Written questions by McMurdock.

What the principal barriers have been to the deportation of foreign nationals convicted of sexual offences since 2024; and what steps her Department is taking to help tackle those barriers.

The Home Office deals with significant and complex challenges when seeking to return those who have no right to be in the UK to their country of origin. Sometimes the UK’s current obligations under international law prohibit us from returning certain individuals despite their criminality. Legal or re-documentation barriers can frustrate immediate deportation. Despite these barriers, we are fully committed to making our communities safer by deporting those who break our laws.To address these challenges, this government is committed to reforming the appeals process by creating a new appeals body with professionally trained adjudicators. We will also strengthen the certification regime to deny appeal rights for clearly unmeritorious claims. Furthermore, the number of countries that foreign national offenders can be deported to before they can lodge an appeal from abroad has also been increased.We are also working to reform Human Rights and Modern Slavery claims. In these areas we will rebalance the public interest test for Article 8 claims and work with our international partners to reform the application of the ECHR’s prohibition on inhuman or degrading treatment. With the Modern Slavery reforms legislation will be brought forward to clarify our responsibilities under international law, the removal of reconsideration for negative decisions, enhanced screening for individuals detained for removal, and a stronger link between timely disclosure and credibility of a claim.Finally, under new measures introduced by the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025, sexual offences which give rise to the notification requirement in Schedule 3 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 will be assumed to be ‘particularly serious’ for the purpose of applying Article 33(2) of the Refugee Convention, thereby allowing the UK to exclude those individuals from being granted asylum protections in the UK.Where removal is still not possible due to our ECHR obligations, the provision will ensure that such individuals are not afforded the generous benefits of protection status in the UK.

What checks are carried out during visa applications to identify previous sexual offence convictions overseas.

We take the issue of preventing foreign criminals entering the UK extremely seriously, and we continue to strengthen our borders so that we can prevent crime and protect the public, delivering on this Government’s commitment to tackle foreign criminality. For example, those required to obtain a visa to enter the UK are checked against a range of police, security and immigration databases for details of any UK or overseas criminal record. All applicants are required to provide details of their criminal history. Where it is found that they failed to declare relevant offences/convictions, their application will be refused and they will be subject to a ten-year ban from applying to enter the UK.We do not hold information on the specific offences relating to refused applications.

What assessment he has made of the adequacy of the capacity of magistrates’ courts to handle additional triable-either-way cases.

The magistrates’ court is an effective and efficient jurisdiction – In the 12 months to September 2025 it disposed of 1,448,163 cases with an average timeliness (offence to case completion) for the most recent quarter of 191 days. The Government will ensure there are sufficient numbers of magistrates and will seek to ensure that there are sufficient magistrates’ court sitting days to meet additional demand placed on the system.An impact assessment for the criminal court reforms will be published alongside legislation in the usual way. In 2024, triable either way offences in the magistrates’ courts completed more than four times faster than in the Crown Court.The Government has already made significant additional investment in the criminal justice system – in record sitting days, court buildings and technology, and in legal professionals. We have secured record investment (up to £450 million per year for the courts system over the Spending Review period), and we are investing almost £150 million to modernise the court estate, including magistrates’ courts. Discussions about the allocation for 2025-26 between the Deputy Prime Minister and Lady Chief Justice continue and we will provide more detail in due course. Nevertheless, the Deputy Prime Minister has been clear that sitting days in the Crown Court and magistrates’ courts must continue to rise.We are also accelerating our programme to recruit more new and diverse magistrates over the coming years and we continue to recruit high levels of legal advisers to ensure courts remain resilient.

What assessment he has made of the potential impact of increased trials without juries on the number of judicial review applications.

Following reforms to the criminal courts, judicial review of criminal court decisions will be available in the same circumstances as it is currently. We might expect to see an increase in the number of applications, given we expect to see more cases retained in the magistrates’ courts; however, the permission stage of a judicial review will mean that only those with proper grounds for a judicial review will progress.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of changes to Employee Car Ownership Schemes on the supply of nearly-new vehicles to the second-hand car market.

At Budget 2025, the government announced that, to allow more time for the sector to prepare for and adapt to the proposed changes in treatment to Employee Car Ownership Schemes (ECOS), its implementation will be delayed to 6 April 2030, with transitional arrangements until April 2032.The government has published a tax impact and information note, which can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/changes-to-employee-car-ownership-schemes-for-income-tax/changes-to-employee-car-ownership-schemes-ecos

What proportion of foreign national sex offenders were subject to deportation orders in each year since 2020.

The information you have requested is not available from published statistics. Work is currently underway to improve the quality of information held by the department on foreign national offenders (FNOs). Further information on this work can be found at: Statistics on foreign national offenders and the immigration system - GOV.UK. We are committed to delivering justice for victims and safer streets for our communities. Foreign nationals who commit serious crimes will face the full force of the law and be deported at the earliest opportunity. Between 1 November 2024 and 31 October 2025 this government has returned over 5,400 FNOs, a 12 per cent increase on the previous twelve months and we will continue to crack down on any foreign nationals who come to this country and break our laws.

What information her Department holds on the number of visa applicants whose applications were denied due to criminal records relating to sex offences since 2020.

We take the issue of preventing foreign criminals entering the UK extremely seriously, and we continue to strengthen our borders so that we can prevent crime and protect the public, delivering on this Government’s commitment to tackle foreign criminality. For example, those required to obtain a visa to enter the UK are checked against a range of police, security and immigration databases for details of any UK or overseas criminal record. All applicants are required to provide details of their criminal history. Where it is found that they failed to declare relevant offences/convictions, their application will be refused and they will be subject to a ten-year ban from applying to enter the UK.We do not hold information on the specific offences relating to refused applications.

How many referrals to the Crown Prosecution Service for immigration offences in the last three years were not prosecuted on evidential grounds.

The CPS does not hold the data requested. To establish whether suspects on cases where immigration offences were considered by reviewing lawyers at pre-charge stage, where then a subsequent no prosecution decision on evidential grounds was made in the last three years, would require a manual review of case files and this would be at disproportionate cost.

What measures will be used to assess the effectiveness of the Fair Work Agency in improving compliance with employment law.

The Fair Work Agency (FWA) will build on the data currently collated and published by existing labour market enforcement bodies.The Secretary of State is required to publish annual reports that assess the extent to which enforcement functions have been carried out in line with the three-year enforcement strategies. These will assess levels of non-compliance and set out how the FWA will measure its performance. Both the annual reports and enforcement strategies will be laid before Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly and will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny in the usual way.

What data the Fair Work Agency will collect and publish on breaches of employment law involving temporary and seasonal workers.

The Fair Work Agency (FWA) will build on the data currently collated and published by existing labour market enforcement bodies.The Secretary of State is required to publish annual reports that assess the extent to which enforcement functions have been carried out in line with the three-year enforcement strategies. These will assess levels of non-compliance and set out how the FWA will measure its performance. Both the annual reports and enforcement strategies will be laid before Parliament and the Northern Ireland Assembly and will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny in the usual way.

How many foreign nationals convicted of sexual offences have been removed under the Early Removal Scheme in each year since 2020.

The information requested regarding foreign national offenders (FNOs) convicted of sexual offences removed under the Early Removal Scheme (ERS) is not available from published statistics.The Home Office has published figures on FNOs removed under the ERS, from 2010 Q1 up until 2022 Q2, which can be found within ‘FNO_09’, here: Migration transparency data - GOV.UK.The Home Office also recently published figures on FNOs removed under the ERS, from 01 March 2023 up to 31 October 2025, which can be found here: Returns from the UK from 1 March 2023 to 31 October 2025 - GOV.UKData on FNOs removed under ERS between July 2022 and February 2023 is not currently available from published statistics, but work is currently underway to publish more detailed information on FNOs subject to deportation. Further information on this work can be found at: Statistics on foreign national offenders and the immigration system - GOV.UK.

What information her Department holds on the (a) number and (b) proportion of (i) foreign and (ii) British sex offenders who have claimed ignorance of the law as a defence in each year since 2020.

The Home Office does not hold information on whether foreign or British sex offenders claimed ignorance of the law as a defence.

What proportion of NHS costs provided to EHIC and GHIC holders is not recovered from the patients’ country of residence; and what steps he is taking to reduce that proportion.

The National Health Service recovers the costs of treatments provided to overseas visitors through a range of routes, including Immigration Health Surcharge, direct cost recovery from chargeable patients, and reciprocal healthcare arrangements.Under the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) scheme, visitors, students, and certain workers from the European Economic Area (EEA) and Switzerland are entitled to necessary healthcare during their temporary stay in the United Kingdom. The Global Health Insurance Card is issued by the UK to cover costs incurred abroad, so is not used to recover NHS costs.NHS providers request an EHIC from the patient and record details of the care provided. These costs are then submitted to the NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) who coordinate recovery of costs from the EEA and Switzerland in line with the rules set out in international agreements. Under these agreements, participating countries are obliged to reimburse eligible costs where a valid EHIC card has been presented for state funded medically necessary healthcare.The vast majority of costs submitted under the EHIC scheme are successfully recovered from patients’ country of residence. However, a small number of rejections can occur for a range of reasons, including incomplete or inaccurate details being submitted by the NHS facilities. Digitisation of systems for reporting EHIC claims has helped reduced the incidence of these types of clerical errors. The NHSBSA monitors rejected claims and works closely with NHS providers to improve data quality and maximise recovery.The Department continues to work with NHS to ensure that the NHS recovers all costs it is entitled to under our international agreements.

What assessment he has made of the effectiveness of cost recovery under the EHIC and GHIC schemes for treatment provided to overseas visitors in the UK.

The National Health Service recovers the costs of treatments provided to overseas visitors through a range of routes, including Immigration Health Surcharge, direct cost recovery from chargeable patients, and reciprocal healthcare arrangements.Under the European Health Insurance Card (EHIC) scheme, visitors, students, and certain workers from the European Economic Area (EEA) and Switzerland are entitled to necessary healthcare during their temporary stay in the United Kingdom. The Global Health Insurance Card is issued by the UK to cover costs incurred abroad, so is not used to recover NHS costs.NHS providers request an EHIC from the patient and record details of the care provided. These costs are then submitted to the NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) who coordinate recovery of costs from the EEA and Switzerland in line with the rules set out in international agreements. Under these agreements, participating countries are obliged to reimburse eligible costs where a valid EHIC card has been presented for state funded medically necessary healthcare.The vast majority of costs submitted under the EHIC scheme are successfully recovered from patients’ country of residence. However, a small number of rejections can occur for a range of reasons, including incomplete or inaccurate details being submitted by the NHS facilities. Digitisation of systems for reporting EHIC claims has helped reduced the incidence of these types of clerical errors. The NHSBSA monitors rejected claims and works closely with NHS providers to improve data quality and maximise recovery.The Department continues to work with NHS to ensure that the NHS recovers all costs it is entitled to under our international agreements.

What assessment he has made of the impact of rising demand for ambulance services on Category 2 performance in the east of England.

The East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (EEAST) has experienced sustained growth in demand in recent years. In the current financial year-to-date, to November 2025, the service has responded to over 640,000 incidents. This represents the highest year-to-date total to November since records began in 2018/19, and an increase of more than 40,000 incidents compared to the same period last year.Despite increased demand, Category 2 performance has improved. In the current financial year to date, to November 2025, the mean Category 2 response time has been 34 minutes 56 seconds.

Pursuant to Answer of 9th December 2025 to Question 96041, on Reoffenders: Sentencing, what assessment he has made of how frequently courts depart from sentencing guidelines on the basis that it is in the interest of justice to do so.

All sentencing courts in England and Wales must follow any sentencing guidelines which are relevant to the offender’s case, unless it is in the interests of justice not to do so (by virtue of section 59 of the Sentencing Code). Whilst there is a high bar for departing from the guidelines, it is necessary, in the interests of justice, that courts retain the discretion to do so, where the individual case and circumstances warrant it. If a court departs from the guidelines, it must give reasons for doing so. As mentioned in my previous response, the Sentencing Council has a statutory duty to monitor and evaluate all definitive guidelines to assess their impact on sentencing outcomes and ensure they operate as intended. Analysis conducted by the Council between 2010 and 2015 demonstrated that the vast majority of sentences imposed for offences for which there were offence-specific guidelines were within the sentence range set out in the guidelines. The findings are presented in the Council’s annual reports for 2010/11 through 2014/15 which are available on its website. As part of its ongoing monitoring of the use of guidelines, the Council conducts quantitative and qualitative research to determine how the guidelines are being used and the effect they are having on sentencing practice. These evaluations will highlight any issues if departures from guidelines are commonplace for a particular offence(s) or aspect of sentencing.

What plans he has to monitor data on (a) conviction rates, (b) sentencing patterns and (c) appeals arising from cases affected by the removal of the right to elect a jury trial; and whether that data will be published.

We will continue to monitor conviction rates, sentencing outcomes and appeals volumes as part of our ongoing assessments of the criminal justice system. The Ministry of Justice publishes data on convictions and sentencing outcomes for a wide range of offences and by defendant characteristics, in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal Justice Statistics. The Department will continue to publish this data quarterly. The Ministry of Justice also publishes data on appeals but does not have access to the reasons for appeal, beyond whether a sentence or verdict has been appealed. Data on appeals volumes can be found as part of the Criminal Courts Statistics release: Criminal court statistics - GOV.UK.

How many Employment Tribunal awards remain unpaid in each of the last three years.

The Government does not collect or publish data on the outcomes of employment tribunal enforcement actions; however we do publish data on the value of awards from the Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal and discrimination claims. The Department of Business and Trade will collect additional updated data on payment outcomes through the Survey of Employment Tribunal Applications in 2026.

What plans she has to amend inheritance tax legislation to ensure that compensation paid to the estates of deceased victims of the Infected Blood scandal is exempt from inheritance tax.

At Budget 2025, the government announced that it would extend the existing relief from inheritance tax for compensation payments made from the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme and the Infected Blood Interim Compensation Payment Scheme (‘infected blood compensation payments’). A Tax Information and Impact Note has been published and can be found here: Inheritance Tax and Infected Blood compensation payments - GOV.UK. Finance Bill 2025-26 contains a power to make changes to the inheritance tax treatment of infected blood compensation schemes in secondary legislation. The government will lay regulations subject to parliamentary approval of the Bill. More information about what this means in practical terms and what action impacted individuals should take ahead of regulations being made were published in this Written Ministerial Statement: Inheritance tax relief for infected blood compensation payments

What assessment he has made of whether the discretion for courts to depart from sentencing guidelines in the interests of justice affects the (a) consistency and (b) effectiveness of sentencing outcomes.

All sentencing courts in England and Wales must follow any sentencing guidelines which are relevant to the offender’s case, unless it is in the interests of justice not to do so (by virtue of section 59 of the Sentencing Code). Whilst there is a high bar for departing from the guidelines, it is necessary, in the interests of justice, that courts retain the discretion to do so, where the individual case and circumstances warrant it. If a court departs from the guidelines, it must give reasons for doing so. As mentioned in my previous response, the Sentencing Council has a statutory duty to monitor and evaluate all definitive guidelines to assess their impact on sentencing outcomes and ensure they operate as intended. Analysis conducted by the Council between 2010 and 2015 demonstrated that the vast majority of sentences imposed for offences for which there were offence-specific guidelines were within the sentence range set out in the guidelines. The findings are presented in the Council’s annual reports for 2010/11 through 2014/15 which are available on its website. As part of its ongoing monitoring of the use of guidelines, the Council conducts quantitative and qualitative research to determine how the guidelines are being used and the effect they are having on sentencing practice. These evaluations will highlight any issues if departures from guidelines are commonplace for a particular offence(s) or aspect of sentencing.