This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe. Without the changes this Government made, courts would have had to halt trials and the police cancel arrests, undermining public safety.

Whilst measures like the SDS40 change provided the intended medium-term relief to the system, this was only ever a temporary change as a bridge to a more sustainable solution. That is why the Sentencing Act has been passed, to deliver a more sustainable solution to the prison capacity crisis we inherited.

Following a review, the Prime Minister and Lord Chanceller have decided that rape and certain child sex offences will be excluded from the progression model and these sentences will retain their current release points. This is in addition to the 18,000 offenders who are already ineligible for earlier release under the model given they have either been found by a court to be the most dangerous or are serving a life sentence.

This Government inherited prisons days from collapse. We had no choice but to take decisive action to stop our prisons overflowing and keep the public safe. Without the changes this Government made, courts would have had to halt trials and the police cancel arrests, undermining public safety.

Whilst measures like the SDS40 change provided the intended medium-term relief to the system, this was only ever a temporary change as a bridge to a more sustainable solution. That is why the Sentencing Act has been passed, to deliver a more sustainable solution to the prison capacity crisis we inherited.

Following a review, the Prime Minister and Lord Chanceller have decided that rape and certain child sex offences will be excluded from the progression model and these sentences will retain their current release points. This is in addition to the 18,000 offenders who are already ineligible for earlier release under the model given they have either been found by a court to be the most dangerous or are serving a life sentence.

The published Impact Assessment for the Courts and Tribunals Bill shows that the structural reform package in the Bill is expected to reduce incoming demand on Crown Court time by almost 20%. The Impact Assessment can be found here: (Courts and Tribunals Bill (Structural Criminal Court) Impact Assessment).

The evidence shows that those given a community order or suspended sentence reoffend less than similar offenders given a short prison sentence. Short prison sentences can exacerbate issues with employment, housing, and maintaining family ties, without allowing sufficient time to provide effective rehabilitative services.

In line with this evidence, and recommendations made by the Independent Sentencing Review, the Sentencing Act 2026 introduced a presumption for the courts to suspend sentences of immediate custody, of 12 months or less. The courts will always have the power to send offenders to prison where they have breached a court order, an individual is at significant risk of physical or psychological harm, or in exceptional circumstances.

Limiting the use of short sentences will help offenders to break the cycle of re-offending, reduce crime and lead to fewer victims and safer communities.

The Government has worked closely with the UK Intelligence Community and with the Intelligence and Security Committee to assess the impact of any measures on the functions of the intelligence and security services.

The Bill includes measures designed to ensure that sensitive information is handled securely and can be protected from inappropriate disclosure. This includes information related to the functions of the intelligence and security services.

As for all public authorities, there will be some limited costs for the intelligence and security services in preparing for the application of the duty and in adapting existing practice to meet its requirements. The Bill’s impact assessment sets out that the extent of ‘new’ costs in the support of these investigative processes is likely to be low.

The Government will continue to review the impact assessment of the Bill as the Bill is amended.

Sentencing in individual cases is a matter for the independent judiciary. They must sentence within the legislative framework set by Parliament, and in line with the relevant Sentencing Council guidelines, unless not in the interest of justice to do so.

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 establishes a comprehensive framework of serious offences with robust maximum penalties. These penalties reflect the gravity with which such offending is treated.

The Government keeps criminal offences and the associated penalties under review to ensure that the legislative framework remains effective, proportionate and responsive to the seriousness of offending. The legislation has recently been further strengthened through the creation of specific sexual offences against children under 16, which carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. This demonstrates the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the law provides the highest level of protection for children and reflects the seriousness of these crimes.

The Government keeps the effectiveness of the criminal law under review, including the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007. The 2007 Act created a specific offence to ensure that organisations can be held criminally accountable where serious management failures leading to a gross breach of a duty of care result in death. The offence has been used to secure convictions and substantial fines where the evidential test has been met. The Government has not undertaken a recent formal review of the Act but continues to monitor its operation through relevant criminal justice agencies and enforcement authorities.

Upon arrival, all prisoners receive a comprehensive fire safety induction covering the actions to take in the event of a fire and the risks and consequences associated with fire-setting behaviour. The quality and effectiveness of the induction process are subject to quarterly audits to ensure compliance and consistency across the prison estate.

All prisons have an adequate level of fire suppression. In the closed prison estate, 11 prisons are equipped with both fixed automatic and manual water misting systems: four of these have automatic systems in all cells, and seven have automatic systems installed in some cells, with manual provision in the remainder. The other 101 closed prisons are equipped with manual water misting systems.

H M Prison & Probation Service’s technical standards require all new closed prisons and secure accommodation blocks to be fitted with fixed automatic water misting systems in prison cells.

Upon arrival, all prisoners receive a comprehensive fire safety induction covering the actions to take in the event of a fire and the risks and consequences associated with fire-setting behaviour. The quality and effectiveness of the induction process are subject to quarterly audits to ensure compliance and consistency across the prison estate.

All prisons have an adequate level of fire suppression. In the closed prison estate, 11 prisons are equipped with both fixed automatic and manual water misting systems: four of these have automatic systems in all cells, and seven have automatic systems installed in some cells, with manual provision in the remainder. The other 101 closed prisons are equipped with manual water misting systems.

H M Prison & Probation Service’s technical standards require all new closed prisons and secure accommodation blocks to be fitted with fixed automatic water misting systems in prison cells.

The level of fire risk associated with prisoner possession of vape devices is continuously monitored through the national fire reporting system. Data gathered through this process has supported the introduction of a redesigned, lower-risk vape device, which has contributed to a 43% reduction in overall fire incidents

Other ignition sources are continuously monitored through the national fire reporting system. Analysis of incident data informs both behavioural and infrastructure-based interventions designed to reduce opportunities for fire-setting and mitigate associated risks. This includes preventative and protective measures across the estate, such as Arc Fault Detection Devices (AFDDs), safer kettles, and the use of non-combustible furnishings, all of which are intended to reduce the likelihood of fire occurring and limit fire growth where incidents do occur.

The Prison Service has established a national working group to consider future policy options relating to vaping in prisons. This work remains at an early stage of development, and no decisions have been made. Several prisons in the north of England are also considering the practical implications of vape removal.

The Prison Service is considering the practical implications of vape removal. There are currently no active trials to prevent prisoners accessing vapes in prisons in the north of England.

This Government understands the pressure that is currently on the court system. The Crown Court backlog currently stands at over 80,000 cases and over 22,000 of those cases have been open for over a year. Behind each of those cases is someone awaiting justice – defendants seeking to clear their name and victims putting their lives on hold. The Crown Court caseload means that thousands of victims and witnesses are waiting years for their day in court. This cannot be acceptable. The justice system exists to serve the public, and this Government is committed to building a stronger justice system in which the public can have confidence.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and will have report stage in the House of Commons when parliamentary time allows.

This Government understands the pressure that is currently on the court system. The Crown Court backlog currently stands at over 80,000 cases and over 22,000 of those cases have been open for over a year. Behind each of those cases is someone awaiting justice – defendants seeking to clear their name and victims putting their lives on hold. The Crown Court caseload means that thousands of victims and witnesses are waiting years for their day in court. This cannot be acceptable. The justice system exists to serve the public, and this Government is committed to building a stronger justice system in which the public can have confidence.

The Courts and Tribunals Bill is currently progressing through Parliament and will have report stage in the House of Commons when parliamentary time allows.

This Government recognises the vital work of Community Care lawyers in supporting those who are vulnerable, and the importance legal aid can have in helping vulnerable people access justice.

The Government recognises the pressures facing civil legal aid and is investing in the sector. We have secured additional funding of over £200 million over the Spending Review period for legal aid transformation, recovery from the cyber-attack, and for moving our legacy systems to a modern and secure technology platform. The transformation programme aims to support sustainability for all providers – including those undertaking community care legal aid work – by ensuring new digital systems streamline processes and reduce administrative burdens.

In preparation for the 2028 Standard Civil Contract, the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) will engage with stakeholders to gather views on how best to support the sustainability of the market. These insights will inform LAA’s approach and help shape future contracts that support providers in delivering high-quality legal aid services.

The Government is making significant investments in legal aid. We are delivering the first major fee uplifts for civil legal aid since 1996, increasing spend on immigration and housing work by £20 million per annum once fully implemented. Whilst these investments are not targeted at community care legal aid specifically, they are important steps towards improving services and sustainability across the civil legal aid system.

We remain committed to fulfilling our manifesto commitment to introduce specialist rape courts. We are working with criminal justice partners and external stakeholders to develop plans for what form such courts should take. This includes a consideration of case timelines and progression, victim experience, the use of special measures and the effective operation of the courts.

The Government is already taking decisive action to revive our criminal court system and address long-standing issues that impact all victims, particularly those of rape and other serious sexual offences.

The uncapping of Crown Court sitting days in the 26/27 financial year means that more rape and other sexual offence cases can be heard more promptly. Judges will continue to prioritise cases involving vulnerable victims and witnesses, including rape and other sexual offences. Under the judiciary's new National Listing Framework published in July 2026, RASSO cases will be prioritised in listing and, crucially, the practice of floating these cases will end.

Lengthy delays can be particularly difficult for victims of rape and sexual violence and so we are taking forward a range of measures to improve the experience of these victims through the criminal justice system. This includes introducing independent legal advisors for adult rape victims, rolling out trauma-informed training to all court staff, and delivering legislative reforms to protect victims, particularly victims of sexual offences, from unnecessary and intrusive cross-examination about their personal lives at court.

The legal profession in England and Wales, together with its regulators and the Office for Legal Complaints (OLC), operates independently of government. Legal services providers handle complaints about their services in the first instance. The OLC administers the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) scheme, which considers service complaints that have not been resolved by providers, while the legal services regulators consider concerns about professional conduct. The Legal Services Board (LSB) oversees the legal services regulators and the OLC.

The Government has not undertaken a specific assessment of the impact of AI-generated complaints. However, through its regular engagement with these bodies, the Ministry of Justice is aware that AI can help consumers articulate and pursue complaints but may also increase demand and place additional pressure on complaints-handling services.

For example, the LeO has reported a record 37% increase in new complaints in 2025–26. It has identified increased use of AI as a driver of this demand and also as a factor increasing the complexity of the complaints it receives. The OLC is responding through operational improvements and a longer-term transformation programme, using technology and AI.

The recently published independent review of the LSB also recognises the importance of maintaining effective consumer redress and ensuring the legal services regulatory framework is equipped to respond to emerging risks, including those associated with technology and AI. The Government is considering the review's recommendations and will set out its response in due course.

The Ministry of Justice publishes quarterly Mortgage and landlord possession statistics - Mortgage and landlord possession statistics - GOV.UK - which details the number of claims and the average time (mean/median) from claim to possession.

In 2025, the median average wait between claim and repossession by County Court bailiffs was 27 weeks and approximately 31% of the claims submitted required enforcement by County Court bailiffs.

Most possession claims do not require bailiff enforcement, as tenants vacate the property at various stages of the process and only a minority lead on to bailiff enforcement.

The timeliness of the enforcement of an order, where this is required, can be influenced by the actions of users and court. HMCTS is taking forward work to explore further improvements to bailiff recruitment and retention practices and to reduce administrative tasks for bailiffs to improve communications and efficiency.

The Ministry of Justice is in the process of appealing the Information Commissioner Officer’s decision to the First-tier Tribunal. It would be prejudicial to live proceedings to release any of the requested information.

The Ministry of Justice is in the process of appealing the Information Commissioner Officer’s decision to the First-tier Tribunal. It would be prejudicial to live proceedings to release any of the requested information.