Asked by: Oliver Dowden (Conservative - Hertsmere)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what requirement or guidance exists under the Victim’s Code to notify victims of child sexual abuse, or their guardians, when a defendant’s statutory two-year Supervision Order is due to lapse; and what reassurances are provided regarding ongoing public protection measures.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Victims’ Code sets out the minimum standards of information and support that criminal justice agencies must provide to victims. This includes rights to information about the investigation and prosecution, the outcome of the case and, in specified circumstances, information about an offender following conviction.
A Supervision Order is imposed by the court for a fixed period and expires automatically when that period ends. The Victim’s code does not provide a separate right to notification when a Supervision Order is due to expire.
The expiry of a Supervision Order is the automatic conclusion of an order already set by the court, rather than a new decision or change in the offender’s custodial status, no separate right exists under the Victims’ Code to notify victims, or their family members or guardians, when a defendant’s Supervision Order is due to lapse. It should be distinguished from other protection measures which may be in place and would continue to apply independently of the supervision order.
Any ongoing arrangements to manage risk and protect the public are considered by those responsible for overseeing the Order.
More widely, the Government recognises that unfitness to plead cases may be difficult to understand as they do not follow the normal trial and sentencing route and we are considering how the court procedure can be made clearer and more supportive for victims and their families.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether his Department has considered introducing additional forms of judicial recognition, formal findings, or symbolic accountability measures in cases where a court has determined that a defendant committed the acts alleged, but a conventional criminal sentence cannot lawfully be imposed.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government agrees that this area of law needs to be updated. The Law Commission reviewed the law on unfitness to plead and the Government has accepted the majority of its recommendations including a modernised legal test, changes to the fact-finding process and wider disposals.
The Government is actively considering how best to take these forward, alongside the defence of insanity, which is also being considered by the Law Commission. This is a complex area of law and it is important that any future reforms are considered carefully to ensure that the legislation is coherent, workable and provides protections for defendants, victims and the public.
Asked by: Manuela Perteghella (Liberal Democrat - Stratford-on-Avon)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has made an assessment of the adequacy of the legal framework governing Trials of Fact in recognising proven wrongdoing in cases where a defendant is found unfit to plead.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Government agrees that this area of law needs to be updated. The Law Commission reviewed the law on unfitness to plead and the Government has accepted the majority of its recommendations including a modernised legal test, changes to the fact-finding process and wider disposals.
The Government is actively considering how best to take these forward, alongside the defence of insanity, which is also being considered by the Law Commission. This is a complex area of law and it is important that any future reforms are considered carefully to ensure that the legislation is coherent, workable and provides protections for defendants, victims and the public.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if he will make an assessment of the effectiveness of current measures that familiarise judges with reports prior to hearings in family courts.
Answered by Jake Richards - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The listing and management of cases, including preparation for hearings in the family court and the Family Division of the High Court, are matters for the independent judiciary. It would therefore not be appropriate for the Secretary of State to assess the effectiveness of the measures used.
The court has an overriding duty under the Family Procedure Rules 2010 to deal with cases justly, including by actively managing cases. This will include timetabling the filing of reports. Supplementing those Rules, Practice Direction 27A provides for the court bundle, which contains the evidence the judge needs to consider, to be filed five days before the hearing. This is intended to give time for the judge to familiarise themselves with reports and other documents.
Asked by: Freddie van Mierlo (Liberal Democrat - Henley and Thame)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to help ensure that repeat litigation is not used maliciously in child arrangement cases.
Answered by Jake Richards - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
This Government recognises that repeat applications, or threats of further applications, to the family court can be used maliciously, and as a method of continuing domestic abuse. This is completely unacceptable.
The family court has clear powers under section 91(14) of the Children Act 1989 to prevent an individual from making further applications under the Children Act 1989 without the court’s permission.
Section 91A of the Children Act 1989, that was inserted by section 67(3) of the Domestic Abuse Act 2021, clarifies that the court can make these orders, either on an application or of its own motion. The circumstances in which the court can make a section 91(14) order, among others, include where further applications for an order under the Children Act 1989 would risk causing harm to a child or relevant adult, particularly where repeated applications could amount to a form of continuing domestic abuse. Where a section 91(14) order is in place, the court must consider whether circumstances have materially changed before granting permission for a new application.
Asked by: Tristan Osborne (Labour - Chatham and Aylesford)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, if his department can provide an update on the timeframes for the introduction of dedicated courtrooms for rape and serious sexual offence cases for Maidstone Crown Court.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
As part of our mission to halve violence against women and girls in a decade, we recently announced a package of measures to improve victims' experiences at court and reduce delays in rape and serious sexual offence cases.
Backed by £23 million investment, every Crown Court building will have at least one specialist rape and serious sexual offence courtroom by 2028. These courtrooms will provide improved facilities and technology, including for pre-recorded evidence, remote observation of sentencing and participation from a private room, helping to ensure victims of rape and sexual offences receive better, more tailored support through the court process. We will also introduce a best practice framework for these cases, trauma informed training for court staff, and trial a single point of contact to ensure that these victims’ needs are met by the court.
In addition, we will deliver victim-centred court upgrades in the Crown Court, such as separate entrances and private waiting rooms to spare victims the trauma of seeing their perpetrator. Where these are not already available, priority will be given to courts with high numbers of rape and serious sexual offences. These upgrades will be made by 2030.
Asked by: Cameron Thomas (Independent - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of mandating financial institutions to notify the Office of the Public Guardian if they suspect an individual with Lasting Power of Attorney is undertaking negligence and fraud regarding money in a donor's account.
Answered by Jake Richards - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is improving public awareness of its role and responsibilities by working with organisations that support its customers and can help extend the reach of its information. Through webinars, meetings and targeted engagement with legal, finance, charity, health and social care sectors, OPG provides timely information about its services, including Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA), and helps stakeholders support the public's understanding more effectively.
In addition, OPG continues to raise awareness of LPAs through its Your Voice, Your Decision campaign, which is delivered in locations across England and Wales. OPG also uses its digital channels and GOV.UK content to provide information about its role and services, and how customers can access support and guidance.
OPG does not have current plans to introduce mandatory safeguarding training. There are several ways throughout the LPA process where OPG supports attorneys to manage a donor’s welfare, property or financial affairs once a donor loses capacity. Following registration, OPG outlines their legal responsibilities and signposts them to further guidance, including the Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice and GOV.UK guidance on being an attorney, for example ‘Getting started as an attorney’ and ‘How to be an attorney’. OPG’s Contact Centre also provides support to attorneys when handling calls, signposting to online guidance or forwarding to a separate team to give specialised advice and signposting when there are potential safeguarding concerns. This guidance is currently being updated to ensure it continues to support attorneys in understanding and carrying out their responsibilities effectively.
OPG does not consider that mandating personal financial statements by all attorneys would be proportionate, as LPAs are private legal arrangements which allow a person to choose who they trust to make decisions on their behalf should they lose capacity. Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, a donor must have capacity when making an LPA and is entitled to make their own decisions about who they trust to act on their behalf. The LPA framework therefore reflects the importance of donor choice and autonomy. There are statutory eligibility requirements and safeguards which mean some people cannot be appointed as attorneys for property and financial affairs, including individuals who are bankrupt or subject to a Debt Relief Order.
OPG can investigate concerns raised about an attorney's conduct and, where appropriate, apply to the Court of Protection to remove attorneys who are not meeting their duties under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. OPG works closely with the financial services sector, including through its engagement with UK Finance, to ensure financial institutions understand when and how to report suspected fraud, financial abuse and other safeguarding concerns involving attorneys and deputies. Financial institutions can and do raise concerns with OPG through established reporting routes, enabling concerns about an attorney's conduct to be investigated.
Asked by: Cameron Thomas (Independent - Tewkesbury)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what steps his Department is taking to improve public awareness of the role and responsibilities of the Office of the Public Guardian.
Answered by Jake Richards - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) is improving public awareness of its role and responsibilities by working with organisations that support its customers and can help extend the reach of its information. Through webinars, meetings and targeted engagement with legal, finance, charity, health and social care sectors, OPG provides timely information about its services, including Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA), and helps stakeholders support the public's understanding more effectively.
In addition, OPG continues to raise awareness of LPAs through its Your Voice, Your Decision campaign, which is delivered in locations across England and Wales. OPG also uses its digital channels and GOV.UK content to provide information about its role and services, and how customers can access support and guidance.
OPG does not have current plans to introduce mandatory safeguarding training. There are several ways throughout the LPA process where OPG supports attorneys to manage a donor’s welfare, property or financial affairs once a donor loses capacity. Following registration, OPG outlines their legal responsibilities and signposts them to further guidance, including the Mental Capacity Act Code of Practice and GOV.UK guidance on being an attorney, for example ‘Getting started as an attorney’ and ‘How to be an attorney’. OPG’s Contact Centre also provides support to attorneys when handling calls, signposting to online guidance or forwarding to a separate team to give specialised advice and signposting when there are potential safeguarding concerns. This guidance is currently being updated to ensure it continues to support attorneys in understanding and carrying out their responsibilities effectively.
OPG does not consider that mandating personal financial statements by all attorneys would be proportionate, as LPAs are private legal arrangements which allow a person to choose who they trust to make decisions on their behalf should they lose capacity. Under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, a donor must have capacity when making an LPA and is entitled to make their own decisions about who they trust to act on their behalf. The LPA framework therefore reflects the importance of donor choice and autonomy. There are statutory eligibility requirements and safeguards which mean some people cannot be appointed as attorneys for property and financial affairs, including individuals who are bankrupt or subject to a Debt Relief Order.
OPG can investigate concerns raised about an attorney's conduct and, where appropriate, apply to the Court of Protection to remove attorneys who are not meeting their duties under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. OPG works closely with the financial services sector, including through its engagement with UK Finance, to ensure financial institutions understand when and how to report suspected fraud, financial abuse and other safeguarding concerns involving attorneys and deputies. Financial institutions can and do raise concerns with OPG through established reporting routes, enabling concerns about an attorney's conduct to be investigated.
Asked by: Alex Mayer (Labour - Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many Stalking Protection Orders have been (a) applied for and (b) granted in (i) Bedfordshire, (ii) Cambridgeshire and (iii) Hertfordshire in each of the last three years.
Answered by Alex Davies-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
Stalking Protection Orders were introduced in January 2020. The Government is strengthening the use of Stalking Protection Orders (SPOs) by enabling courts to impose them on both conviction and acquittal of their own volition.
The total number of SPO applications received and SPOs issued in Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire in each of the last three years can be found in the table below.
Total Number of SPO Applications1 received and SPO Results Issued2 between 1st April 2023 and 31st March 2026
Area | Applications1 | SPOs Issued2 (As a result of an application or during court proceedings). | |||||||
Bedfordshire | 36 | 26 | |||||||
Cambridgeshire | 43 | 34 | |||||||
Hertfordshire | 54 | 44 | |||||||
Grand Total | 133 | 104 | |||||||
Notes | |||||||||
This data is HMCTS - Management Information
| |||||||||
Asked by: Pippa Heylings (Liberal Democrat - South Cambridgeshire)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans his Department has to monitor the impact of the Renters' Rights reforms on tribunal workloads and processing times.
Answered by Sarah Sackman - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
The Ministry of Justice continues to ensure that the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) has the capacity to manage its workload following commencement of the Renters’ Rights Act on 1 May 2026.
Part of this work has included ensuring that suitable arrangements are in place for monitoring data on workloads and processing times. Data for residential property cases, including receipts, disposals, and open caseload, is published within Tribunals Statistics Quarterly on gov.uk here: Tribunals statistics - GOV.UK.
The Government has also recently announced that HM Revenue and Customs’ (HMRC’s) Valuation Office will become responsible for decisions on challenges to rent increases in England. This provides the strongest foundation for a dedicated rent determination service that is quick, efficient and able to manage future demand. The Ministry of Justice continues to work with partners across government to develop this future service and prepare for implementation.