Written questions by O'Brien.

What the average number of working days lost to sickness absence per full-time equivalent member of staff was in (a) his Department and (b) its executive agencies in the last year; and how many formal performance warnings were issued to staff whose absence exceeded departmental triggers.

The Ministry of Justice annual report and accounts include information on the average number of working lost across the Department including its executive agencies. The report is available here with the relevant information on page 141 - Ministry of Justice annual report and accounts: 2024 to 2025 - GOV.UK. The Ministry of Justice does not issue performance warnings to employees whose sickness absence exceeds departmental trigger points. Under the supporting attendance policy, sickness absence is managed through a separate attendance management process.

How many (a) Equality Impact Assessments and (b) equality screenings have been produced by his Department in the last three months.

Under the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED), all public authorities, including Government departments, are required by law to have due regard to certain equality considerations when carrying out their functions. While equality impact assessments and equality screenings may be produced, there is no legal requirement for these assessments to be compiled in a specific format or published. In accordance with section 149 of the Equality Act 2010, the Ministry of Justice ensures that assessment of the equality considerations of its policy proposals is integrated into the development, implementation, and review of its policies. We do not keep a central record of all equality impact assessments or screenings undertaken in recent months. However, and where relevant, the equality assessments undertaken are often published alongside policy consultations on the Ministry of Justice consultation hub, which is publicly available on GOV.UK: Ministry of Justice - Citizen Space.

Pursuant to the Answer of 29 April 2025 to Question 45822 on Ministry of Justice: Equality, for what reason his Department no longer collects that information centrally.

The Ministry of Justice does not routinely collate information on specific words in job titles as there is no business or legal requirement to do so. Further information on staffing can be found in the Department's annual report and accounts.

How many staff in his Department are recorded as having a (a) mental health condition and (b) physical disability, broken down by grade.

In the Ministry of Justice (including its executive agencies: HMCTS, CICA, LAA, OPG, and HMPPS), along with the wider Civil Service, information about a disability or long-term condition, including mental health conditions, is completed by staff on a voluntary basis, on HR systems. Data on mental health conditions is only available as a subset of those who have voluntarily indicated they considered themselves to have disability or long-term condition. As there is no single category for physical disability, we have provided data on all those who have indicated a disability or long-term condition.The data provided covers the Ministry of Justice, including its executive agencies: MoJ HQ, HMCTS, CICA, LAA, OPG, and HMPPS.The table below shows data for the number of staff in post in the department who have self-reported a disability or long-term condition, broken down by grade, as of 31 March 2025.Grade Number of self-reported disabled staff SCS39G6132G7389SEO1,023HEO1,231EO1,626AO3,798AA1,088Unknown4,780Total14,106The total will not exactly match that used in Civil Service Statistics as we have used a different methodology applicable to internal data in order to answer this question.The table below shows data for the number of staff in post in the department who have self-reported the HR data management systems category mental health conditions, broken down by grade, as of 31 March 2025.Grade Number of self-reported disabled staff with mental health conditions SCSLess than 10G612G739SEO111HEO151EO171AO427AA118Unknown658Total1,691*Data includes those who have selected a single category mental health conditions. We do not capture those who may have multiple conditions or include information provided as free text.

How many staff left his Department in each of the last 5 years, broken down by grade.

Information on the number of civil servants leaving each government Department and organisation by responsibility level for the years 2021 to 2025 is published annually through the ‘Civil Service data browser’ as part of Civil Service Statistics 2025, an accredited official statistics publication. Information can be accessed through the Civil Service data browser for 2021 through 2025 at the following web address: Civil Service Statistics data browser.

How many staff (a) did not retain employment in the Department following completion of their probationary period and (b) had their probationary period extended in each of the last 5 years.

The Ministry of Justice’s probation policy and guidance advises managers on the steps to take to assess a new employee’s suitability for the post and to provide support to enable them to succeed. It also advises on the steps to take where performance, attendance or conduct are not satisfactory. This can include exiting the employee or extending their probation to provide further evidence for a final decision on their suitability.The table below shows data for the number of staff who left the Department for the leaving reason "Discharged Probation", in the 12 months to 31 March 2021 - 31 March 2025.12 months to… Number of leavers 31st March 20257231st March 20249731st March 20233231st March 20223631st March 202116Notes to table 1:Information on the number of staff who have left the department is published in the Civil Service Statistics but not broken down by the leaving reason "Discharged Probation". Therefore, we have used leavers data from the MOJ’s central HR system, SOP, to answer this PQ.Data for MoJ staff (excluding HMPPS) includes only on-strength payroll leavers, whereas data for HMPPS includes all leavers. Information for the second part of this question, relating to the number of staff that had their probationary period extended in each of the last 5 years, is not published and is not held in the central HR system. Therefore, this information cannot be provided.

How many performance reviews were undertaken for staff in (a) his Department and (b) its agencies in each of the last five years; in how many cases performance was rated as unsatisfactory or below; how many staff left as a result of such a rating; and what proportion of full-time equivalent staff this represented.

The Ministry of Justice operates a continuous performance management approach based on a rolling cycle of regular performance conversations between line managers and staff members. The Department does not operate a set reporting year for performance reviews and does not use performance ratings or box markings. As such, the Ministry of Justice does not hold the data requested.

How many employment tribunal claims have been lodged against his Department in each of the last five years by (a) unfair dismissal and (b) claims under the Equality Act 2010.

The proportion of Employment Tribunals claims which include Unfair Dismissal as a reason for the claim is 25.1%, and 62.5% of Employment Tribunals lodged against the Department are brought under the Equality Act 2010. 3.9% of cases lodged against the Department cite both Unfair Dismissal and claims under the Equality Act 2010.Employment Tribunals lodged against the Department for Unfair Dismissal 01 Oct – 31 Dec 2020202120222023202402 Jan – 28 Oct 2025Total01744665661244 Employment Tribunals lodged against the Department under the Equality Act 2010 *A breakdown of protected characteristics where Employment Tribunals have been brought has been included. Please note, Employment Tribunal claims often include multiple reasons when lodging a claim e.g. race discrimination and disability discrimination etc. This means that, total Employment Tribunals lodged against the department under the Equality Act 2010 will not reflect the total claims under the different protected characteristics. 01 Oct – 31 Dec 2020202120222023202401 Jan – 28 Oct 2025TotalAge3131026172089Disability47885110104103484Gender Reassignment0001012Marriage & Civil Partnership0000123Pregnancy & Maternity01424819Sex1102018132385Sexual Orientation146421027Total Employment Tribunals Brought Under the Equality Act 2010918127145153155607 Employment Tribunals lodged under both Unfair Dismissal and a claim under the Equality Act 2010 against the Department*Figures below are included in the previous tables.01 Oct – 31 Dec 2020202120222023202401 Jan – 28 Oct 20250725453338The Ministry of Justice headcount is circa 82,000 in total.

What estimate she has made of the cost of the new prison at Gartree in Leicestershire.

The value of the main works for the new prison next to HMP Gartree is planned to be published later this year.

How many people in prison for offences of (a) violence against the person, (b) sexual offences, (c) robbery, (d) theft offences, (e) criminal damage and arson, (f) drug offences, (g) possession of weapons, (h) public order offences, (i) miscellaneous crimes against society, (j) fraud offences, (k) summary non-motoring, (l) summary motoring and (m) offence not recorded are of (i) Asian or Asian British, (ii) Black or Black British, (iii) Mixed, (iv) White, (v) Chinese or other, (vi) not stated and (vii) unrecorded ethnicity.

The requested information is shown in the attached table.

Pursuant to the Answer of 7 March 2024 to Question 17002, how many staff in her Department, excluding its public bodies, have job titles that include the words (a) equality, (b) diversity, (c) inclusion, (d) gender, (e) LGBT and (f) race.

This information is not held centrally.

How many Independent Social Workers are recognised by the Tribunal system as qualified to provide independent reports in immigration cases.

The Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal is independent of government and act as impartial arbiters of the evidence presented by Appellants and the Home Office as Respondent to appeals. The Tribunal does not establish verification systems for any experts called by either party. Regulation of Social workers is overseen by Social Work England, Scottish Social Services Council, Social Care Wales and Northern Ireland Social Care Council.Similarly, the Tribunal does not commission reports from parties and accordingly bears no cost.The information requested on reports produced for either party on an appeal is not held centrally. HMCTS does not hold data on the number of expert reports that may have been entered into evidence by a party, the classification of the expert, the conclusions of that expert or whether those conclusions contradict or support the conclusions of the Home Office.Judges weigh the opinions of experts and make their decisions based on all of the collective evidence including any expert reports that may be provided, but they are not bound to accept conclusions in those reports.

How many reports were produced by Independent Social Workers for the immigration and asylum tribunals in the last year for which data is available.

The Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal is independent of government and act as impartial arbiters of the evidence presented by Appellants and the Home Office as Respondent to appeals. The Tribunal does not establish verification systems for any experts called by either party. Regulation of Social workers is overseen by Social Work England, Scottish Social Services Council, Social Care Wales and Northern Ireland Social Care Council.Similarly, the Tribunal does not commission reports from parties and accordingly bears no cost.The information requested on reports produced for either party on an appeal is not held centrally. HMCTS does not hold data on the number of expert reports that may have been entered into evidence by a party, the classification of the expert, the conclusions of that expert or whether those conclusions contradict or support the conclusions of the Home Office.Judges weigh the opinions of experts and make their decisions based on all of the collective evidence including any expert reports that may be provided, but they are not bound to accept conclusions in those reports.

What the cost to the asylum and immigration tribunal system was of commissioning reports from Independent Social Workers in each of the last five years.

The Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal is independent of government and act as impartial arbiters of the evidence presented by Appellants and the Home Office as Respondent to appeals. The Tribunal does not establish verification systems for any experts called by either party. Regulation of Social workers is overseen by Social Work England, Scottish Social Services Council, Social Care Wales and Northern Ireland Social Care Council.Similarly, the Tribunal does not commission reports from parties and accordingly bears no cost.The information requested on reports produced for either party on an appeal is not held centrally. HMCTS does not hold data on the number of expert reports that may have been entered into evidence by a party, the classification of the expert, the conclusions of that expert or whether those conclusions contradict or support the conclusions of the Home Office.Judges weigh the opinions of experts and make their decisions based on all of the collective evidence including any expert reports that may be provided, but they are not bound to accept conclusions in those reports.

How many reports were produced by Independent Social Workers for the immigration and asylum tribunals which recommended that a person liable to be removed from the UK should be allowed to stay in the last year for which data is available.

The Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal is independent of government and act as impartial arbiters of the evidence presented by Appellants and the Home Office as Respondent to appeals. The Tribunal does not establish verification systems for any experts called by either party. Regulation of Social workers is overseen by Social Work England, Scottish Social Services Council, Social Care Wales and Northern Ireland Social Care Council.Similarly, the Tribunal does not commission reports from parties and accordingly bears no cost.The information requested on reports produced for either party on an appeal is not held centrally. HMCTS does not hold data on the number of expert reports that may have been entered into evidence by a party, the classification of the expert, the conclusions of that expert or whether those conclusions contradict or support the conclusions of the Home Office.Judges weigh the opinions of experts and make their decisions based on all of the collective evidence including any expert reports that may be provided, but they are not bound to accept conclusions in those reports.

Pursuant to the Answer of 11 November 2024 to Question 12200 on Reoffenders: Foreign Nationals, if she will publish a breakdown of the offences committed by reoffending foreign nationals by main offence group.

I refer the honourable Member to the response I gave on 11 November 2024 to PQ 13567.

How many prisoners released under Standard Determinate Sentence 40 legislation have been recalled to prison.

Recall remains, as intended, a tool Probation can use to protect the public.Data on SDS40 recalls forms a subset of data intended for future publication, but our initial operational insights suggest there has not been a significant change to the use and application of recall since implementation of the SDS change.

Pursuant to the Answer of 16 October 2024 to Question 8672 on Immigration: Appeals, for what reason she has no plans to legislate to change the current arrangements on publication of decisions of the First-tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber.

I am satisfied that the question of whether, and in what form, to publish judgments is properly a judicial function. The judge is best placed to determine these matters in individual cases.

Pursuant to the Answer of 14 October 2024 to Question 6948 on Offenders: Foreign Nationals, if she will publish a breakdown of foreign national offenders by detailed offence type.

We recently provided information on the offence group of foreign national offenders (FNOs) in prison on 30 June 2024, in answer to PQ 6948. This can be found in the attached table.The Department currently has no plans to publish a breakdown of foreign national offenders by detailed offence type.The removal of FNOs is an important priority of this Government. FNOs who commit crime should be in no doubt that the law will be enforced and, where appropriate, we will work with the Home Office to pursue their deportation. We are exploring the ways that we can accelerate that further, including working with the Home Office to make the early removal scheme for foreign offenders more effective.

If she will bring forward legislative proposals to ensure decisions of the First-tier Tribunal Immigration and Asylum Chamber are published on the same basis as decisions of the Upper Tribunal.

I refer the honourable Member to the answer I gave on 10 October 2024 to Question 7538: Written questions and answers - Written questions, answers and statements - UK Parliament.Decisions on publishing judgments, including those judgments of the Immigration and Asylum Chamber of the First-tier Tribunal, are a judicial function.We have no plans to legislate to change the current arrangements.