to put an end to all of this madness next week?

[Shabana Mahmood]

We do not have a blasphemy law, and we are not going to have a blasphemy law in this country. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, I believe that that specific case is going to be subject to an appeal, so it would be inappropriate for me or any other Minister to comment on the details of the matter. However, I am sure that once all other channels are exhausted and we have a final resolution, we will be debating these matters in detail in this House.

Nottingham Inquiry: Terms of Reference

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Written Statements

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

On 22 April, I established an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 into the attacks that took place on 13 June 2023 in Nottingham, which cost Barnaby Webber, Grace O’Malley-Kumar and Ian Coates their lives, and harmed three others.

The inquiry will be chaired by Her Honour Deborah Taylor.

HH Deborah Taylor is a retired senior circuit judge. She served as the resident judge at Southwark Crown court from 2017 to 2022. In accordance with section 3(1) of the Act, this inquiry will be undertaken by HH Deborah Taylor acting alone as chair.

In accordance with section 4(3), I have now consulted the chair on the terms of reference for the inquiry. This process is now complete, and I have today deposited a copy of the terms of reference in the Library of the House.

The terms of reference cover: a comprehensive timeline of events and the actions of and interactions between the various agencies involved, including health, policing and the wider criminal justice system. Rightly, the terms of reference allow for an inquiry that builds on previous reviews and offers scope for the chair to consider gaps and omissions where she considers it necessary to do so.

It is in the public interest—in particular for the bereaved families and survivors whose lives have been devastated by these events—that the inquiry reports in two years.

The inquiry will play a key role in learning the lessons from this terrible tragedy.

The inquiry’s investigations will now be a matter for the chair. As the sponsoring Department, the Ministry of Justice will provide support and ensure that the inquiry has the resources that it needs.

[HCWS656]

Judiciary and Prison Officer Workforce

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Written Statements

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

I am today announcing my decision on the pay awards for prison staff and for the judiciary.

Prison Service Pay Award 2025-26

Having carefully considered the 13 recommendations made by the Prison Service Pay Review Body for the 2025-26 pay award, I can announce that we are accepting in full the recommendations made by the PSPRB for all staff within their remit.

The role of prison service staff in helping to keep the public safe and rehabilitate prisoners cannot be overstated. Acceptance of these recommendations reflects our priority of ensuring that prison service staff can deliver this essential frontline service and recognises their unwavering dedication to continuing protecting the public during the current prison capacity crisis.

The award will deliver a pay rise of at least 4% of base pay for all eligible prison staff between operational support grade and governors (bands 2-11), with a targeted focus on the lowest paid.

The award delivers headline pay increases of:

4% for prison officer grades (bands 3-5)

4% for managerial and prison governor grades (bands 7-12)

4% increase for operational support grades (band 2), in addition to the national living wage increase that band 2 staff received from 1 April 2025. Operational support grades will also receive a temporary increase of 5% to the unsocial hours allowance. This increase will be applied for a maximum period of 2 years, to 31 March 2027, while we consider arrangements for unsocial hours working for future years as part of future pay review body remits.

This pay award will be paid this summer and will be backdated to 1 April 2025. This Government value the vital contribution the almost 6 million public sector workers make across the UK, delivering the public services we all rely upon. The acceptance of the PSPRB’s recommendations is expected to further stabilise the recruitment and retention position in the prison service. This is key to ensuring prisons have the staff they need to deal with ongoing capacity pressures.

I would like to thank the PSPRB for their valuable advice and response to the Government’s evidence. The report has been laid before Parliament today and a copy is attached. I am grateful to the chair and members of the review body for their report.

Judiciary pay award 2025-26

The Senior Salaries Review Body shared their annual report with Government on 7 May 2025. This will be presented to Parliament and published on gov.uk.

I value the SSRB’s expertise and independent advice in recommending a judicial pay award that reflects the important role that the judiciary play across the justice system. When making my decision, I have carefully considered the SSRB’s advice alongside the financial implications for my Department.

The SSRB recommended a pay award of 4.75% for all judicial office holders within the remit group for 2025-26. I have decided to reject this recommendation, and instead a 4% judicial pay award will be applied equally to all judicial office holders for whom I have responsibility. This will be backdated to April 2025. This strikes a balance between addressing SSRB’s advice and managing the overall affordability to my Department.

The SSRB highlighted their concern over the persistent recruitment and retention issues affecting parts of the judiciary when making this recommendation. I share these concerns. That is why I commissioned the SSRB to undertake the major review of the judicial salary structure. The terms of reference for this review were published on 13 May, and include looking in depth at the specific recruitment and retention issues affecting the judiciary. As I set out in my evidence, the major review is the right place to address these areas through targeted reform, and presents better value than the flat-rate pay uplift of the annual pay review. I look forward to working closely with the SSRB over the course of the major review.

I am committed to strengthening our world-class judiciary. I hope this increase reflects that, and the value I place on their independence and commitment to the delivery of justice and the rule of law.

[HCWS665]

Independent Sentencing Review

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Written Statements

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

Today, the independent sentencing review published its findings and recommendations. The review was chaired by the right hon. David Gauke alongside a panel of experts, including a former Lord Chief Justice, and representatives from the police, prisons, probation and victims’ rights organisations. The Government are grateful for its recommendations, and I will ensure a copy of the review is deposited in the Libraries of both Houses.

This statement sets out the Government’s in-principle response. But this review must be set in its proper context. This Government inherited a prison system at the point of crisis. Our prisons are, once again, running out of space. If our prisons collapse, courts would be forced to suspend trials, the police would have to stop making arrests, and crime would go unpunished. It is shameful that, in this day and age, we are confronted by this crisis once more. The reasons are clear—the last Government added just 500 places to our prison estate in 14 years, while at the same time, sentence lengths rose. As a result, the prison population is now rising by 3,000 each year and we are heading back towards zero capacity. It falls to this Government to end this cycle of crisis.

That starts by building prisons. Last week, I announced £4.7 billion for prison building, putting us on track to hit 14,000 prison places by 2031. This is the largest expansion of the prison estate since the Victorian era. However, we cannot build our way out of this crisis. Even though we are building as quickly as we can, we expect demand for prison places to outstrip supply by 9,500 in early 2028.

It was in that context that I commissioned the independent sentencing review. Its task was clear—to ensure that the country must always have the prison places it needs, and that there must always be prison spaces for dangerous offenders. At the same time, I asked the review to address the fact that our prisons too often create better criminals, not better citizens. Instead of cutting crime, they are breeding grounds for it. The panel of experts have followed the evidence and looked at examples from countries across the world. Today, I set out an initial response—with further detail to follow once legislation is placed before the House.

The report’s central recommendation is to move to a three-part sentence called the “earned progression model”. The Government accept this in principle. Under this model, an offender will not necessarily leave prison at an automatic point. Instead, their release date will be determined by their behaviour. If they follow prison rules, they will earn earlier release. If they do not, they will be locked up for longer.

This echoes the model I witnessed in Texas earlier this year, which has cut crime and brought its prison population under control. Under this new model, offenders serving standard determinate sentences with an automatic release of 40% or 50% will now earn their release. The earliest possible release will be at the one third mark, with additional days added for bad behaviour. The review has suggested a new maximum of 50%, but for those who behave excessively badly, I will not place an upper limit beyond their full sentence.

For those serving standard determinate sentences with an automatic release point of 67%, their earliest possible release will be 50%. Again, for those who behave excessively badly, I will not set an upper limit.

We have rejected the recommendation to change the sentence structure for extended determinate sentences

The review also suggested that those serving extended determinate sentences should also earn an earlier release. This we will not accept. Judges give extended sentences to those they consider dangerous, with Parole Board hearings happening no earlier than two-thirds of the way through the custodial sentence. I will not change that. Furthermore, I can also confirm that no sentences being served for terror offences will be eligible for earlier release from prison.

We will increase investment in our Probation Service

In the second part of the progression model, offenders will enter a period of “intensive supervision”. This will see more offenders tagged and close management from probation. The Government will therefore significantly increase its funding—by the final year of the spending review period, probation’s annual £1.6 billion spend will rise by up to £700 million. This will allow us to tag and monitor tens of thousands more offenders.

We will standardise the length of recall to prison

If offenders do not comply with the conditions of their release, the sentencing review has suggested that recall to prison should be capped at 56 days. We have agreed to this policy, in principle, though the precise details will be placed before the House when we legislate.

In the final stage of the three-part sentence, offenders could still be recalled if a new offence is committed, and I will also ensure that the most serious offenders continue to be subject to strict conditions.

We will reduce the use of short sentences and increase suspended sentences

The review also recommends a reduction in the use of short prison sentences. A compelling case for doing so has been proposed in this House many times. In the most recent data, nearly 60% of those sentenced to a prison sentence of 12 months or less reoffended within a year. With reoffending rates for those who receive community sentences consistently lower, we must ask whether alternative forms of punishment would make the public safer.

It is important, however, to note that the review recommends a reduction in short sentences—not an abolition. It is right that judges retain the discretion to hand down short sentences in exceptional circumstances. We will continue to ensure courts have access to thorough risk assessments for domestic abuse and stalking cases. In addition, breaches of protective orders linked to violence against women and girls will be excluded.

The review also recommends an extension of the length of custodial sentences that can be suspended from two years to three years. During this period, the prospect of prison time hangs over an offender, should they break any of the conditions imposed upon them. Again, we accept this recommendation.

We will make community sentences tougher

The recommendations set out above will see more community punishment. For that reason, it is essential that community punishment works. The review recommends a series of measures to make community punishment tougher and to force offenders to pay back to those they have harmed. We will consider new financial penalties which could see offenders’ assets seized, even if they are not proven to be linked to crime, and expanding the use of punishments such as travel and driving bans that will curtail an offenders’ liberty.

We also accept the recommendation to expand intensive supervision courts. These courts impose tough conditions, including treatment requirements, that tackle the root causes of prolific offending. In these courts, offenders are regularly brought before a judge to monitor compliance with the conditions set by the courts. This leaves the prospect of prison hanging over them.

However, I believe community punishment must be tougher still. Unpaid work must pay back. Therefore, I will shortly bring together business leaders to explore a model where offenders work for them and a salary is paid not to the offender but used for the good of victims. I will also work with local authorities to determine how unpaid work teams could give back to their communities, whether that be filling potholes or cleaning rubbish.

The number of women in prison will reduce

I also invited David Gauke to consider cohorts this Government believe require particular focus, and I welcome his recommendations on female offenders. Around two thirds of female offenders receive short sentences and around the same number are victims of domestic abusers. I am pleased to note that the review’s recommendation on short, deferred and suspended sentences will reduce the number of women in prison.

We will make it easier and quicker to send foreign national offenders back to their country of origin

I also asked David Gauke to consider how we tackle foreign national offenders. Today, our deportation rate is ahead of the last Government’s. I welcome the recommendations to make it quicker and easier to deport foreign criminals. Under the existing scheme, foreign offenders are sent back to their country of origin after serving 50% of the custodial sentence. We will bring this down to 30%. We will also conduct further work with the Home Office on how we can deport foreign prisoners serving less than three years as soon as possible after sentencing.

We will expand the pilot of medication to manage problematic sexual arousal for sex offenders

I also asked the review to consider how we manage sex offenders. The review has recommended that we continue a pilot of so-called “medication to manage problematic sexual arousal”. I will go further than this, with a national roll-out beginning in two regions, covering 20 prisons. I am also exploring whether mandating the approach is possible. It is, of course, vital that this approach is taken alongside psychological interventions that target other causes of offending, like asserting power and control.

We will ensure our justice system serves victims

When discussing these issues, it is too easy to focus on how we punish offenders when we should be talking more about victims. I welcome the recommendations to improve the way the system serves victims. Everything I am announcing today is in pursuit of a justice system that serves victims. If our prisons collapse, it is victims who pay the price. By cutting reoffending, we will have fewer victims in future. However, there is also more we must do to support victims today.

The review recommends a number of important measures, including better identifying domestic abusers at sentencing so that we can monitor and manage them.

I also welcome the recommendation to expand the use of domestic abuse specialist courts, where trained staff support victims. To improve transparency in the system, we will extend a pilot in which free sentencing transcripts are provided to victims of rape and serious sexual offences. Again, I want to go further than the review recommends to better support victims. Exclusion zones are an important protective tool, preventing offenders from entering areas where victims might be, but these can place greater limits on victims than they do offenders. I want to change this: locking offenders down to specific areas so that victims know that they are safe wherever else they want to go.

This review sets out major reform. In appointing David Gauke, a former Conservative Lord Chancellor, to conduct this review I hoped to show that two politicians from different political traditions can agree on the reforms that our justice system requires. To end this cycle of crisis we must not only build prisons on a historic scale, deport foreign nationals faster than ever, and speed up our courts, but reform criminal sentencing.

These reforms are designed to ensure that we never again find ourselves in the prison capacity crisis which this Government has faced, and will ensure that we never again run out of prison places for dangerous offenders.

[HCWS667]

Independent Sentencing Review

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

With your permission, Mr Speaker, I will make a statement on sentencing in England and Wales. As the House will be aware, the independent sentencing review was published today. It was chaired by David Gauke and his panel comprised experts, including a former Lord Chief Justice, and representatives from the police, prisons, probation and victims’ rights organisations. The Government are grateful for the review’s recommendations, and I will ensure that a copy is deposited in the Libraries of both Houses. Today, I will set out our in-principle response.

First, however, it is essential that we set the review in its proper context. A year ago today, the Conservative party called an election. They did so because they were confronted by the prospect of prisons about to collapse. Rather than confront their failure, they chose to hide it and hoodwink the public into re-electing them. It did not work, but their legacy lives on.

Our prisons are, once again, running out of space and it is vital that the implications are understood. If our prisons collapse, courts are forced to suspend trials, the police must halt their arrests, crime goes unpunished, criminals run amok and chaos reigns. We face the breakdown of law and order in this country. It is shameful that, in this day and age, we are confronted by this crisis once more. The reasons are clear. The last Government added just 500 places to our prison estate, while at the same time, sentence lengths rose. As a result, the prison population is now rising by 3,000 each year and we are heading back towards zero capacity. It now falls to this Government to end this cycle of crisis. That starts by building prisons.

Since taking office, we have opened 2,400 places. Last week, I announced an additional £4.7 billion for prison building, putting us on track to hit 14,000 places by 2031, in the largest expansion since the Victorian era. That investment is necessary, but not sufficient. We cannot build our way out of this crisis. Despite building as quickly as we can, demand for places will outstrip supply by 9,500 in early 2028, and that is why I commissioned the sentencing review. Its task was clear: this country must never run out of prison places again. There must always be space for dangerous offenders.

At the same time, the review was tasked with addressing the fact that our prisons too often create better criminals, not better citizens. Instead of cutting crime, they are breeding grounds for it. The reviewers have followed the evidence and example of countries across the world. Today I present an initial response, with further detail to follow once legislation is placed before the House.

Let me start with the report’s central recommendation: the move to a three-part sentence called the earned progression model, which the Government accept in principle. Under the model, an offender will not necessarily leave prison at an automatic point. Instead, their release date will be determined by their behaviour. If they follow prison rules, they will earn earlier release; if they do not, they will be locked up for longer. That echoes the model I witnessed in Texas earlier this year, which cut crime and brought their prison population under control.

Under the new model, offenders serving standard determinate sentences with an automatic release of 40% or 50% will now earn their release. The earliest possible release will be one third, with additional days added for bad behaviour. The review suggests a new maximum of 50%, but for those who behave excessively badly, I will not place an upper limit. For those currently serving standard determinate sentences with an automatic release point of 67%, their earliest possible release will be 50%. Again, for those who behave excessively badly, I will not place an upper limit.

David Gauke also suggests that those serving extended determinate sentences should also earn an earlier release. This we will not accept. Judges give extended sentences to those they consider dangerous, with no Parole Board hearing until two thirds of time served, and I will not change that. I can also confirm that no sentences being served for terror offences will be eligible for earlier release from prison.

In the second part of the progression model, offenders will enter a period of intensive supervision. That will see more offenders tagged and close management from probation. The Government will therefore significantly increase funding: by the final year of the spending review period, an annual £1.6 billion will rise by up to £700 million, allowing us to tag and monitor tens of thousands more offenders. If offenders do not comply with the conditions of their release, the sentencing review has suggested that recall to prison should be capped at 56 days. We have agreed to this policy in principle, though the precise details will be placed before the House when we legislate. In the final stage of the three-part sentence, offenders could still be recalled if a new offence is committed, and I will also ensure that the most serious offenders continue to be subject to strict conditions.

The review also recommends a reduction in short prison sentences. A compelling case for doing so has been proposed in this House many times. In the most recent data, nearly 60% of those receiving a 12-month sentence reoffended within a year. With reoffending rates for community punishment consistently lower, we must ask ourselves whether alternative forms of punishment would make the public safer. It is important, however, to note that the review recommends a reduction in short sentences, not abolition. It is right that judges retain the discretion to hand them down in exceptional circumstances. In considering exceptional circumstances, we will continue to ensure that courts have access to thorough risk assessments for domestic abuse and stalking cases, and breaches of protective orders linked to violence against women and girls will be excluded.

The review also recommends an extension of suspended sentences from two to three years. In this period, the prospect of prison time hangs over an offender should they break any conditions imposed upon them, and we accept that recommendation.

The recommendations set out above will see more community punishment. For that reason, it is essential that it works. The review recommends a series of measures to make community punishment tougher and force offenders to pay back to those they have harmed. We will consider new financial penalties, which could see offenders’ assets seized, even if they are not knowingly linked to crime, and expanded use of punishments such as travel and driving bans that would curtail offenders’ liberty.

We accept a recommendation to expand intensive supervision courts. Those impose tough conditions, including treatment requirements, that tackle the root causes of prolific offending. Offenders are brought before a judge regularly to monitor compliance, and the prospect of prison hangs over them like the sword of Damocles.

However, I believe community punishment must be tougher still. Unpaid work must pay back, so I will shortly bring together business leaders to explore a model whereby offenders work for them, and the salary is paid not to the offender but towards the good of victims. I will also work with local authorities to determine how unpaid work teams could give back to their communities, whether by filling potholes or cleaning up rubbish.

I invited David Gauke to consider cohorts of offenders who this Government believe require particular focus. I welcome his recommendations on female offenders. Approximately two thirds of female offenders receive short sentences. Around the same number are victims of domestic abusers. I am pleased to say that the review’s recommendation on short, deferred and suspended sentences will reduce the number of women in prison.

I asked David Gauke to consider how we tackle foreign national offenders. Today, our deportation rate is ahead of the last Government’s. I welcome the recommendations to make it quicker and easier to deport foreign criminals. Under the existing scheme, they are sent back to their country of origin after serving 50% of the custodial sentence. We will bring that down to 30%. We will also conduct further work with the Home Office on how we can deport foreign prisoners serving less than three years as soon as possible after their sentencing.

I also asked the review to consider how we manage sex offenders. The review has recommended we continue a pilot of so-called medication to manage problematic sexual arousal. I will go further, with a national roll-out beginning in two regions, covering 20 prisons. I am exploring whether mandating the approach is possible. Of course, it is vital that this approach is taken alongside psychological interventions that target other causes of offending, such as asserting power and control.

When discussing sentencing, it is too easy to focus on how we punish offenders when we should talk more about victims. Everything I am announcing today is in pursuit of a justice system that serves victims. If our prisons collapse, it is victims who pay the price. By cutting reoffending, we will have fewer victims in future, but there is more we must do to support victims today. The review recommends a number of important measures, including better identifying domestic abusers at sentencing, so that we can monitor and manage them more effectively. I pay tribute to those who have campaigned on this, particularly the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde). I also welcome the recommendation to expand the use of specialist domestic abuse courts, where trained staff support victims. To improve transparency in the system, we will extend a pilot of free sentencing transcripts for victims of rape and serious sexual offences.

I want to go further than the review recommends to better support victims. Exclusion zones are an important tool, preventing offenders from entering areas their victims might be in, but these place greater limits on victims than on offenders. I want to change that, locking offenders down to specific locations so that victims know they are safe wherever else they want to go.

This review sets out major reform. I know its recommendations will not be welcomed by all. By appointing David Gauke, a former Conservative Lord Chancellor, I hoped to show that two politicians from different traditions can agree on the reforms our justice system requires. I do not expect Conservative Members to join me to solve this crisis. In fact, I can hear their soundbites already. “Just build faster,” they will say. Well, we are building faster than they did: we have already added 2,400 places, and we are now investing £4.7 billion more. “Just deport more foreign criminals,” they will say. Well, we are ahead of where they were, and today we have accepted major reform to go further and faster. “Clear the courts backlog,” they will say despite having created it themselves. Well, we are investing more in our courts than they ever did, and we are ready to embrace once-in-a-generation reform to deliver swifter justice for victims.

While we are doing more on each of these areas than they ever did, these are not solutions that rise to the scale of the crisis that they left behind. We must build prisons on an historic scale, deport foreign national offenders faster than ever, and speed up our courts; and yet still, despite all that, we must reform sentencing too. So, more in hope than expectation, and despite, not because of, experience, by appealing to the better angels of their nature—if they have any—I end by inviting those opposite to help us fix the crisis that they left behind. I commend this statement to the House.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Lord Chancellor.

--- Later in debate ---

[Robert Jenrick]

Of course, Mr Speaker.

The Ministry of Justice’s own pilot scheme found that 71% of tagged offenders breached their curfew. When it comes to stopping reoffending, tags are about as useful as smoke alarms are at putting out bonfires. What is the Justice Secretary going to say when she meets the victims of offenders that she let off? How is she going to look them in the eye and say with a straight face, “I’m sorry—we are looking into how this criminal escaped from their digital prison cell.” Her reforms are a recipe for carnage.

I urge the Justice Secretary to change course and to make different choices—yes, choices—from the ones that we knew the Government would make from the day that the Prime Minister hand-picked Lord Timpson as Minister of State for Prisons, Probation and Reducing Reoffending, a man who is on record as saying that

“a lot of people in prison…shouldn’t be there”—

two thirds of them in fact, he said—

“and they are there for far too long”.

The Labour party is clearly ideologically opposed to prison and that is why the Government are letting criminals off with a “get out of jail free” card, rather than deporting the 10,800 foreign national offenders in our prisons—one in every eight cells—a figure that is rising under the Justice Secretary’s watch. If she is actually serious about keeping violent criminals off our streets and finding the cells that are needed, will she bring forward legislation, tomorrow, and disapply the Human Rights Act 1998, which is stopping us from swiftly deporting foreign national offenders?

Some 17,800 prisoners are on remand awaiting trial—another figure that has risen under the Justice Secretary. In fact, her own Department’s figures forecast that it could rise to as many as 23,600. If she is serious, will she commit to taking up the Lady Chief Justice’s request for extra court sitting days to hear those cases and free up prison spaces? Will she commit, here and now, to building more than the meagre 250 rapid deployment cells her prison capacity strategy says she is planning to build this year? They have been built in seven months before, and they can be built even faster.

If the Justice Secretary were serious, she would commit to striking deals with the 14 European countries with spare prison capacity, renting their cells from them at an affordable price, as Denmark is doing with Kosovo. Between 1993 and 1996, her beloved Texas, the state on which she modelled these reforms—a state that, by the way, has an incarceration rate five times higher than that of the United Kingdom—built 75,000 extra cells. If the Government were serious, why can they not build 10,000 over a similar time period?

Labour is not serious about keeping hyper-prolific offenders behind bars. In fact, there is nothing in the Justice Secretary’s statement on locking them up or cutting crime, because the Labour party does not believe in punishing criminals and it does not really believe in prison. The radical, terrible changes made today are cloaked in necessity, but their root is Labour’s ideology. It is the public who will be paying the price for her weakness.

[Shabana Mahmood]

The shadow Secretary of State talks about serious Government—if the Government that he was a part of had ever been serious, they would have built more than 500 prison places in 14 years in office—[Interruption.] He is a new convert to the prison-building cause. He and his party have never stood up in this Chamber and apologised for adding only 500 places—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. I want the same respect from Members on the Opposition Front Bench. [Interruption.] Do we understand each other?

[Robert Jenrick]

indicated assent.

[Shabana Mahmood]

Mr Speaker, if I were waiting for respect from Opposition Members, I would be waiting for a long time, so it is a good job that I do not need it.

The shadow Secretary of State talks about “iron bars”, but he was part of a Government that did not build the prison places that this country needs. Unlike him, I take responsibility, and it has fallen to me to clean up the mess that he and his party left behind. In case there is any confusion, let me spell out what happens when he and his party leave our prison system on the brink of collapse, which is exactly what they did, and set out the prospect that faced me on day one, when I walked into the Justice Department. When prisons are on the verge of collapse, we basically have only two choices left at our disposal: either we shut the front door, or we have to open the back door. The right hon. Gentleman’s party knew that that was the situation it was confronted with, but did it make any decisions? No, it just decided to call an election instead and did a runner.

The public put the Conservatives in their current position. If they ever want to get out of that position, I suggest that they start by reckoning with the reality of their own track record in office. In any other reality, they should have started already with an apology. Conservative Members have had many chances to apologise to the country for leaving our prisons on the point of absolute collapse, but they have never taken them. Frankly, that tells us everything that anyone needs to know about the modern Conservative party.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Justice Committee.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

I welcome the report and the Government’s response. It is a comprehensive and measured response to the prisons crisis, as one would expect from David Gauke, in contrast with the hysterical nonsense that we have heard from the Opposition today. I particularly welcome the additional resources for probation and electronic monitoring to enable robust punishment and control in the community as an alternative to custody, but even the aggregate effect of the measures in the report will only stabilise the prison population over the longer term. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we also need effective rehabilitation to end the cycle of reoffending if we are to see a fall in historically high prison numbers?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Let me be clear: we will be adding prison places to the estate, and we will be filling them up. The prison population will rise year on year by the end of this Parliament, but my hon. Friend is right that the measures we have announced today stabilise the prison population. As a whole country, we will have to do better at ensuring that our prisons are churning out better citizens, rather than better criminals. When we know that 80% of offenders are reoffenders, there is clearly much work to be done in this area.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh Babarinde]

The right hon. Gentleman says that this Government want to let domestic abusers out early. He fails to remember that the end-of-custody supervised licence scheme under the Conservative Government from October to June last year released 10,083 offenders early, with no exclusions for domestic abusers. Does the Secretary of State agree it is critical that this Government provide more support for domestic abuse victims from the likes of their abusers in a way that the last Government failed to do on their watch?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank the hon. Member for his remarks. I would accept nothing less than holding us fully to account for these changes, and I look forward to working collaboratively where possible on these measures as we move forward. I pay tribute to him, his family and his mum for the campaigning that they have done on the identification of cases arising from domestic abuse being flagged properly within our justice system.

The new identifier will develop over time, and I am sure that it will inform future policy decisions made by Governments of all stripes, but it is an important starting point. We are very happy to accept the recommendation, and we will move at pace to ensure that we deliver it.

Cases under Clare’s law will be covered by the new measure. As for more support for victims of domestic abuse, we are very keen to take forward the review’s recommendation on the specialist courts, because we think they will have a particularly important role to play. As I said in my statement, we will ensure that the measures relating to the presumption against short sentences contain an exclusion for breaches of orders, which we know is a matter of particular concern for victims of domestic abuse. I will engage with Members across the House on where we can make further progress.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

Before I put my question to my right hon. Friend, may I give the shadow Justice Secretary a reality check? Under the previous Government, 98% of reported rape cases went completely unpunished. Under the Conservative Government, rape was effectively legalised, so a little bit of humility would not go amiss.

One in five adults in this country will experience domestic abuse in their lifetime. Could my right hon. Friend please explain how domestic abuse victims will be protected under these new measures?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I will repeat the point I have made to the hon. Member for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde). We know that there is a particular concern about what the presumption against short sentences might have meant for breaches of protective orders, and we know that issue is of real concern for domestic abuse victims. We want to ensure that those orders are not rendered useless because those who breach them are not seeing any prison time at all. The specific circumstances surrounding this type of violence against women need a very specific response, which is why we have already said that we will make that exclusion, and I will work with Members across the House to identify where we can make further progress.

[Dame Caroline Dinenage (Gosport) (Con)]

I welcome what the Secretary of State has said about female offenders, but I would like to know a little bit more. Hope Street in Hampshire, which offers residential alternatives to custody for women, has seen remarkable results, and of course it prevents those women from being separated from their children, which would otherwise drive the intergenerational cycle of offending behaviour, trauma and cost to society. Do these proposals include any plans to set up more such facilities across the rest of the country?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Lady raises an important point. The combination of the measures that we are accepting from the review will mean that we will see a huge reduction in the number of women going to prison. Approximately two thirds go in for sentences of less than one year and, as the hon. Lady knows, many of those women are themselves victims of domestic abuse. In future, we expect the numbers to drop very significantly, and I know we will make progress in that regard. I have set out an ambition to see fewer women prisoners and, ultimately, to have fewer women’s prisons.

Turning to residential alternatives to custody, the hon. Lady will know that I have set up the Women’s Justice Board. It is well represented, including by those who have personal experience of Hope Street, and we will work with the Women’s Justice Board as we roll out further changes to the female estate.

[Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)]

Despite what the shadow Justice Secretary has said about this scheme putting domestic abusers and rapists out on the streets, can the Justice Secretary cut through the rhetoric and fearmongering from the Opposition and be clear that she has put the victims of sexual and domestic abuse at the heart of these measures? Can she confirm that they will be protected, and that those abusers and perpetrators will not benefit from the early release scheme?

[Shabana Mahmood]

All dangerous offenders—those who receive an extended determinate sentence, including some of the serious offenders to which my hon. Friend has referred—will be excluded from this scheme. All other offenders receiving a standard determinate sentence will be within the earned progression model, but they will have to earn an early release. That is why we are ensuring that there is an uplift in probation funding, to ensure that all those individuals are intensively supervised in the middle stage of their sentence. The worst thing that could happen for every type of victim in this country, and in fact for every citizen, would be for us to run out of prison places altogether. We are in this position because of the mess that the previous Government left behind, and it falls to us to fix it.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

Notwithstanding the predictable nonsense from the shadow Leader of the Opposition, the right hon. Member for Newark (Robert Jenrick), it is critical that we focus on the needs of the victim. I welcome the Lord Chancellor making that point in her statement, but we need more than fine words. Can she please commit to giving all victims of crime proper access to restorative justice?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Restorative justice has an important role to play in our justice system, so where it is appropriate and where it can make a difference, we will ensure that it is available. But I want to ensure that victims of crime have other confidence-inducing measures at their disposal, which is why I want to look at exclusion zones in particular, and it is why we want to do the domestic abuse identifier, so that we can track systems, learn from the cases that are going through and make better policy for victims.

[Sarah Coombes (West Bromwich) (Lab)]

I am amazed by the gall of the Conservatives, who left our prisons in utter crisis, failing victims. I thank the Lord Chancellor for her work. Five years ago, my constituent Diane had her world changed when her husband was killed by a driver who was on her phone. Not only did the driver do that, but the first call the driver made was not to 999, but to her sister. When the driver is released from prison, she will have a four-year driving ban, but Diane and her family have had their lives devastated forever. Can the Minister set out that, as we take this necessary action to fix our bursting prison system, we will make use of lengthy restrictions and lifetime driving bans for those who cause death by dangerous driving?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am sorry to hear of the case of my hon. Friend’s constituent; those are truly horrible circumstances for any family to find themselves in. I can assure her that we will be rigorously pursuing the recommendations in the Gauke review relating to ancillary orders, which are other orders that we can make that curtail an offender’s liberty, including lengthier driving bans, which I am considering bringing forward.

[Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)]

Public confidence in the criminal justice system—and, importantly, the confidence of victims—is paramount. Since 2010, the use of community-based orders has decreased by 61%. That is in no small part because of concerns about offender engagement in the process. If the Government are going to pursue this route, what steps has the Lord Chancellor taken to model how many will reoffend and, more importantly, that they will be rigorously reinforced?

[Shabana Mahmood]

That issue is why already today I have announced measures to toughen up community punishment, and we will be going further in some areas than even the review recommends. I absolutely agree that community punishment has to maintain the confidence of the public. Like all other Members, I am a constituency Member of Parliament, and I want my constituents to be able to see community punishment as real punishment. It is on us to make sure that it is worthy of that name. That is why I am considering going further on unpaid work, working with businesses to see whether salaries could be paid into a victims fund. That might be one model. I want to see offenders filling potholes and cleaning our streets, and I will be working with local authorities to ensure that we go as far as we can, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that this Government are committed to toughening up community punishment and making sure that it maintains the confidence of the public.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

I am grateful to the Lord Chancellor for her statement and for commissioning the sentencing review. Does she agree that this Government are now taking action, whereas this time last year, rather than sorting out the prison crisis—when we had fewer than 90 spaces, with a prison population of 90,000—the Conservatives called a general election instead? Does she also agree that the present proposals will ensure that dangerous offenders will be locked up and will enable us to rehabilitate others and stop reoffending, which costs us £22 billion a year?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is right. This time last year, the Conservatives had a chance to put the country first. Instead, they called an election and tried to put themselves first. They did a runner on the job, and it falls to us to clean up their mess. This Government will clean up their mess, and we will get our prison system on to a sustainable footing so that there is always a prison place. There will be more prison places under this Government, and we will make sure that there is always a prison place for the most dangerous offenders. That is why we are taking all the other measures that we need to take to ensure that we never run out of prison places again.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

Respect for justice is diminished by the fiction of the judge announcing a sentence and those in the know then calculating on the back of a fag packet the fraction that it actually represents. Has this statement not reinforced that system with bells on?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am sorry to have to break it to the right hon. Gentleman, but he will be horrified to discover that he agrees with David Gauke on this one. The independent reviewer has pointed out that transparency will be paramount to maintaining confidence in the justice system, and we will make sure that we take the transparency measures forward.

[Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)]

With the National Police Chiefs’ Council having declared violence against women and girls a national emergency, it is right that we explore radical methods to bring down the scale of offending in our communities. We know that most sexual offending is not about sex at all, but about power. However, for the subset of convicts whose offending is driven by sexual compulsion, chemical castration could be an option. Is there estimate data on how many future offences that could prevent? By definition, it would only be for those who have already offended. As I am not aware of a method of permanent chemical castration, is there capacity in the Probation Service to monitor ongoing compliance with treatment?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Studies show a 60% reduction in offending. My hon. Friend is right to say that, for one subset of offenders, offending relates to power. For another subset of offenders, we believe that a combination of chemical suppressants and psychological interventions can have a big and positive impact. A pilot has been trundling along for many years, and nobody has shown much interest in it, including any of my predecessors—Tory Justice Secretaries just let it carry on. I am not willing to do that, and I am not squeamish about taking further measures. We are going to have a national roll-out of this programme, and I will ensure that is what happens. I am expanding it to two further regions, including for prisoners in 20 further prisons, so that we can build the evidence base and make sure that we are using every tool at our disposal to cut reoffending.

[Sarah Olney (Richmond Park) (LD)]

I welcome the Government’s commitment to extending the pilot scheme to give free sentencing transcripts for rape and serious sexual offences—something for which I have long campaigned. I am sorry that the Victims Minister, the hon. Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), has just left the Chamber, because I wanted to pay tribute to her for all her work on this issue. I also pay tribute to the victims, survivors and campaigners, and particularly my own constituent Juliana Terlizzi, for their bravery and advocacy on this issue. I look forward to continuing to work with the Minister on this issue. Can the Lord Chancellor tell us what measures will be taken to ensure that victims know about the scheme, and that they understand their right to request a transcript of the sentencing remarks? I know that the pilot has shown how much that contributes to their recovery and their welfare after sentencing.

[Shabana Mahmood]

I pay tribute to the hon. Lady for her work in this area, and I will pass on her remarks to the Victims Minister. I also pay tribute to her constituent. It is very difficult to raise these issues and talk about them openly, and her constituent has shown real bravery in coming forward and explaining why the scheme would have made a difference to her own recovery.

I am very pleased to extend the pilot scheme. We will learn the lessons about how the first pilot scheme worked in the first year, and if we need to do more on publicising what the scheme can do and its availability, we will do so. The hon. Lady will know that I want to make further progress on using AI technology to make transcripts more widely available, because I believe in a transparent justice system. I do not believe that we are very far away from having tech that is accurate enough to be a matter of court record, but we are not quite there yet. It is something we continue to work on.

[Linsey Farnsworth (Amber Valley) (Lab)]

In my 21 years as a Crown prosecutor, I prosecuted many, many cases, but I prosecuted far fewer individuals. That is because 80% of offenders are reoffenders, so I saw the same defendants time and again. The current system does not work. Does the Lord Chancellor agree that the new approach will reduce reoffending, cut crime and lead to fewer victims?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right to remind the House that 80% of offenders in our country are reoffenders, which tells us that our system is broken. It tells us that our prisons are creating better criminals, not better citizens, and this is something we absolutely have to turn around if we are to protect victims and cut crime.

[Sir John Hayes (South Holland and The Deepings) (Con)]

The Lord Chancellor will know that for a very long time in this country, the prejudices of the establishment, poisoned by liberal thinking, have been at odds with the preoccupations of the vast majority of law-abiding people. Will she acknowledge now that the principal purpose of prison is retributive? It has other purposes, too, but its principal purpose is punishment. In that spirit, will she confirm when she will bring forward the further legislation on sentencing that she promised? Given what she has announced today, will she also confirm that violent sexual offenders will be excluded from early release?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I have no truck with anyone else’s prejudices and they certainly do not decide what I do in office. I believe in prison. This Government are going to build more prison places, and we will fill them. I believe in prison for the reasons of punishment, primarily; I agree with the right hon. Gentleman on that. I will not let this country run out of prison places, because I know what will happen if we do. I am not willing to put anyone through the breakdown of law and order in our country—I am not willing to take that risk. It means that harder choices are in front of me and this House as we get ourselves out of this crisis, and I am making those choices today.

I will work at pace to bring forward legislation at the earliest opportunity, so that the House can consider the proposals in full. Those on extended determinate sentences —the most dangerous offenders, as judged by a judge in a court—will be excluded from these measures. For all other offenders, earlier release will have to be earned, and there will be intensive supervision afterwards. That is the earned progression model, and I am sure we will debate it at length in the weeks and months ahead.

[Mike Tapp (Dover and Deal) (Lab)]

There is no place in our country for foreign offenders who pose a serious risk to the public. This Government are already returning more foreign national offenders than the Conservatives did when they were in power. Does the Minister agree that the Tories are clearly all talk and no action?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend puts it very well, and he is absolutely right. We have made more progress on the deportation of foreign national offenders than the previous Government and we will go further. We accept the review’s recommendations on reducing the threshold for early removal from 50% to 30%. For offenders who get less than three years in prison, we will work with the Home Office on proposals to move to immediate deportation.

[Caroline Voaden (South Devon) (LD)]

The national average reoffending rate for people who have done a short-term sentence is 54%. Among those who graduate from a prisoner rehabilitation programme in my constituency, the average reoffending rate is just 6%—and the programme is still in touch with every single graduate, after operating for 10 years. In the spirit of trying to reduce the prison population, does the Lord Chancellor agree that such rehabilitation programmes are absolutely crucial and that investing in rehabilitation not only keeps people safe in the community because it reduces the reoffending rate, but helps the mission to free up prison places for the dangerous criminals who absolutely need to be there?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Lady makes a good point. I pay tribute to the work that is going on in her constituency. As I have said before, 80% of offenders in this country are reoffenders. That tells us how broken our system is, and how imperative it is that we sort it out.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

I welcome my right hon. Friend’s statement. Reoffending is costing us £22 billion a year, and 80% of offenders are reoffenders. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we need to bring that figure down? What is she intending to do to prevent people from reoffending at such high rates?

[Shabana Mahmood]

One of the problems of running a prison system at absolutely boiling hot—where it is permanently on the point of collapse, as has been the case in our prison system for far too long now—is that we are not able to make much progress in the prison estate on the programmes that offenders need to access to begin a rehabilitation journey. Part of our proposals, which are designed to relieve the stress in our prison system, will help with rehabilitation within the prison estate.

We are also absolutely determined to make more progress on rehabilitation outside the prison estate, which is why we are toughening up community punishment. We know that that works, and we know that the country can have confidence in such punishment. We will be working with our colleagues in the Department of Health and Social Care to think about the availability of drug and alcohol treatment. We will expand the use of sobriety tags, which are already helping offenders to come off the drink that often fuels their offending. I have asked some tech companies to look at further technological innovation that can help us in this space. The holy grail would be a drugs tag, which could make a huge difference in reducing reoffending in our country. We will continue to press ahead and work as quickly as we can to find further technological solutions.

[Dr Caroline Johnson (Sleaford and North Hykeham) (Con)]

Crimes against children are among the worst crimes humanity can commit. There is relatively little, if anything at all, about offences against children in this review. Could the Lord Chancellor confirm that those who have abused children will not be allowed out early?

[Shabana Mahmood]

All those who have received an extended determinate sentence—and that includes many of the offenders mentioned by the hon. Lady—are excluded from these measures. All other offenders would have to earn an earlier release by proving that they have behaved properly in prison and not broken prison rules; the minimum for them is set at one third of the sentence, but it can be higher. As I have said, for those who egregiously offend, we will set no upper limit.

[James Naish (Rushcliffe) (Lab)]

We heard this morning that probation services in Nottinghamshire have been rated inadequate following visits by inspectors. They have been judged as understaffed, with urgent improvements needed. I therefore welcome the £700 million increase for probation services, but can I ask the Lord Chancellor what other steps can be taken to drive up probation standards in constituencies like mine?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for raising issues relating to the Probation Service. We have already expanded the number of staff. Last year, we recruited 1,000 extra, and this year we are on track to hit our target of 1,300 extra staff. Increasing resource—first and foremost with more staff—is a clear priority for us. We are investing in technology to help the Probation Service to be more productive. We have already funded programmes and pilots on AI tech designed to decrease the amount of file work that probation officers have to do to allow them to have more time to do the things that only a human can do: to spend time with the offender in front of them, to come up with a proper plan to reduce their reoffending and therefore to keep the public safe.

[Calum Miller (Bicester and Woodstock) (LD)]

I very much welcome the Lord Chancellor’s statement, and I know that victims and survivors of domestic abuse and sexual violence in my constituency will do so as well. I thank her and her ministerial colleagues for their cross-party working, including with my hon. Friends the Members for Eastbourne (Josh Babarinde) and for Twickenham (Munira Wilson).

On the domestic abuse recommendations and the application of domestic abuse at sentencing, will the Lord Chancellor consider whether it is possible to tag those offences retrospectively, as well as at sentencing? Also, I welcome her remarks about transcripts and transparency. In the light of the pilot on transcripts for sexual violence and rape cases, will she consider including in that pilot the entire transcript, not just the transcript of sentencing?

[Shabana Mahmood]

On tagging retrospectively, I will certainly go away and have a look at that point. I suspect, although I do not want to mislead the hon. Member or the House, that a retrospective trawl of all cases—including common assault, which is where we see most domestic abuse cases land for a charge and a criminal case—may be beyond where we can get with the data available to us and the time it would take. However, going forward we will try to capture exactly those cases—not only domestic abuse-connected offences, but other offences such as common assault, which we know have taken place in a domestic abuse context—so that they are all flagged and proper data is kept.

On transcripts, sentencing remarks are currently available for other victims, such as in murder cases and so on, and that will be extended to victims of rape and serious sexual violence. To repeat a point I made earlier, I believe in a transparent justice system. I would like to be in the position of using AI technology to make not just sentencing remarks available. We are thinking about making broadly what happens in courts and such transcripts more widely available. What inhibits us is cost, and we are trying to take out that cost by looking at AI models, but we cannot proceed with anything unless we are absolutely certain about its accuracy because, as I am sure the hon. Member appreciates, a document purporting to be a record of what was said in court needs to be bang on.

[Douglas McAllister (West Dunbartonshire) (Lab)]

I welcome the fact that this Government are getting on with building the largest prison expansion programme since the Victorians. That is a Labour Government in action, fixing the Tory prison crisis once and for all. Can I ask the Secretary of State to learn from the SNP Scottish Government’s abject failure with the new Barlinnie prison project in Glasgow? It has been delayed again, and now will not be ready until 2028, which is nine years late. The cost has soared from £100 million to a staggering £1 billion for one prison. Will we learn lessons from the SNP failure?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his question. Let me tell him that we have already learned the lessons of the Tory party’s failure, and I am very sorry to hear about the situation he describes in Scotland. The Conservatives’ failure on prison building stemmed from two things: they could not get it past their own Back Benchers, so the planning delays added billions to the cost of prison place expansion; and they did not make certain and available the amount needed to stimulate funding at the rate required. We have reversed both those things: we have made £4.7 billion available and we have made it very clear that planning will not get in the way of prison building.

[John Glen (Salisbury) (Con)]

Several years ago, when I was a magistrate in Westminster and my father was a magistrate in north Wiltshire, we lamented a great deal about the fact that when we put people in prison, we found that there was a whole list of antecedents every time and that this recurred all the time. Could the Secretary of State tell the House what assurances she can give us about prison education, rehabilitation programmes and regular work programmes so that we avoid the pattern of prescribing—with good intentions—solutions that do not work, cost a lot of money and leave the public pretty dissatisfied with the justice system?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I pay tribute to the right hon. Member, his father and magistrates all over our country. They do an incredibly valuable job of keeping our justice system going. In fact, magistrates deal with 90% of all criminal cases.

The right hon. Member is referring to prolific offending: the people who keep coming back, cycling in and out of the system. The review recommends that we switch to a model of intensive supervision courts, where a judge is in charge of making sure that a treatment programme is adhered to. We will take that forward, and I will set out more proposals when we bring forward the legislation. The early pilots—which, in fairness, were started under the previous Government—have shown very positive progress in helping those offenders to turn their lives around and break the cycle of addiction or mental health problems that often leads to prolific offending. We will build on that work.

[Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)]

What does the Secretary of State make of the extraordinary admission by the former Lord Chancellor last year that the previous Government chose not to take action on the prison crisis because

“you have to win votes”?

Fortunately, the Conservatives did not win any votes in Margate, Broadstairs and Ramsgate, which is why I stand here today to say that neighbourhoods in East Thanet are blighted by drug dealing, theft, burglary, sex trafficking and antisocial behaviour, which ebbs and flows according to whether the main criminals, organisers, pimps, co-ordinators and dealers are in or out of prison, causing mayhem. Does she agree with me that the shortage of prison cells, because of the Conservative party, and the lack of alternative punishments, because of the Conservative party, have contributed to that situation, which blights the lives of those in our communities?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend makes an incredibly powerful point and she is absolutely right. When we have a prison system on the point of collapse, it is not as if the criminals do not know that that is happening. That is why it is imperative that we get our system under control and ensure there is always a prison place available for those who have to be locked up to keep the public safe. Her point about winning votes shows the approach taken by the previous Government: they put themselves first, not the country first.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

On behalf of the justice unions parliamentary group, I welcome the independent review’s recognition of probation officers and join the call from the National Association of Probation Officers for extra direct investment in staff now. Stable accommodation on release is also key to offender rehabilitation. There are presently no approved premises for women in Wales and women centres struggle for funding, so how will the Justice Secretary improve rehabilitation and life chances for Welsh women in the criminal justice system?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I very much hope that the position for Welsh women will be the same as for women in England, which is that we see a huge reduction in the number of women in Wales and England entering the female prison estate. That is because the combination of the measures David Gauke recommends, in particular on short sentences, will mean that fewer women go to prison. I will, of course, work with colleagues across Wales to look at what more we can do on accommodation provision. I know that there is no specific centre in Wales—the right hon. Lady and I have discussed that previously. It was a promise made by the previous Government without any funding attached to it, so I was not able to make decisions when I first came into office that could reverse that, but we will work with the Women’s Justice Board and others to ensure that the offer for women who are now no longer going to prison is still strong and helps them on their rehabilitation journey.

[Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)]

This is a day of shame for the Conservative party. One of their own has laid bare the scale of its failure, leaving us with nowhere to put the prisoners. Conservatives used to call themselves the party of law and order. Take it from this former police inspector: they lost that label long ago and they are never getting it back. Moving forward, the criminal justice system is just that—a system. Decisions taken on policing, courts, probation and prisons all affect one another, so will the Lord Chancellor assure me that the implications for policing and the enforcement of sentences are being taken into account when we roll out the changes?

--- Later in debate ---

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: it is a day of shame for the Conservative party. I am sorry to see that the attitude of Conservative Members today is shameless. He makes a very important point on policing. I have had a good conversation with police leaders. I am determined to use the national Criminal Justice Board to ensure that every part of the criminal justice system is aligned and that we take into account all the interactions—based on this review, and on the upcoming criminal courts review—and think about the impact they have not just on the bit of the justice system I am directly responsible for, but on the wider criminal justice system, including policing as a whole.

[Mark Pritchard (The Wrekin) (Con)]

May I first say to the Lord Chancellor that I have huge personal respect for her? I may disagree with some—some, by the way, not all—of what she has announced today, but I would like to put that on the record. She mentions female offending. She will know that there are six mother and baby units in female prisons in England. There were 90 applications for the last period we know about, up to March 2024, with 64 places for mothers and 70 places for babies, allowing for twins. Clearly, there are not enough places. Has she considered as part of this review, when there is not serious and violent offending by female prisoners, getting more of those mothers and babies into the community, rather than having them in prison?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Let me thank the right hon. Gentleman for his remarks of personal respect, which are shared across this House. I thank him for that and for the important issue he raises. I hope to move to a position where the combined impact of the changes in the review and the work we are doing with the Women’s Justice Board mean that we see a huge drop in the number of female prisoners. I am particularly keen to ensure that pregnant women and mothers of young children are not anywhere near our female prison estate in future. Of course, for serious offenders we will always need to make sure that prison is an option, but the vast majority of women go to prison on short sentences for much less serious offences and we need to turn that around.

[Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)]

Under the last Conservative Government, the number of foreign criminals in our prisons rose to the tens of thousands, shamefully. Will the Lord Chancellor outline for my constituents what we are doing to deport those foreign criminals from our prisons as quickly as possible to free up vital prison spaces?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We are deporting at a faster rate than the previous Government. We have accepted the review’s recommendation to drop the threshold for early removal from this country from 50% of the custodial sentence to 30%. We will urgently work up a plan, with the Home Office, for those who are sentenced to less than three years to be deported as quickly as possible after sentencing.

[James Wild (North West Norfolk) (Con)]

In her statement, the Lord Chancellor said that under her earned progression plans, if offenders follow prison rules they will win earlier release. The review says that thousands of offenders will benefit from that. Can she explain to my constituents why simply following the rules means that serious offenders will serve only a third of their sentence? Where is the punishment and where are victims’ interests in that approach?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Gentleman will know that the track record of his party in government was to run prisons boiling hot, with violence off the charts. The shadow Justice Secretary has been showing a huge amount of concern for prison officers and the violence they face in our prisons. I would have hoped that the Conservative party might welcome some incentivisation in our prison system to make sure we can run safer prisons and keep our prison officers safe. Making sure that people follow the rules, and that that is how they can earn an earlier release, means that those who break the rules will serve longer in prison.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

I thank my right hon. Friend for her statement and her razor-like focus on fixing the broken justice and prison system this Government inherited. May I welcome the £700 million to help rebuild probation services and ask a question on rehabilitation and making community punishment pay? I think many people in my constituency will welcome a focus on community punishment being used to do jobs such as fixing potholes and rebuilding services that are needed locally. Equally, I want community punishment to pay by breaking the cycle of reoffending. Can she tell us more about how this programme will get businesses and apprenticeships into prisons, and give young offenders a way out of that cycle, so that we stop them being in prison for a second and third time?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend raises a really important point. This is why the Government have already rolled out employment work councils, where prisons link up with employers in their region and try to make sure that there are jobs and training available for offenders on leaving prison. We know that the ability to work is a really important part of driving down reoffending. That is a priority for this Government. Of course, unpaid work is a very visible way for offenders to make reparations to the communities they have harmed. In our eyes, that is the primary focus of it, but the discipline of doing that work can help offenders who are far away from the world of work to get closer to it.

[Jess Brown-Fuller (Chichester) (LD)]

The Government’s plans lay out an expectation that they will be able to manage ex-offenders in the community under intensive supervision. A probation officer in my constituency recently told me that she was told off by her bosses for spending too long with offenders when she was booking just 15-minute appointments. Can the Lord Chancellor tell me when the promised investment will actually reach frontline probation services, and can she guarantee it will be enough to ensure public safety and reduce reoffending?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Let me reassure the hon. Lady that this is a huge uplift in funding for probation. It is a £1.6 billion budget as it stands, and it will increase by up to £700 million by the end of the spending review period. We have already invested in piloting AI and other technology designed to improve productivity, where AI can complete much of the paperwork that a lot of probation officers spend far too much of their time on, often repeating the same information in different documents. That shows huge promise. We will roll that out at pace to give probation officers more time with the offenders in front of them, doing the thing that only a human can do, which is to get to grips with what is driving that offender’s behaviour and have a plan to tackle it, including by accessing treatment programmes and other things in the community. We are determined to make sure that the Probation Service can rise to the scale of the challenge. The funding will help with that, as will our investment in that technology.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)]

Location and curfew restrictions using electronic tagging to stop hyper-prolific offenders going anywhere near a place where they could reoffend; a requirement to engage in mental health, drug and alcohol treatment, including the use of sobriety tags to address the cause of criminality; putting offenders back to work cleaning up the communities they have harmed; chemical castration for sex offenders; the speeding up of foreign deportations; and the largest prison expansion ever—does the Lord Chancellor agree that this is about putting victims and the public first?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. This Government are determined to clean up the mess left by the previous Conservative Government and to put victims first, cut crime and make our communities safer.

[John Cooper (Dumfries and Galloway) (Con)]

Under the yoke of the SNP, Scotland already has a presumption against short sentences, and now the new Scottish commission looking at sentencing and penal policy has been accused of being packed with activists determined to keep criminals out of jail. Why is the Lord Chancellor in Westminster following this lead and failing to put victims at the heart of the justice system?

[Shabana Mahmood]

What absolute rubbish, I am sorry to say. I am not taking any lessons from the hon. Gentleman or the SNP. This is a programme for England and Wales, for which I am directly responsible, and we are going to make it work.

[Jo White (Bassetlaw) (Lab)]

When a previous Government fail to take responsibility for the crisis they have caused, they deserve a life sentence on the Opposition Benches. I welcome the construction of a new wing at Ranby prison in my constituency by Worksop-based Laing O’Rourke, a specialist in modern methods of construction that is involved in many other construction projects across the country. If the Minister is seeking more sites for new prisons, could I propose the Crown-owned land across the road from HMP Ranby? We would very much welcome a new prison there.

[Shabana Mahmood]

I shall take my hon. Friend’s early bid for further building in her constituency under advisement immediately.

[Blake Stephenson (Mid Bedfordshire) (Con)]

Under these proposals, foreign criminals will be deported after serving 30% of their sentence, which I appreciate is an improvement. The public want them to be deported right away—does the Lord Chancellor?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The review recommends immediate deportation—meaning “as quickly as possible”, because we still have to detain people before we can get them on a plane and back to their country of origin—for sentences of under three years. We are going to work up proposals on that with the Home Office. For more serious offenders with sentences of over three years, we are going to bring the threshold down from 50% to 30%.

[Josh Fenton-Glynn (Calder Valley) (Lab)]

I thank the Lord Chancellor for her statement today, which is a sensible response to the overincarceration and prison places crisis. Can she assure my constituents that notwithstanding these changes, under-reported and under-prosecuted crimes, such as violence against women and girls, will continue to be prioritised by this Government?

[Shabana Mahmood]

This Government will make sure we are running a prison system that is sustainable and not on the point of collapse, so that we can ensure that dangerous offenders in this country are still locked up. We will make progress on our broader mission to halve the level of violence against women and girls over 10 years.

[Tessa Munt (Wells and Mendip Hills) (LD)]

I welcome the Lord Chancellor’s statement and the work that David Gauke has done to inform everything that is happening today. As a member of the Justice Committee, I look forward to seeing him before us shortly. I seek clarity on what the Lord Chancellor referred to as the

“so-called medication to manage problematic sexual arousal”.

Will she place the available research and conclusions in the Library so that we all have access to the information and can understand the data on which she and David Gauke have relied?

[Shabana Mahmood]

I am happy to ensure that the evidence is available. I would say to the hon. Lady that the very small-scale pilot that I inherited had been running for some time without anybody paying a huge amount of attention to it, and the evidence from other jurisdictions where it has been rolled out a bit more widely is stronger. Our roll-out—I want to get to a national roll-out—will start with two extra regions and 20 more prisons, and we will build the evidence base there. We want measures that work, and I do believe that the combination of chemical suppressants and psychological interventions can help with a cohort of particularly difficult sex offenders.

[Ben Goldsborough (South Norfolk) (Lab)]

In the last four years of the previous Conservative Government, the number of foreign national offenders increased. Now, call me old-fashioned, but I believe that non-UK citizens who commit crimes within the UK should not serve their sentences here. Today’s report makes good progress, and I welcome the Lord Chancellor’s tackling this issue urgently; it is what South Norfolk wants to see, and it will get capacity back in our prisons.

--- Later in debate ---

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right: we are already deporting more foreign national offenders than the previous Government. We are taking forward the measures from the Gauke review to speed up and get more foreign offenders out of our system and back to their countries of origin.

[Charlie Dewhirst (Bridlington and The Wolds) (Con)]

I wholeheartedly support my hon. Friend the Member for Mid Bedfordshire (Blake Stephenson) in his call for the immediate deportation of foreign criminals. What is the Lord Chancellor doing to ensure that the courts are not holding up those deportations, and that once deported, those criminals are never allowed back on these shores?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Gentleman may have seen that just last week, when the Home Secretary set out the immigration White Paper, we announced that we are reviewing the use of article 8 in relation to immigration cases, and we will bring forward our proposals on that in due course. We will not allow the misuse of our courts and the use of article 8 to enable people who have no right to be in this country to stay in this country. That will require changes to the immigration rules, which the Home Secretary is working on.

[Jess Asato (Lowestoft) (Lab)]

Does the Lord Chancellor agree that the voluntary and community sector can play a vital role in supporting offenders to rehabilitate and gain vital employment and housing? Organisations such as Pathways Care Farm and Access Community Trust in my constituency have helped to prevent t reoffending.

[Shabana Mahmood]

I pay tribute to the organisations in my hon. Friend’s constituency; such voluntary organisations play a hugely important role in helping the justice system to succeed in rehabilitating offenders. We will continue to work closely and build on the review’s recommendations in this area.

[Rachel Gilmour (Tiverton and Minehead) (LD)]

Having sat on the Public Accounts Committee inquiry into prison overcrowding, I know full well the issue at hand and who to blame. Can the Lord Chancellor assure me and my constituents that they will not be placed in more danger by the Government not jailing criminals? When those individuals are in the community, the local community must have a voice in the effectiveness and planning of these new sentences, lest we end up with community concerns similar to those about bail hostels in Tiverton and Minehead.

[Shabana Mahmood]

What puts the whole country at risk, including current, future and potential victims of crime, is letting our prison system collapse, and I will never let that happen. The measures we are taking forward from the review today are designed to make sure that this country never runs out of prison places ever again. I will ensure that there is ample time for debate and discussion across this House as we bring our legislation forward.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Is the Lord Chancellor as astounded as I am by the hypocrisy of the Conservatives? They really are the arsonists attacking the firefighters. We are having to clean up their mess, because, in the words of the National Audit Office, this crisis is the result of their failure

“to ensure that the number of prison places was aligned with criminal justice”

priorities.

[Shabana Mahmood]

After some months in this job facing the shadow Ministers, I am afraid that nothing about their behaviour surprises me any more. I will take notice—as, I think, will the country—when the Conservatives finally offer an apology for the absolute abject mess they left behind.

[Shaun Davies (Telford) (Lab)]

Police officers, magistrates and judges all report that some offenders would rather go to prison to be back with their mates, watching Sky TV and having three square meals a day. Does the Lord Chancellor agree that those who go to prison should be treated more harshly and robustly than was the case under the 14 years of the previous Conservative Government?

[Shabana Mahmood]

We want to make sure that our prisons are used to punish offenders, that those offenders are made to abide by strict prison rules, that they engage with programmes in prison to bring down their propensity to reoffend, and that, ultimately, we succeed in keeping my hon. Friend’s constituents safe by turning out better citizens rather than better criminals.

[Luke Myer (Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland) (Lab)]

There are thousands of decent, moderate Conservatives all across the country who will have seen the ridiculous spectacle today of the Opposition denigrating David Gauke—of all people—on the prison system. The review was absolutely clear that short sentences are driving reoffending—60% reoffend within the year. Will the Minister set out the steps that she will take to cut crime and create fewer victims?

--- Later in debate ---

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is right. We have to cut crime, have fewer victims and make sure that our streets are safe. That is why we have to make sure that we never run out of prison places, that we never see the breakdown in law and order that would ensue were that to happen, and that we take forward a package of measures that I have announced today. We work on the legislation in the coming weeks and months, which will be designed to make sure that we do not run out of prison places, that we put victims first, and that we cut crime in this country.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

I call Tristan Osborne for the last question on this statement.

[Tristan Osborne (Chatham and Aylesford) (Lab)]

Leaving the best until last, Madam Deputy Speaker.

As a former police officer, I can say that community payback works. Does the Lord Chancellor agree with me and many of my colleagues in the criminal justice system that rehabilitation of offenders, including filling potholes and clearing fly tipping, is popular, not only in Chatham and Aylesford but in Newark and across the country?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point. I am determined that we toughen community punishment and make sure that unpaid work truly pays back to the communities that have been harmed by crime. That is why I work with businesses and local authorities, so we can all have a system that drives down reoffending—a system where reparations are made to the communities that have been harmed by crime, whether they are in Newark, Birmingham Ladywood or indeed anywhere else.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Judith Cummins)]

That concludes the statement.

Victims and Courts Bill

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

2nd reading
Tuesday 20th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

I beg to move, That the Bill be now read a Second time.

When the Government took office just 10 months ago, we inherited a justice system in crisis—our prisons were on the point of collapse, and the backlog in our courts was at record levels and rising fast—and victims were all too often paying the price. The Government are beginning the long and hard work of rebuilding our justice system so that it serves victims once more. In my eyes, that means meeting three principles.

The first is that justice must be swift. It is all too easily said that justice delayed means justice denied, but few have had the bravery to wrestle with the implications of that. This Government are investing more in court sitting days than any before them, but we know that that is not enough, so we will pursue reform—even if it courts opposition—in the pursuit of swifter justice for victims. That is why I have asked Sir Brian Leveson to propose once-in-a-generation reform of our courts. Jury trials will always be a cornerstone of our legal system for the most serious cases, but it is clear that we must consider whether there are cases heard before a jury today that could be heard in a different way, such as in front of a magistrate or a new intermediate court, in order to deliver the swifter justice that victims deserve.

The second principle of a justice system that serves victims is that punishment must be certain. This Government inherited the grotesque position of having more prisoners than prison cells. If prisons run out of space, victims pay the price. If courts hold trials and the police are forced to stop making arrests, crime goes unpunished and victims see no justice done. This Government will ensure that criminals face punishment. We are building 14,000 prison places in the largest expansion since the Victorian era, after 14 years in which the Conservatives added just 500 cells to our prison estate. We are also reforming sentencing so that our prisons never run out of space again and there is always space inside for dangerous offenders.

The third and final principle of a justice system that serves victims is that they are not retraumatised by their engagement with it. That third principle is what unites the specific measures set out in the Bill, and I will start by speaking about those which will force criminals to attend their sentencing in court.

In recent years, too many offenders have been allowed to cower in their cells rather than face the consequences of their actions. That is a final insult to victims and their families because it robs them of the chance to tell offenders, through victim impact statements, the pain they have caused. It robs victims and their families of the opportunity to look the offender in the eye and see them face the consequences of their crime and the full reality of their punishment. The Bill will change that.

The Bill gives judges the power to order criminals to attend sentencing hearings, it makes it clear that reasonable force can be used to ensure that happens and it hands out punishments to those who still defy that order. Adult offenders could face up to an additional two years in prison and an unlimited fine. I know, however, that that is little punishment for those who are serving long sentences or perhaps whole life orders, because they did not expect to see the light of day at all. For that reason, we will also give judges the power to impose prison sanctions on offenders, including confining criminals to their cells, the loss of privileges and, going further, limits on social visits.

If offenders appear in the dock but behave in a disruptive or disrespectful way, as has all too often been the case in recent months, judges must have the ability to remove them from the courtroom so that the hearing can continue and justice can be served. The Bill will give a judge the ability to impose the same penalties both on those who refuse to attend their sentencing and on those who attend but attempt to disrupt proceedings. While the previous Government brought forward similar measures, we are going further by expanding the range of punishment available through amending prison rules, which will expand the sanctions available to judges, and by extending the length of time for which such sanctions can be applied.

[Clive Efford (Eltham and Chislehurst) (Lab)]

I welcome this section of the Bill. My constituent, Sabina Nessa, was brutally murdered when she was on her way out to meet a friend. Her murderer refused to attend court and participate in his sentencing, and that caused a great deal of distress to her family. I therefore welcome the move not just to force these characters to turn up in court, but to apply sanctions when they do not comply; my right hon. Friend is to be congratulated on that.

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend speaks of one of the tragic cases that has led to these changes in the law and on which, in fairness, the previous Government were also seeking to act before the election was called. We are pleased to go further on sanctions. I know that some of the families we are talking about are here and I will pay tribute to them in a few moments’ time.

We will take a delegated power to allow the Secretary of State to specify sanctions in regulations. Those regulations will provide discretion to prison governors, who hold a legal responsibility and accountability for what happens inside prisons. Judges will retain discretion over when to order offenders to attend. This means that, in cases where a victim’s family does not want to see the offender forced to attend, judges can decide differently. As this is a delegated power, the list of sanctions is not presented on the face of the Bill, but it will be rooted in the Prison Rules 1999, which will be amended and extended. The Secretary of State will have the ability to add more sanctions quickly and easily, should that be necessary. This approach offers much more flexibility than a rigid list, which would require the lengthy process of primary legislation to amend it.

I know that, for many, this day has been a long time coming. I am sure the House will therefore join me in paying tribute to the families of Olivia Pratt-Korbel, Jan Mustafa, Zara Aleena and Sabina Nessa, and I would like to welcome to this place Cheryl Korbel, Antonia Elverson, Jebina Islam, and Ayse Hussein and her daughter Angel, who are in the Public Gallery today. They have suffered unimaginable pain and then faced the indescribable trauma of an offender who would not face them. They have fought tirelessly to bring about this law, and we owe them a debt of thanks for their courage and fortitude. Today is their day, and it will have a lasting impact for others yet to come, who should never have to face what they have endured. While nothing will ever lessen the pain of such immense loss suffered by these families, this measure in the Bill is brought forward in the name and memories of Olivia, Zara, Sabina and Jan.

The Bill will also address the trauma that reverberates years after a parent has sexually abused their child. Today, a parent convicted of sexually abusing their child can continue to exercise parental responsibility for them. From behind bars, these vile abusers have been able to continue interfering in the lives of their children. Today a mother has to request that parental responsibility is restricted in a case where a father has committed a sexual offence against their child; now, we will automatically restrict the exercise of parental responsibility by anyone sentenced to four years or more for serious child sexual abuse against their children. This will restrict those rights from the moment of sentencing, so that children are immediately protected. It sends a clear message that abusers no longer have the power to exercise control. Making this step automatic will spare families the trauma of having to go through proceedings in the family courts, giving them the space they need to begin healing and move on with their lives.

The previous Government brought forward proposals in their Criminal Justice Bill to apply this measure to offences committed against all children, but that measure was restricted to child rape. Under their proposals, a parent could commit a wide range of heinous sexual offences against their child, including sexual assault and sexual exploitation, and not be covered. We believe that was too narrowly drawn; it overlooked the devastating impact of a parent committing other serious sexual offences against their own child—so although we supported the measures in opposition, we are now strengthening them in government.

Our measure will cover all serious sexual offences committed by a parent against a child they have parental responsibility for, such as sexual assault and sexual exploitation, causing a child to watch a sexual act and sexual activity without consent. There is no denying that we are in novel territory with this measure and, as such, we have a duty to take a balanced approach. This automatic restriction can, and likely will, be challenged. We do not yet know how many challenges the courts will receive. We have a responsibility to ensure that the courts are not overwhelmed, and that vulnerable children going through the family court do not suffer. For that reason, we have chosen to expand the offences beyond child rape, but to begin by restricting our measures to serious sexual offences where a perpetrator holds parental responsibility for their victim.

I have heard the strength of feeling from survivors and campaigners who want to see our measure extended to all offences against any child, not just where a perpetrator has parental responsibility. I understand the calls on us to be as ambitious as possible, and to expand this to a wider cohort of offenders, but we believe that our measure is stronger than what came before and is the right starting point for this novel change. We will work collaboratively and constructively with Members from across the House, and with those in the sector. I say to them that this is the beginning of legal change in this area, not the end.

The Bill will also strengthen the powers of the Victims’ Commissioner, so that victims are not forced to fight every fight themselves, but have the commissioner—both the individual and the office—to fight for them. That will ensure that there is proper accountability when victims are let down by the justice system, and that victims are not retraumatised by having to fight for every improvement to the system.

[Rachael Maskell (York Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

My hon. and learned Friend is making an excellent presentation to the House. My constituent Kevin Curran has campaigned all his life in memory of his brother Declan, who tragically took his own life. He was a victim of child sexual abuse. The ability to access therapeutic services is one issue, but another is that many providers are reluctant to give their services because evidence from medical records could be used to try to break a case. Will my hon. and learned Friend ensure not only that people can access therapeutic services, but that their records will not be used in evidence to destroy a case?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend raises an important point, and I am sorry about the case of her constituent. She will know that her request is one of the leading recommendations of the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse, and the Department of Health and Social Care has committed to taking it forward. I know that we will see more progress made in this area.

Under the Bill, for the first time, the Victims’ Commissioner will be able to act on individual cases that expose systemic failure. They will have the power to request information from agencies on why a failing has happened, what will be done to address it, and how we can drive change across the system.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

I welcome the inclusion of this measure in the Bill. Does the Lord Chancellor agree that the extension of the measure to local authorities and social housing providers is essential if the Victims’ Commissioner is to fully represent victims of antisocial behaviour?

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Member makes a powerful point, and I will say later why the Government and I reject the idea that antisocial behaviour is low level and therefore outside the purview of the Victims’ Commissioner; that is why we are extending the commissioner’s powers. I welcome the support that the measure has received from the hon. Gentleman and others across the House. I hope we can all work collaboratively on the measure to ensure that it takes proper effect.

The Bill will also require the commissioner to produce a new independent assessment each year, providing much-needed scrutiny of how public agencies meet their duties under the victims code. It will ensure that victims’ rights are being upheld and, where they are not, that action is taken.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister for bringing forward the Bill; what she has outlined is exactly what we wanted to hear. My constituent has asked me this question. During the restoration of justice, the victim often feels isolated from the process. Does the Minister believe that if the Bill is to be effective, communication is key? Does the Bill go far enough in ensuring an obligation to communicate? I know she wants that communication, but I ask for my constituent, and to satisfy my conscience.

[Shabana Mahmood]

The hon. Member makes an important point about communication with victims, and I will come a little later to the measures in that area that will enhance the system and provide a good foundation for us to build on, so that victims have the information that they need to get through criminal justice system processes, and are kept updated once an offender has served their sentence and is on licence in the community.

[Jim Shannon]

Will the Minister give way again?

[Shabana Mahmood]

Just once more—it is hard to say no to the hon. Gentleman!

[Jim Shannon]

Will the Minister ensure that the legislation also applies to Northern Ireland? I understand that it does, but I meant to ask that question before; apologies for not doing so.

[Shabana Mahmood]

These matters are devolved in Northern Ireland—the Bill applies to England and Wales—but we are in regular contact with our counterparts in Northern Ireland. I know that the Victims Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Pontypridd (Alex Davies-Jones), will engage with counterparts to ensure that, where possible, arrangements reflect each other. We all have an interest in ensuring that the whole system, across the UK, is as strong as it can be.

The Bill will also ensure greater accountability for how agencies respond to victims of antisocial behaviour. As the House will know, that is an area in which many victims are not heard and not supported. Incidents are too often dismissed as minor or low-level crimes, when they have a devastating effect on local communities and on people’s lives. The Bill will empower the Victims’ Commissioner to request information from local authorities, and from social housing providers, which sit outside the criminal justice system, so that the commissioner can better understand how victims of antisocial behaviour are being supported. Those measures are an important first step towards rebuilding victims’ confidence in the system, ensuring that their voices are heard, and leaving public bodies in no doubt that they will be held to account when they fall short.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

My right hon. Friend is making an excellent and compelling speech. I warmly welcome what she is saying, which closely resonates with the feelings of many of my constituents in Reading town centre and elsewhere who have unfortunately suffered from antisocial behaviour in many different forms. I am sure that colleagues from around the country have experienced the same. I commend her approach and thank her for her work.

[Shabana Mahmood]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention. I know that this part of the Bill will get lots of support from across the House. By strengthening the Victims’ Commissioner’s powers, so that they can take more action on antisocial behaviour, it is important that we send the clear message that we will not tolerate antisocial behaviour ruining the lives of constituents up and down the country.

[Becky Gittins (Clwyd East) (Lab)]

Antisocial behaviour is a huge issue in my constituency. I have seen its impact on many of my constituents; it blights the community and makes people fearful in their own home. I have felt my constituents’ real disappointment when it has been labelled low-level crime; that has affected how supported they feel. Does my right hon. Friend agree that we must absolutely ensure that antisocial behaviour is not dismissed as low-level crime, and that its victims are put at the forefront of our justice system?

[Shabana Mahmood]

My hon. Friend is an assiduous champion for the people of Clwyd East. Let me assure her that I approach this as a constituency MP just as much as I do as a Cabinet Minister. Far too many of my constituents have, like hers, suffered antisocial behaviour and been unable to move on in their life because of the trauma that they suffered, day in, day out. They feel like nobody takes it seriously. Under the Bill, the Victims’ Commissioner will be able to hold local authorities and social housing providers to account to ensure that they deliver for the victims of antisocial behaviour.

Let me move on to other measures in the Bill. The victim contact scheme plays a critical role in ensuring that information is communicated to those who are eligible to receive it. The legislation that governs it is over 20 years old, and there are issues with the scope and operation of the scheme. Victims repeatedly say that the criminal justice system is too complex, disjointed and difficult to navigate, including when they try to access support. Where we can simplify and rationalise the system, we should. That is why the Bill will streamline the system. It will bring victims who are currently served by different operational schemes into the victim contact scheme, and will provide all victims with one clear route for requesting information, through a new dedicated helpline. Taken together, the measures will better support victims and ensure that they receive the right information about offenders at the right time.

I move on to measures that will improve efficiency and deliver swifter justice for the victims of crime. Timely access to justice is a cornerstone of public confidence in our legal system, yet we face a shortage of prosecutors—an issue that directly contributes to delays in our courts. Legislation prevents the appointment of qualified legal professionals—such as Chartered Institute of Legal Executives practitioners—as Crown prosecutors, even when those individuals are eminently capable, have experience in criminal litigation, and hold the necessary rights of audience.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

Only this weekend, I was discussing with a district Crown prosecutor and another Crown prosecutor the backlog in our court system, and they expressed strong concern about the recruitment and retention problem in the Crown Prosecution Service. I welcome this new measure, which will go a long way to ensuring that we have enough Crown prosecutors, so that the backlog in the court system can be eased.

--- Later in debate ---

[Shabana Mahmood]

We hope that the Bill will provide some immediate relief when it comes to the recruitment of prosecutors, because it will address an outdated constraint, remove unnecessary legislative barriers, and allow the CPS to recruit Crown prosecutors from a broader, more diverse pool of talent. Estimates suggest that there may be more than 800 CILEX specialist criminal practitioners who have expressed an interest in becoming a Crown prosecutor. The measure will support greater flexibility in resourcing, and may help to shorten waiting times for cases to be prosecuted. It supports our manifesto pledge to ensure that more prosecutors are available and, above all, may help reduce the long, painful wait that many victims face for their case to come to court.

We are committed to reforming the private prosecution system, so that it is fairer and has the right safeguards. Through the Bill, we are taking the first steps towards longer-term change. Although private prosecutions play an important role in our justice system, the way private prosecutors’ costs are awarded can provide perverse incentives for firms to bring private prosecutions. Costs in private prosecutions can be more than five times higher than in cases where both defence and prosecution are funded via fees that are set out in regulations. That is why the Bill will give the Lord Chancellor the power to make regulations to set rates at which prosecutors can recover their costs from central funds in private prosecutions. That will ensure the best use of public funds and reduce the incentive for private prosecutors to prioritise profit when considering bringing criminal proceedings.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

I am sure that my right hon. Friend is about to mention that this comes from a proposal made by the Justice Committee as long ago as 2020, under my distinguished predecessor, Sir Bob Neill KC. I am glad to see that the measure is finally reaching the statute book.

[Shabana Mahmood]

I was just about to pay tribute to the Justice Committee for its work, to Sir Bob Neill, and to my hon. Friend, the current esteemed Chair of that Committee. I thank him and Members past and present for pushing for Government action on this matter, and I am glad that we have been able to include this measure in the Bill.

Let me turn to measures on the unduly lenient sentence scheme. As the House will know, the scheme is a safeguard that allows the Attorney General to refer certain cases to the Court of Appeal. That action is taken if it is believed that the original sentence did not adequately reflect the seriousness of the offence. However, in practice, the 28-day statutory time limit for referral has proven problematic when cases have been brought to the Attorney General’s attention late in that period.

The Bill will ensure that every eligible case is properly scrutinised, and will guarantee that the Attorney General has 14 full days to assess any request received in the final fortnight of that 28-day window. This change will ensure that enough time is allowed for cases to be fully considered and referred to the Court of Appeal as necessary, and will provide greater clarity to victims, families and the public.

Finally, the Bill will create greater consistency in the courts through a targeted and technical amendment to magistrates court sentencing powers for six offences. We are tidying up an anomaly that we inherited. These six offences were not included in legislative changes made by the previous Government. By ensuring that everything is aligned, this change will ultimately help to avoid confusion and errors in sentencing.

The Bill marks an important step forward in our mission to rebuild our justice system, so that it serves the victims who, in recent years, it has all too often failed. It brings forward long-overdue reforms that will strengthen victims’ rights, force offenders to attend their sentencing hearings, restrict the parental responsibility of convicted child sex offenders, and further empower the Victims’ Commissioner.

The criminal justice system in this country suffered terribly at the hands of the Conservative party: the backlog in our courts is long and growing longer; our prisons are trapped in a cycle of crisis; and victims have paid the price. This Government are beginning the work of reversing that damage. We will deliver swifter justice for victims, and ensure that criminals face certain punishment and that our justice system serves victims, rather than subjects them to trauma on top of what they have already suffered. I know this is just the beginning and that there is much more that we must do, but the work is under way and I look forward to a constructive debate ahead. I commend the Bill to the House.

Prison Capacity

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Wednesday 14th May 2025 Written Statements

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

This Government inherited a prison system at the point of crisis. We took swift and decisive action to stabilise it, but we knew that was a first step. This is why, in October, I appointed the right hon. David Gauke to lead an independent review of sentencing. I expect the sentencing review to provide recommendations to place the system on a sustainable footing and ensure there is always space in prison for dangerous offenders.

Last December we published a long-term prison capacity strategy, setting out plans to build 14,000 prison places by 2031. This is the largest expansion of the prison estate since the Victorians. We have already committed £2.3 billion to prison expansion. Since taking office, we have opened 2,400 new prison places. While the spending review is ongoing, I can announce today that the Treasury will fund our prison expansion plans, in full, across the spending review period.

I have been clear that it was likely that further measures would be required before the sentencing review’s long-term recommendations could be implemented. Under central demand projections, the adult male estate will have capacity of just 200 prison places remaining by the end of September 2025 and will hit zero capacity—entirely run out of prison places—by November 2025.

It is therefore essential that we act now to avert a further crisis in prison capacity and manage the system over the shorter term while long-term reforms are delivered. The alternative would be the total breakdown of law and order, and the end to our ambitions of meeting our safer streets mission.

The recall population has more than doubled since 2018 from 6,000 to 13,600 prisoners in March this year. Last year I was clear that sustained action on recall was needed. The Government will bring forward legislation in the coming weeks to make more use of fixed-term recall, mandating it for sentences of less than four years. We will exclude offenders recalled for committing a serious further offence and offenders who are subject to higher levels of risk management by multi-agency public protection arrangements. This measure builds on previous legislation that mandated 14-day recalls for those serving sentences of less than a year. The proposals will ensure we do not run out of prison places before we introduce the sentencing reforms that—alongside our record prison building plans—will end the crisis in our prisons for good.

[HCWS634]

Judicial Conduct Investigations Office Annual Report 2023–2024

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Thursday 8th May 2025 Written Statements

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

With the concurrence of the Lady Chief Justice, I will today publish the 17th annual report of the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.

The JCIO supports the Lady Chief Justice and the Lord Chancellor in our joint statutory responsibility for judicial discipline.

The judiciary comprises approximately 20,000 individuals serving across a range of jurisdictions. Over the past year, the JCIO received 2,394 complaints against judicial office holders. A total of 58 investigations resulted in disciplinary action.

I have placed copies of the report in the Libraries of both Houses, the Vote Office and the Printed Paper Office. Copies are also available online at: https://www.complaints.judicialconduct.gov.uk/reportsandpublications

[HCWS621]

Young Offender Institutions in England: Use of PAVA

Shabana Mahmood Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Written Statements

[The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (Shabana Mahmood)]

This Government inherited a crisis in our criminal justice system. This extends to the children and young people’s secure estate, which has seen increased levels of violence and instability in the past decade, particularly in the public sector young offender institutions HMP and YOI Feltham A, HMYOI Werrington and HMYOI Wetherby. Our hard-working staff manage young people who are in custody for serious crimes, and this situation is putting them both in danger.

Risk to staff and young people in custody is higher than ever before

There has been a welcome reduction in the overall number of young people in custody over the last decade (from over 1,000 under 18-year-olds a decade ago, to an average of 430 in latest published statistics, the lowest number on record).

Custody is only ever used as a last resort, with many young people successfully managed in the community or diverted away from a life of crime. But the fact remains that sometimes young people do need to be placed into custody for public protection. This means that those who are in youth custody today are predominantly older teenage boys, aged 16 to 18 years. Over two thirds of these are there for violent offences.

The levels of violence across the children and young people’s secure estate are unacceptable. On a weekly basis there are assaults involving young people in custody. Serious assaults can see these young people use homemade weapons, including stabbing implements, against each other and our staff. Today, levels of violence are higher than in the adult prison estate. For the 12 months to Dec 2024, the rate of assaults by children and young people on staff across the three public YOIs (HMYOI Feltham A, HMYOI Werrington and HMYOI Wetherby) increased by almost 25% compared to the previous year—rates are around 14 times higher than that in the adult estate. In July 2024, HM Inspectorate of Prisons described HMP & YOI Feltham A as the

“most violent prison in the country”.

Officers working in the YOIs are trained to use physical restraint at the lowest possible level that is required. However, we have seen levels of violence that mean staff must place themselves at risk of considerable harm to intervene—for example, when a violent attack involves the use of a homemade weapon, or when a large group of young people in custody are engaged in an assault against one other. This type of situation hampers the ability of staff to quickly intervene to protect those who are being attacked, and their ability to protect themselves from injury.

In recent months, incidents have seen staff members act as human shields to protect victims from attack, where they have been stamped and kicked in the head by numerous assailants. This has seen young people in custody and staff sustain serious injuries, including fractures, dislocations, puncture wounds and lacerations. The nature of this violence presents a high risk of life-changing injury, and trauma for staff and the young people in custody experiencing this violence.

Decision on PAVA

After considering the evidence carefully and listening closely to a range of views, I have decided to authorise the issuing of PAVA (a synthetic pepper spray) to a specially trained and selected group of staff in the three public sector YOIs (Feltham A, Werrington and Wetherby) for a 12-month period. This is a specific authorisation for use in youth settings, and is different from how this tactic is deployed in the adult estate, where all officers carry it as part of their personal protective equipment.

PAVA will only be authorised for use as a last resort. This means it can be used when use is necessary, proportionate and appropriate to reduce the risk of serious or life-threatening injury to a young person in custody or a member of staff. This will allow staff to respond to these serious incidents more effectively. It will potentially reduce the severity of injury and will help restore control much more quickly.

PAVA can already be used during the most serious incidents in the YOIs, but only by national tactical response officers, who are nationally based, when authorised under the governance of a gold commander. It can typically take over an hour to deploy these officers. As altercations in YOIs arise rapidly, often with little warning, these officers can rarely, if ever, arrive on the scene in time to respond to active violence that is being experienced.

This change in policy will mean PAVA can now be drawn or deployed by local staff to diffuse a situation where it is deemed necessary to reduce the risk of serious physical harm.

Future checks and balances

Very close scrutiny and oversight will be in place to safeguard the use of this tactic. There will be a suitability assessment and training for the limited number of staff that will be authorised to carry and draw or discharge PAVA. The authorisation for this policy will only be for a 12-month period, allowing further review of whether to continue, change or stop the use of the tactic.

A live evaluation will be conducted. It will review each and every incident in which PAVA is used; collect data and evidence focused on necessary, appropriate and proportionate use of PAVA and its efficacy; and consider the impact of PAVA. Additionally:

Senior officials will review every incident of PAVA being drawn or deployed when young people in custody are involved, with every use reported to the local authority designated officer. Any unnecessary or inappropriate use will be investigated in line with safeguarding policies.

A weekly report to Ministers on any serious incidents will now include PAVA, and while use is expected to be low, Ministers will review incidents and all data related to the drawing and use of PAVA on a monthly basis. There will be a clear focus on any disproportionality and neurodiversity.

The independent restraint review panel will provide oversight of every PAVA use and will include this in their report to Ministers annually, which is published externally on gov.uk.

There will be a ministerial review of the roll-out after 12 months of operation to consider whether to continue with the policy; if, in doing so, any changes to the policy are necessary; or whether there should be a decision to withdraw the tactic, informed by the live evaluation and wider research.

The need for long-term reform

This is not a decision I have taken lightly, but I am clear that this vital measure is needed to urgently prioritise safety in these three YOIs at this present time. I believe that failing to act will place young people in custody and staff at risk of serious harm.

This decision will bring greater stability, which is essential to improving YOIs in the short to medium term, notably reducing the highest level of risk and the severity of violence.

However, while this measure is necessary, it is not sufficient alone. For that reason, we commissioned the Youth Custody Service to develop improvement plans for the YOIs, in the form of road maps to effective practice. These plans focus on preventing violence through effective behaviour management and relationships, and improving safety. I expect to see an increased focus on improving access to purposeful activity, including education and skills development, as well as greater time out of room for young people in custody.

We have published an independent review into placements for the small number of girls in custody, who are highly vulnerable, and have accepted the review’s recommendation to no longer place girls in YOIs, having not placed them there for several months (PAVA will therefore not be used on girls in the youth estate).

In the longer term, we intend to move away from the current estate, based on the evidence of what works for young people in custody. We will learn from the pilot of the first ever secure school and the operation of secure children’s homes.

Our work in the children and young people’s estate is part of our commitment to reforming the justice system so that it tackles the cycle of violence, ensures public safety, and safeguards vulnerable young people.

[HCWS599]