Written questions by Johnson.

What the average sentence length was for those convicted aged 16 to 25 at the time of sentencing for cases included in the CPS Joint Enterprise National Monitoring Scheme 2024-25 by ethnicity and sex.

Awaiting answer.

What the (1) mean and (2) median tariff length is for people receiving a life sentence aged 16 to 25 at the time of sentencing in each year since 2015 by ethnicity.

Awaiting answer.

What the total value of compensation awarded for cases of assaults on Emergency Workers was since 2019.

Awaiting answer.

What information his Department holds on compensation awards resulting from the offence of Assault on an Emergency Worker by type of emergency worker.

Awaiting answer.

How many compensation orders have been issued in cases involving the offence of Assault on an Emergency Worker each year since 2019.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on the number of compensation orders at criminal courts in England and Wales for a wide range of offences including assault on an emergency worker in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from th...

What estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of Parole Board hearings relating to people serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection who had been recalled to custody having not committed

The power to recall is a vital public protection measure. Where an offender serving an IPP sentence is recalled to custody, it is because the Probation Service has assessed that the offender’s risk has escalated to the point where the offender may no long...

How many and what proportion of people serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection were recalled to custody having not committed a further offence in each of the last three reporting years.

The power to recall is a vital public protection measure. Where an offender serving an IPP sentence is recalled to custody, it is because the Probation Service has assessed that the offender’s risk has escalated to the point where the offender may no long...

How many people were in prison on recall on 30 April 2026.

The power to recall is a vital public protection measure. Where an offender serving an IPP sentence is recalled to custody, it is because the Probation Service has assessed that the offender’s risk has escalated to the point where the offender may no long...

How many requests were (a) made, (b) granted and (c) refused for Category A oral hearings in each of the last ten years.

Prisoners held as Category A / Restricted Status are subject to a structured review process, with a formal review after two years and annually thereafter. These reviews are informed by progress reports and considered by a Local Advisory Panel (LAP), which...

How many and what proportion of people serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection received a positive direction from the Parole Board for (a) release and (b) transfer to open conditions following a

The power to recall is a vital public protection measure. Where an offender serving an IPP sentence is recalled to custody, it is because the Probation Service has assessed that the offender’s risk has escalated to the point where the offender may no long...

What data his Department receives from NHS providers on the mental health conditions of prisoners serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection.

The NHS is responsible for delivering healthcare services, including mental health services, in prisons in England and Wales.All prisoners, including those serving IPP sentences, have access to integrated mental health services. Healthcare provision is ba...

What recent assessment he has made of the adequacy of support available to unreleased prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection.

The Government remains determined to support the rehabilitation of IPP prisoners, through the IPP Action Plan, which we published on 17 July 2025. The Plan sets out actions and associated targets, to ensure that those serving IPP sentences, including thos...

How many and what proportion of people serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection received a positive direction from the Parole Board for (a) release and (b) transfer to open conditions following a

The power to recall is a vital public protection measure. Where an offender serving an IPP sentence is recalled to custody, it is because the Probation Service has assessed that the offender’s risk has escalated to the point where the offender may no long...

What comparative assessment he has made between prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection and those serving determinate sentences of levels of access to (a) education, (b) employment train

The Government is committed to ensuring that all prisoners, including those serving Imprisonment for Public Protection (IPP) sentences, have access to appropriate rehabilitative support. Access to education, employment training and resettlement services i...

How many and what proportion of recommendations made by Local Advisory Panels to downgrade prisoners from Category A status were (a) agreed by the Category A Review Team, (b) approved by senior decision-makers wi

Prisoners held as Category A / Restricted Status are subject to a structured review process, with a formal review after two years and annually thereafter. These reviews are informed by progress reports and considered by a Local Advisory Panel (LAP), which...

Whether the interventions available to unreleased prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection differ from those available to other prisoners serving such sentences.

There are a range of interventions aimed at reducing reoffending and aiding resettlement into the community. These are allocated on an individual basis. Those working with prisoners serving sentences of imprisonment for public protection (IPP) will identi...

Whether his Department has assessed the potential impact of recent changes to planned core education hours in public sector prisons on its compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty.

The Department complies with the ongoing Public Sector Equality Duty to have due regard to the potential equality impacts of decisions to make changes to the provision of education in prisons at both a national and local level. Changes to planned core education hours vary across different prisons because the national funding formula for prison education has been refreshed, to ensure that allocations are a fair reflection of prison population, function and regional cost differences. Governors and Heads of Education, Skills and Work undertake needs analysis to understand the characteristics and needs of their local prison population, and commission education based on this information. New Core Education contracts also have strengthened requirements around Equality, Diversity and Inclusion. Providers are required to adhere to the Public Sector Equality Duty, and must continuously maintain an Equality, Diversity and Inclusion action plan to ensure equity of access to learning.

How many Risk Assessed Recall Review applications on behalf of prisoners serving a sentence of imprisonment for public protection have been (a) submitted, (b) accepted, and (c) directed for release, in each month since November 2024.

Since 1 November 2024, officials in the Public Protection Casework Section (PPCS) in HMPPS has on behalf of the Secretary of State considered the suitability of every newly recalled IPP prisoner for re-release under RARR. That means that the recalled offender does not need to make an application for RARR. In each case, officials in PPCS will have regard to any recommendation made by the offender’s community offender manager. The number of recalled IPP offenders re-released via RARR in each month from 1 November 2024 to 30 September 2025 is given in the table below.YearMonthRelease Decisions2024November02024December32025January82025February52025March82025April42025May42025June82025July72025August12025September2Note:Data quality: The figures in these tables have been drawn from administrative IT systems which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.We have provided the RARR release data up to 30 September 2025 as we have only published general release data up to 30 September 2025.

What progress the Government has made on strengthening the operation, consistency and availability of Out‑of‑Court Disposals, further to the recommendations on OOCDs set out by Sir Brian Leveson in Part 1 of his Review of Efficiency in Criminal Proceedings; and what assessment he has made of the potential implications for his policies of the analysis that a more effective OOCD framework could improve outcomes for racialised communities.

This Government is committed to improving early intervention and proportionality in the justice system, and Sir Brian Leveson’s Independent Review of the Criminal Courts has been an important part of shaping that direction. The Independent Review highlights the significant potential of Out of Court Resolutions to secure better outcomes by addressing the underlying causes of crime before offending can escalate. This subsequently benefits the community as it reduces the risk of reoffending, preventing future crime, and delivers quicker justice for victims. We are working with the Home Office as we consider the best options for strengthening the use of Out of Court Resolutions and will respond to the recommendations in the Review in due course.

What scores were most recently awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel for (a) the Time4Change programme and (b) the Sycamore Tree programme.

The Ministry of Justice does not disclose the scores awarded by the National Frameworks Intervention Panel. These scores are commercially sensitive, both in relation to the Ministry of Justice’s own interests, and to those of third‑party providers, who are entitled to expect that any assessment of their performance will remain confidential.It is not possible, without incurring disproportionate cost, to confirm which prison rehabilitative projects have been assessed, approved or refused. Details are not held in a single national record. Under the National Framework for Interventions, proposals are predominantly assessed at regional level, with only regionally approved proposals submitted for central consideration.