Written questions by Lowe.

What communications protocols exist between his Department and the Home Office to prevent the erroneous release of asylum-seeker prisoners.

The Government is determined to fix the issue of mistaken releases and ensure the public is properly protected.We are focused on fixing release and discharge processes and have already brought in the strongest ever release checks with more direct senior accountability. Going further, we have established a new Justice Performance Board to provide a comprehensive view of prison and criminal court performance including releases in error. Dame Lynne Owens is conducting an independent review to identify what further action we can take.A team of data scientists are reviewing releases in error to gain a clear picture of what is going wrong and as part of crucial improvements to court processes, an Urgent Warrant Query Unit is being set up, staffed by court experts, so prisons can get urgent answers on what sentences have been imposed. A digital rapid response unit has already been in HMP Wandsworth to use cutting-edge technology in place of manual systems and reduce the potential for human error. These are our initial steps and we will continue to take action to stop these errors and continue the existing close co-operation that exists between the Ministry of Justice, the Home Office and the police.On the issue of public notification when a foreign national offender is released from custody, decisions about public statements rest with the police.

How many foreign nationals have been released from prison in error in each of the last five years.

We regularly publish information on releases in error but this does not show how many of these releases relate to foreign nationals or the proportion of such offenders who were awaiting deportation at the time of release.The Government is determined to fix the issue of mistaken releases and ensure the public is properly protected. We are also rightly deporting foreign national offenders faster than ever.Foreign nationals who commit crime should be in no doubt that the law will be enforced. Where appropriate, the Ministry of Justice will work with the Home Office to pursue their deportation. Between 5 July 2024 and 4 July 2025, over 5,000 FNOs were removed. This is an increase of 14% compared to the 4,532 FNO returns in the same period 12 months prior.

How many officials in his Department have faced disciplinary action following the mistaken release of asylum seekers convicted of criminal offences in each of the last five years.

The information requested could only be obtained at disproportionate cost.

What proportion of foreign national offenders released in error were awaiting deportation at the time of release in each of the last five years.

We regularly publish information on releases in error but this does not show how many of these releases relate to foreign nationals or the proportion of such offenders who were awaiting deportation at the time of release.The Government is determined to fix the issue of mistaken releases and ensure the public is properly protected. We are also rightly deporting foreign national offenders faster than ever.Foreign nationals who commit crime should be in no doubt that the law will be enforced. Where appropriate, the Ministry of Justice will work with the Home Office to pursue their deportation. Between 5 July 2024 and 4 July 2025, over 5,000 FNOs were removed. This is an increase of 14% compared to the 4,532 FNO returns in the same period 12 months prior.

What proportion of (a) fathers and (b) mothers received legal aid support in family court proceedings relating to child custody and access in the last five years.

The requested information is not centrally held.

How many complaints have been made to the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office on (a) bias against and (b) unfair treatment of fathers in family law proceedings in the last five years.

Our judges swear an oath to act "without fear or favour, affection or ill will". Judges make decisions based on the evidence and arguments presented to them, applying the law as it stands.To uphold the important principle of judicial independence that is a cornerstone of the UK constitution, the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office (JCIO) can only consider complaints about the personal behaviour of a judge. Allegations of bias or unfairness in a judge’s decision or case management must be addressed through the appeals process.The JCIO does not collect or report details of the type of proceedings that are being complained about. Its annual reports includes information about the number and subject matter of complaints received (https://www.complaints.judicialconduct.gov.uk/reportsandpublications/).

How many individuals released through the early release scheme were foreign nationals.

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. On 10 September 2024, the Government therefore took the unavoidable step to move the release point for certain standard determinate sentences from 50% to 40% (SDS40).We have published SDS40 release data alongside the quarterly Offender Management Statistics, in line with the Lord Chancellor’s commitment to transparency. This includes data on the number of foreign national offenders released under SDS40.Please find statistics on SDS40 releases by nationality group in Table 5: Standard Determinate Sentence 40 (SDS40) : September 2024 to June 2025 - GOV.UK.

What the average waiting time is for fathers seeking access to their children through the family courts after a separation.

The Ministry of Justice holds data on child arrangements that might help answer the questions relating to:The number of custody arrangements ordered by family courts that resulted in the father being granted equal or majority care of the child in the last five years.The average waiting time for fathers seeking access to their children through the family courts after a separation.The number of fathers prevented from seeing their children following court proceedings in each of the last five years.The information requested is not held centrally.  It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would incur disproportionate costsThe Ministry of Justice is not able to estimate the average cost to fathers of making child arrangements in court as this data is not available.We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system supports all parents – including fathers – and children and reflects the realities of modern family life, and we recognise the importance of ensuring that both parents have the opportunity to maintain meaningful relationships with their children where it is safe and appropriate to do so.The Children Act 1989 requires the court to have the child’s welfare as its paramount consideration when making a decision about the child’s upbringing. Any decisions the family courts make about the future arrangements for children are based on this fundamental principle. There is no automatic assumption of shared custody, as decisions about whom a child is to live or spend time with are based on the child’s best interests. This principle applies equally to mothers and fathers.The Government is already taking steps to ensure that financial hardship does not prevent parents from engaging with the family court system. To support access to justice, the Help with Fees scheme provides full or partial remission of court and tribunal fees for those who cannot otherwise afford them. This includes applications made in the family courts such as applications for child arrangements orders.We are also working to reduce backlogs and improve timeliness, so that children – and the parents seeking to support them – can access the support and stability they need without unnecessary delay. This includes the agreement of system-wide targets by the Family Justice Board for 2025/26, with a continued focus on tackling delay and reducing outstanding caseloads. In public law proceedings relating to children (such as care proceedings), this involves a renewed emphasis on the procedure set out in the Public Law Outline; and in private law proceedings relating to children (such as applications for child arrangements orders), areas delivering the new Pathfinder model have made significant progress in addressing delays.The Government does not have any plans to commission a cross-departmental review as suggested, and we have committed to long-term reform of the family courts to deliver better outcomes for families.

If his Department will make an estimate of the number of fathers prevented from seeing their children following court proceedings in each of the last five years.

The Ministry of Justice holds data on child arrangements that might help answer the questions relating to:The number of custody arrangements ordered by family courts that resulted in the father being granted equal or majority care of the child in the last five years.The average waiting time for fathers seeking access to their children through the family courts after a separation.The number of fathers prevented from seeing their children following court proceedings in each of the last five years.The information requested is not held centrally.  It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would incur disproportionate costsThe Ministry of Justice is not able to estimate the average cost to fathers of making child arrangements in court as this data is not available.We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system supports all parents – including fathers – and children and reflects the realities of modern family life, and we recognise the importance of ensuring that both parents have the opportunity to maintain meaningful relationships with their children where it is safe and appropriate to do so.The Children Act 1989 requires the court to have the child’s welfare as its paramount consideration when making a decision about the child’s upbringing. Any decisions the family courts make about the future arrangements for children are based on this fundamental principle. There is no automatic assumption of shared custody, as decisions about whom a child is to live or spend time with are based on the child’s best interests. This principle applies equally to mothers and fathers.The Government is already taking steps to ensure that financial hardship does not prevent parents from engaging with the family court system. To support access to justice, the Help with Fees scheme provides full or partial remission of court and tribunal fees for those who cannot otherwise afford them. This includes applications made in the family courts such as applications for child arrangements orders.We are also working to reduce backlogs and improve timeliness, so that children – and the parents seeking to support them – can access the support and stability they need without unnecessary delay. This includes the agreement of system-wide targets by the Family Justice Board for 2025/26, with a continued focus on tackling delay and reducing outstanding caseloads. In public law proceedings relating to children (such as care proceedings), this involves a renewed emphasis on the procedure set out in the Public Law Outline; and in private law proceedings relating to children (such as applications for child arrangements orders), areas delivering the new Pathfinder model have made significant progress in addressing delays.The Government does not have any plans to commission a cross-departmental review as suggested, and we have committed to long-term reform of the family courts to deliver better outcomes for families.

What information his Department holds on the number of custody arrangements ordered by family courts that resulted in the father being granted equal or majority care of the child in the last five years.

The Ministry of Justice holds data on child arrangements that might help answer the questions relating to:The number of custody arrangements ordered by family courts that resulted in the father being granted equal or majority care of the child in the last five years.The average waiting time for fathers seeking access to their children through the family courts after a separation.The number of fathers prevented from seeing their children following court proceedings in each of the last five years.The information requested is not held centrally.  It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would incur disproportionate costsThe Ministry of Justice is not able to estimate the average cost to fathers of making child arrangements in court as this data is not available.We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system supports all parents – including fathers – and children and reflects the realities of modern family life, and we recognise the importance of ensuring that both parents have the opportunity to maintain meaningful relationships with their children where it is safe and appropriate to do so.The Children Act 1989 requires the court to have the child’s welfare as its paramount consideration when making a decision about the child’s upbringing. Any decisions the family courts make about the future arrangements for children are based on this fundamental principle. There is no automatic assumption of shared custody, as decisions about whom a child is to live or spend time with are based on the child’s best interests. This principle applies equally to mothers and fathers.The Government is already taking steps to ensure that financial hardship does not prevent parents from engaging with the family court system. To support access to justice, the Help with Fees scheme provides full or partial remission of court and tribunal fees for those who cannot otherwise afford them. This includes applications made in the family courts such as applications for child arrangements orders.We are also working to reduce backlogs and improve timeliness, so that children – and the parents seeking to support them – can access the support and stability they need without unnecessary delay. This includes the agreement of system-wide targets by the Family Justice Board for 2025/26, with a continued focus on tackling delay and reducing outstanding caseloads. In public law proceedings relating to children (such as care proceedings), this involves a renewed emphasis on the procedure set out in the Public Law Outline; and in private law proceedings relating to children (such as applications for child arrangements orders), areas delivering the new Pathfinder model have made significant progress in addressing delays.The Government does not have any plans to commission a cross-departmental review as suggested, and we have committed to long-term reform of the family courts to deliver better outcomes for families.

If the Government will commission a cross-departmental review across (a) justice, (b) education and (c) welfare on (i) improving support for and (ii) empowering fathers in maintaining active roles in children’s lives.

The Ministry of Justice holds data on child arrangements that might help answer the questions relating to:The number of custody arrangements ordered by family courts that resulted in the father being granted equal or majority care of the child in the last five years.The average waiting time for fathers seeking access to their children through the family courts after a separation.The number of fathers prevented from seeing their children following court proceedings in each of the last five years.The information requested is not held centrally.  It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would incur disproportionate costsThe Ministry of Justice is not able to estimate the average cost to fathers of making child arrangements in court as this data is not available.We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system supports all parents – including fathers – and children and reflects the realities of modern family life, and we recognise the importance of ensuring that both parents have the opportunity to maintain meaningful relationships with their children where it is safe and appropriate to do so.The Children Act 1989 requires the court to have the child’s welfare as its paramount consideration when making a decision about the child’s upbringing. Any decisions the family courts make about the future arrangements for children are based on this fundamental principle. There is no automatic assumption of shared custody, as decisions about whom a child is to live or spend time with are based on the child’s best interests. This principle applies equally to mothers and fathers.The Government is already taking steps to ensure that financial hardship does not prevent parents from engaging with the family court system. To support access to justice, the Help with Fees scheme provides full or partial remission of court and tribunal fees for those who cannot otherwise afford them. This includes applications made in the family courts such as applications for child arrangements orders.We are also working to reduce backlogs and improve timeliness, so that children – and the parents seeking to support them – can access the support and stability they need without unnecessary delay. This includes the agreement of system-wide targets by the Family Justice Board for 2025/26, with a continued focus on tackling delay and reducing outstanding caseloads. In public law proceedings relating to children (such as care proceedings), this involves a renewed emphasis on the procedure set out in the Public Law Outline; and in private law proceedings relating to children (such as applications for child arrangements orders), areas delivering the new Pathfinder model have made significant progress in addressing delays.The Government does not have any plans to commission a cross-departmental review as suggested, and we have committed to long-term reform of the family courts to deliver better outcomes for families.

If he will publish (a) all recreational activities provided to inmates and (b) the total cost to the public purse for providing those activities in (i) HMP Maidstone, (ii) HMP Huntercombe and (iii) HMP Morton Hall since 2018.

The requested data is not held centrally and could not be obtained without incurring disproportionate cost.

How many (a) translators and (b) interpreters have worked in the prison estate since 2018; and what the total cost to the public purse was for their services.

HMPPS uses translation services provided under contract. These services provide translation by phone and do not require translators to physically come onto the prison estate. There may be specific occasions where in person translators are required but we do not hold a central record for these and to collect the information would incur disproportionate cost.

What information his Department holds on the average cost to fathers of pursuing access to children through the family court system; and whether he plans to make that process more affordable.

The Ministry of Justice holds data on child arrangements that might help answer the questions relating to:The number of custody arrangements ordered by family courts that resulted in the father being granted equal or majority care of the child in the last five years.The average waiting time for fathers seeking access to their children through the family courts after a separation.The number of fathers prevented from seeing their children following court proceedings in each of the last five years.The information requested is not held centrally.  It may be held in court records, but to determine that and obtain it would incur disproportionate costsThe Ministry of Justice is not able to estimate the average cost to fathers of making child arrangements in court as this data is not available.We are committed to ensuring that the family justice system supports all parents – including fathers – and children and reflects the realities of modern family life, and we recognise the importance of ensuring that both parents have the opportunity to maintain meaningful relationships with their children where it is safe and appropriate to do so.The Children Act 1989 requires the court to have the child’s welfare as its paramount consideration when making a decision about the child’s upbringing. Any decisions the family courts make about the future arrangements for children are based on this fundamental principle. There is no automatic assumption of shared custody, as decisions about whom a child is to live or spend time with are based on the child’s best interests. This principle applies equally to mothers and fathers.The Government is already taking steps to ensure that financial hardship does not prevent parents from engaging with the family court system. To support access to justice, the Help with Fees scheme provides full or partial remission of court and tribunal fees for those who cannot otherwise afford them. This includes applications made in the family courts such as applications for child arrangements orders.We are also working to reduce backlogs and improve timeliness, so that children – and the parents seeking to support them – can access the support and stability they need without unnecessary delay. This includes the agreement of system-wide targets by the Family Justice Board for 2025/26, with a continued focus on tackling delay and reducing outstanding caseloads. In public law proceedings relating to children (such as care proceedings), this involves a renewed emphasis on the procedure set out in the Public Law Outline; and in private law proceedings relating to children (such as applications for child arrangements orders), areas delivering the new Pathfinder model have made significant progress in addressing delays.The Government does not have any plans to commission a cross-departmental review as suggested, and we have committed to long-term reform of the family courts to deliver better outcomes for families.

Whether his Department has made an assessment of the (a) prevalence and (b) potential impact of parental alienation on fathers’ ability to maintain a relationship with their children.

The Government does not recognise the concept of “parental alienation” syndrome and does not think it is capable of diagnosis and has therefore not undertaken an assessment of the prevalence of “parental alienation” or its impact on fathers’ ability to maintain a relationship with their children.The Government does recognise the important role that fathers play in their children’s lives and supports a father’s involvement in their child’s lives where that involvement is safe, meaningful and positive. The family court must make decisions in the child’s best interests; this includes having particular regard to the factors set in the ‘welfare checklist’ in the Children Act 1989, such as the ascertainable wishes and feelings of the child concerned (considered in light of their age and understanding), the impact on the child of any change in circumstances, and how capable each parent is of meeting the child’s needs.In December 2024, the Family Justice Council published guidance on “responding to a child’s unexplained reluctance, resistance or refusal to spend time with a parent and allegations of alienating behaviour”. The guidance provides a comprehensive overview of the reasons a child may reject a parent, including harmful parenting, and provides a clear framework for assessing whether alienating behaviours are present. Where alienating behaviours are found the guidance provides clear next steps.

How much his Department has spent on social media advertising by (a) influencer and (b) organisation in each of the last five financial years.

The Ministry of Justice uses social media influencers to help deliver its communications and operational priorities. This includes activity to support recruitment campaigns for prison officers, probation officers and magistrates, ensuring that frontline services are effectively staffed to maintain public safety and deliver swift access to justice.Some sensitivities exist around aspects of this expenditure, as disclosure could prejudice commercial interests. All influencer activity is subject to strict Cabinet Office spending controls to ensure we balance effectiveness with value for money for the taxpayer.

Pursuant to the Answer of 27 October 2025 to Question 83161 on Prisoners’ Release: Reoffenders, when this data will be included in statistical releases

The next proven reoffending statistics publication where SDS40 releases will fall within the overall cohort is currently scheduled for 30 July 2026. The content of this release, as with all future statistical releases, remains under review.

What steps his Department is taking to improve the (a) recording and (b) categorisation of crimes against (i) Christian churches and (ii) other religious sites.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on convictions for a wide range of offences, including violence against the person by defendant’s age, sex and ethnicity, in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.It is not possible to disaggregate the data to identify individuals who were convicted of offences committed against a person from specific religious backgrounds including Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian churches/other places of worship nor the nationality of the offender. This information may be held in court records but to examine individual court records would incur disproportionate costs.We are committed to creating a more stable and sustainable criminal justice system, in which victims and the public can have confidence. In December 2024, Government commissioned the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, led by Sir Brian Leveson, to propose reform to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swift justice for victims.

Whether his Department holds data on the (a) age, (b) sex, (c) ethnicity and (d) nationality of offenders convicted of criminal offences against Christian places of worship since 2010.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on convictions for a wide range of offences, including violence against the person by defendant’s age, sex and ethnicity, in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.It is not possible to disaggregate the data to identify individuals who were convicted of offences committed against a person from specific religious backgrounds including Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian churches/other places of worship nor the nationality of the offender. This information may be held in court records but to examine individual court records would incur disproportionate costs.We are committed to creating a more stable and sustainable criminal justice system, in which victims and the public can have confidence. In December 2024, Government commissioned the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, led by Sir Brian Leveson, to propose reform to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swift justice for victims.

How many convictions there have been for crimes committed against (a) churches and (b) other Christian places of worship in England and Wales since 2010; and what proportion of all religious-premises offences this represents.

The Ministry of Justice publishes data on convictions for a wide range of offences, including violence against the person by defendant’s age, sex and ethnicity, in the Outcomes by Offences data tool, that can be downloaded from the Criminal Justice Statistics landing page here: Criminal justice statistics - GOV.UK.It is not possible to disaggregate the data to identify individuals who were convicted of offences committed against a person from specific religious backgrounds including Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian churches/other places of worship nor the nationality of the offender. This information may be held in court records but to examine individual court records would incur disproportionate costs.We are committed to creating a more stable and sustainable criminal justice system, in which victims and the public can have confidence. In December 2024, Government commissioned the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, led by Sir Brian Leveson, to propose reform to improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swift justice for victims.