Speeches by Munt.

“Three weeks ago I asked about the long overdue final delivery plan for ME, and the Leader of the House rightly acknowledged the strength of feeling on this issue and referenced the NHS 10-year plan. The 10-year plan has now been published, but unfortunately it makes absolutely no mention of ME. The Department of Health…”

“I have caution about stripping back jury trials, so I ask the Government to commit to tackling court backlogs by investing in more court capacity, particularly in Bristol and the west country, by supporting rehabilitation to stop reoffending and people coming back into the system so quickly, and by addressing the root …”

“The rules were changed in 2022 so that the chair could determine that a hearing could be held in public, but I think I am right in saying that only nine hearings have been granted, whereas 39 have been refused. Are those figures correct?”

“I am Tessa Munt, the Member for Wells and Mendip Hills in Somerset. Everything is on the register, but I will just point out that I am a vice-chair of the APPG on penal affairs and of WhistleblowersUK, which is a non-profit organisation.”

“The role of the Parole Board might be misunderstood by the public. If possible, could you please outline that role and explain the typical process for a Parole Board review, from the initial referral to a final decision?”

“Yes, it would be interesting from the public’s point of view. They would want to understand the key factors that you consider in your process.”

“What happens if a decision is set aside? Is that it?”

“Give me an example of where something might theoretically be set aside.”

“Which hearing?”

“That is helpful. Thank you. I understand the appeal process for prisoners. Are victims not part of that? You are saying the Secretary of State and the prisoner, but that no other party can intervene in any way in initiating an appeal process?”

“I would like to better understand the process for making recommendations to the Secretary of State for a move to open conditions.”

“How often does the Parole Board review its own decisions, whether they have been right or not, depending on what happened in the future? Does that happen? Do you regularly look at what has happened in the way of recommendations over the last three or six months?”

“I wondered about the slightly lower level, as reoffending is such a serious problem, as I understand it. I understand why you have a process in place for looking at serious further offending, but there is the slightly less serious, but still serious, issue of further offending and people coming back into the system so …”

“Increasing transparency has been a significant focus for your board since 2018. What does transparency mean in the context of the board’s work, and what do you currently do to promote it?”

“Yes, I was going to ask you about that. Is that the Rook Topolski review?”

“What did that review reveal?”

“Do you feel that victims in particular have an understanding of your decision-making process? You have referred, perhaps obliquely, to the fact that they might be a group who do not.”

“That would be interesting. If you could write to the Chair, that would be good. Can I just take you back a bit? You had six that were heard, and another two—what happened to them?”

“So 39 have been refused—that is quite a weight on one side, is it not? It does not seem as if the new rules have kicked in hugely, or am I being very unfair?”

“What is stopping that?”