Corporate report

Annual report and accounts 2021-22: Accountability (HTML)

Published 15 December 2022

This was published under the 2022 to 2024 Sunak Conservative government

Applies to England and Wales

Corporate Governance Report

The purpose of the Corporate Governance Report is to explain the composition and organisation of the department’s governance structures and how these arrangements have supported the achievement of its objectives during 2021-22.

Directors’ Report

The table below sets out names and titles of all ministers and members of the Departmental Board who have had responsibility for the department during 2021-22.

Departmental Board, Audit and Risk Assurance Committee and Nominations Committee member attendance 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022

Meetings attended per member of those eligible to attend

Members	Departmental board	Audit and Risk Assurance Committee [footnote 1]	Nominations Committee [footnote 2]
Ministers
The Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP, Lord Chancellor, Secretary of State for Justice and Deputy Prime Minister (from 15 September 2021)	1 of 1	- -
The Rt Hon Robert Buckland KC, MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (to 14 September 2021)	1 of 1	- -
Lord David Wolfson of Tredegar KC, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State	1 of 2	- -
Chris Philp MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (to 16 September 2021)	0 of 1	- -
Alex Chalk KC, MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (to 16 September 2021)	0 of 1	- -
James Cartlidge MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (from 17 September 2021)	1 of 1	- -
Tom Pursglove MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (from 17 September 2021)	1 of 1	- -
The Rt Hon Kit Malthouse MP, Minister of State	1 of 2	- -
Victoria Atkins MP, Minister of State (from 17 September 2021)	1 of 1	- -
Executive management
Antonia Romeo, Permanent Secretary	2 of 2	6 of 6	1 of 1
Dr. Jo Farrar, Second Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Justice and Chief Executive Officer, HM Prison and Probation Service	2 of 2	-	-
Kevin Sadler, Interim Chief Executive Officer, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (to 25 March 2022)	1 of 2	-	-
Nick Goodwin, Chief Executive Officer, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (from 14 March 2022)	0 of 0	-	-
James McEwen, Chief Operating Officer	2 of 2	6 of 6	-
Jerome Glass, Director General for Policy and Strategy Group[footnote 3]	2 of 2	-	-
Non-executive or independent member
Mark Rawlinson, Lead Non-Executive Member	2 of 2	-	1 of 1
Paul Smith, Non-Executive Board Member and Chair of the Audit and Risk Assurance Committee	2 of 2	6 of 6	-
Nick Campsie, Non-Executive Member	1 of 2	-	-
Shirley Cooper, Non-Executive Member	2 of 2	1 of 1	-
Alison Bexfield, Independent Member of Audit and Risk Assurance Committee	-	6 of 6	-
Laurence Milsted, Independent Member of Audit and Risk Assurance Committee (to 1 October 2021)	-	5 of 5	-

Managing conflicts of interest

Members of the department’s governance forums are asked to declare any interest that could give rise to a conflict of interest. Declarations are documented alongside any agreed actions to manage the risk of conflicts of interest.

Any significant interest held by management, where there is a link with the department, is included in Note 27 on Related Party Transactions. The list of ministers’ interests can be found at:

www.gov.uk/government/ publications/list-of-ministers-interests

Links to our executive and non-executive register of interest can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/ministry-of-justice-register-of-board-members-interests

Personal data-related incidents

The following gives a summary report of personal data-related incidents reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) in 2021-22. MoJ manages millions of records containing personal data and takes all incidents of data loss seriously. All staff are required to undertake mandatory data protection training upon joining the department and yearly thereafter.

Effective implementation of security measures is applied in line with the government’s security policy framework and the Government Functional Standard on Security. Adherence is monitored through a network of trained security and data protection practitioners.

Table 1 – Personal data incidents reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office

Date of incident	Nature of incident	Nature of data involved	Number of people potentially affected	Notification steps
30 June 2021	Disclosure of confidential address of respondent in a child arrangement case to the applicant	Name and address	1	ICO notified 2 July 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
27 September 2021	A C21 completed risk assessment form for bailiff service, and a blank C9 was sent to a party to divorce proceedings in error. The recipient then forwarded this email with attachments to approximately 50 different email addresses	Confidential information of court case	3	ICO notified 6 October 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
21 October 2021	Disclosure of confidential address of an applicant in a non-molestation order to the respondent assessment form for bailiff service, and a blank C9 was sent to a party to divorce proceedings in error. The recipient then forwarded this email with attachments to approximately 50 different email addresses	Name and address	1	ICO notified 27 October 2021. The ICO response is pending.
26 October 2021	Disclosure of a COVID status spreadsheet of staff and offenders sent by email to all staff within a prison	Confidential data for offenders and staff, including health data	1,800	ICO notified 28 October 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
7 January 2021	Disclosure of confidential address disclosed to the other party	Name and address	1	ICO notified 10 January 2022. The ICO response is pending.
22 January 2021	Disclosure of confidential address disclosed to the other party	Name and address	1	ICO notified 25 January 2022. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
8 February 2021	11 bags of confidential waste stored in an unsecured location which both staff and offenders had access to	Confidential offender and staff information, including health data	120	ICO notified 1 March 2022 (reported to the DPT on 28/02/22). The ICO response is pending.
16 March 2022	A Notice of a Grant of Bail was sent to the incorrect address. Data subject identified as at risk due to the proximity of the unintended recipient and the offences committed	Name, address, and criminal offence data	1	ICO notified 31 March 2022. The ICO response is pending.
24 March 2022	A theft occurred from a court bailiffs’ car which contained 33 warrants all based in the same area	Confidential court user data	90	ICO notified 24 March 2022. The ICO response is pending.
15 April 2021	Disclosure of confidential address of respondent to applicant in a family case	Names and address	2	ICO notified 15 April 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
28 April 2021	Disclosure of confidential address of victim in a compensation order to the defendant	Names and address	3	ICO notified 30 April 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
2 June 2021	Compromised Office 365 account allowing access to personal data of current divorce proceedings and staff details on a separate spreadsheet	Confidential information of court case and staff information	1,400	ICO notified 3 June 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
2 June 2021	Disclosure of confidential address of an applicant in a non-molestation order to the respondent	Name and address	1	ICO notified 4 June 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
3 June 2021	Loss of an indictment folder from 1991 during transit between archival storage and MoJ	Confidential information of court case and attendees	100+	ICO notified 27 June 2021. The ICO response is pending.
17 June 2021	Disclosure of names of youth defendants on publicly available websites. The defendants were under 18 years of age and should have received judicial anonymity	Names	4	ICO notified 18 June 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
18 June 2021	Disclosure of names of youth defendants on publicly available websites. The defendants were under 18 years of age and should have received judicial anonymity	Names	3	ICO notified 18 June 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.
23 June 2021	Disclosure of confidential address of respondent in child arrangement case to the applicant	Name and address	1	ICO notified 25 June 2021. The ICO closed its investigation taking no further action.

The department continues to monitor and assess its personal data risks to identify and address any weaknesses and ensure continuous improvements. For further information on information security, see page 73.

The assessment of whether an incident meets the threshold for reporting to the ICO is carried out by the Data Protection Team. Incidents which are not reported to the ICO are recorded centrally as set out in the table below and are categorised according to Cabinet Office requirements.

Table 2 – Incidents which did not meet the threshold to report to the Information Commissioner’s Office for 2021-22

Category	Number of incidents 2021-22	Number of incidents 2020-21
Loss or theft of information assets from secured government premises	223	169
Loss or theft of information assets from outside secure premises	124	967
Insecure disposal of inadequately protected electronic equipment, devices or paper documents	16	9
Unauthorised disclosure (information disclosed in error) *	5,227	4,724
Other **	192	398
TOTALS	5,782	6,267

*Examples of ‘Unauthorised disclosure’ could include the release of personal data to the incorrect recipient, such as information being sent to the incorrect email or postal address, the sharing of data to incorrect recipients internally in the department and inappropriate access to electronic data.

**Examples of ‘Other’ incidents could include any cyber or related attacks on the personal data held by the MoJ, technical security failings either with an application setup or a breach of a relevant policy.

Complaints to the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman addresses complaints made by members of the public, brought to its attention by MPs, where there has been alleged maladministration by government departments and other bodies in their jurisdiction. The department’s performance for the year 2021-22 is shown below.

The Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman’s annual analysis of the complaints it has received for each government department can be found at:

www.ombudsman.org.uk

Number of complaints accepted for investigation	Number of completed investigations*	Investigations upheld or partly upheld	Investigations not upheld	Investigations resolved without a finding or discontinued
12	10	3 (25%)	6 (50%)	1 (8.3%)

*Includes enquiries about organisations that are accountable to the department.

	Compiled with	Not compiled with	Total
The number of Ombudsman recommendations:	6	0	6

Statement of accounting officer’s responsibilities

Under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000, HM Treasury has directed MoJ to prepare, for each financial year, consolidated resource accounts. These must set out the resources acquired, held or disposed of by the department during the year, and the uses to which those resources have been put. The scope of the accounts must cover the department, including its executive agencies, and those of its sponsored arm’s length public bodies that are designated by order made under the Government Resources and Accounts Act by Statutory Instrument 2021 No 265. These public bodies are together known as the ‘departmental group’, consisting of the department and sponsored bodies listed at note 29 to the accounts. The accounts are prepared on an accruals basis and must give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the department and the departmental group and of the income and expenditure, statement of financial position and cash flows of the departmental group for the financial year.

In preparing the accounts, the Accounting Officer of the department is required to comply with the requirements of the Government Financial Reporting Manual and in particular to:

• observe the Accounts Direction issued by HM Treasury, including the relevant accounting and disclosure requirements, and apply suitable accounting policies on a consistent basis
• ensure the department has appropriate and reliable systems and procedures in place to carry out the consolidation process

• make judgements and estimates on a reasonable basis, including those judgements involved in consolidating the accounting information provided by non-departmental and other arm’s length public bodies

• state whether applicable accounting standards as set out in the Government Financial Reporting Manual have been followed, and disclose and explain any material departures in the accounts
• Prepare the accounts on a going concern basis
• confirm that the annual report and accounts as a whole is fair, balanced and understandable and take personal responsibility for the annual report and accounts and the judgements required for determining that it is fair, balanced and understandable

HM Treasury has appointed the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Justice as Principal Accounting Officer.

As the Principal Accounting Officer of the department, I have appointed the chief executives or equivalents of the department’s sponsored arm’s length public bodies as Accounting Officers of those bodies. I am responsible for ensuring that appropriate systems and controls are in place to ensure that any grants made by the department to its sponsored bodies are applied for the intended purposes, and that such expenditure and the other income and expenditure of the sponsored bodies are properly accounted for, for the purposes of consolidation within the resource accounts. Under their terms of appointment, the Accounting Officers of the sponsored bodies are accountable for the use, including the regularity and propriety, of the grants received and the other income and expenditure of the sponsored bodies.

My responsibilities as an Accounting Officer, including responsibility for the propriety and regularity of the public finances for which I am answerable, for keeping proper records and for safeguarding the assets of the department or non-departmental or other arm’s length public body for which I am also responsible, are set out in Managing Public Money published by HM Treasury.

As the Principal Accounting Officer, I have taken all the steps that I ought to have taken to make myself aware of any relevant audit information and to establish that the MoJ’s auditors are aware of that information. So far as I am aware, there is no relevant audit information of which the auditors are unaware.

The annual report and accounts as a whole are fair, balanced and understandable and I take personal responsibility for the annual report and accounts and the judgments required for determining that they are fair, balanced and understandable.

Accounting Officer system statements

In 2016, the Public Accounts Committee recommended, as part of its wider work on accountability to Parliament for taxpayers’ money, that all departments should prepare accountability statements.

The Accounting Officer System Statement (AOSS) provides Parliament a single statement setting out all of the accountability relationships and processes within the department, making clear who is accountable for what, from the Principal Accounting Officer down. It ensures accountability for all of the public money and other public resources which fall within the accounting officer’s responsibilities.

The department’s AOSS is available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/ministry- of-justice-accounting-officer-system-statement

Governance statement

This governance statement sets out the main features of the governance, risk management and internal control frameworks operated in 2021-22 and up to the date of approval of the annual report and accounts.

It sets out my view of the most significant challenges across the department in operating an effective review of the system of risk management and internal control, and the collective steps teams are taking to continuously improve and strengthen these frameworks. The governance statement should be considered in conjunction with the Accounting Officer System Statement.

Governance

MoJ maintains robust governance arrangements to support delivery of departmental priorities and objectives. The governance framework:

• provides leadership and direction, including a clear vision of what the department is trying to achieve
• brings relevant capabilities, experience and insights to provide rigorous scrutiny of the efficiency and effectiveness of performance and value for money
• promotes transparency and accountability that maintains the trust and confidence of stakeholders through clear, complete and accurate reporting on what is being achieved and to what standards
• ensures compliance with HM Treasury’s code of good practice for corporate governance in central government departments
• supports our work to deliver change in line with the Declaration on Government Reform

We have structured our governance to ensure we have complete, timely and insightful information flows to direct and manage the department’s delivery and use of resources.

The board secretariat is responsible for ensuring the information provided to the Departmental Board and its committees is of a good quality to enable informed decision- making, with risks and resource implications highlighted to ensure detailed engagement and challenge during discussions.

Our governance structures were strengthened during 2021-22 with the addition of the Delivery Board. We also added the Portfolio Committee and the Finance, Performance and Risk Committee as sub-committees of the Executive Committee.

Departmental Board

Chair: Secretary of State for Justice

Meetings in 2021-22: 2

Purpose: The Departmental Board forms the collective strategic and operational leadership of the department. Chaired by the Secretary of State for Justice, it brings together the ministerial and civil service leaders with senior non-executives from outside government. It is responsible for setting strategic direction, including reviewing delivery against the Outcome Delivery Plan.

Meeting composition

15 members

By position:

• 6 ministers
• 5 executive directors
• 4 non-executive directors

By gender:

• 4 female
• 11 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• assessment of progress against the Outcome Delivery Plan, including performance and delivery of critical milestones
• departmental priorities
• savings and efficiency review
• Spending Review 2021
• review of Key Performance Indicators
• discussing recommendations and actions from Audit and Risk Assurance Committee
• probation reform implementation, lessons learned and next steps

Audit and Risk Assurance Committee

Chair: Non-executive board member

Meetings in 2021-22: 7

Purpose: The Departmental Audit and Risk Assurance Committee supports the board and me in my role as Principal Accounting Officer by reviewing the completeness and reliability of assurances over the design and operation of governance, risk management and internal control frameworks and the integrity of financial statements in the department.

Meeting composition

3 members

By position:

• 2 non-executive directors
• 1 independent member

By gender:

• 2 female
• 1 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• considering and challenging the preparatory work undertaken for the Spending Review 2021
• considering the work of the newly established transparency unit to understand transparency and propriety requirements
• considering the Government Internal Audit Agency findings, particularly in relation to limited audit opinions considering lessons learned
• considering the work of external audit
• considering and challenging the department’s approach and progress to mitigate cyber security risk, data protection, privacy and technical debt
• reviewing the annual report and accounts and providing independent oversight and challenge on its content
• continuing oversight of arm’s length bodies and executive agencies through dedicated informal meetings with arm’s length bodies and executive agency Audit and Risk Assurance Committee Chairs to share information and ideas
• challenging the department’s approach and progress to mitigate against fraud and to test the whistleblowing process

Nominations Committee

Chair: Lead non-executive board member

Meetings in 2021-22: 1

Purpose: The Nominations Committee provides assurance on senior executive appointments within the department.

Meeting composition

3 members

By position:

• 1 non-executive directors
• 2 executive directors

By gender:

• 1 female
• 2 male

Activities in 2021-22 included discussing and advising on performance assessment and appraisal of Directors General with:

• pay award recommendations
• talent strategy
• succession planning

Executive Committee

Chair: Permanent Secretary

Meetings in 2021-22: 37

Purpose: I chair the Executive Committee. It is the executive leadership team for the department and is comprised of senior officials. The committee ensures that the department is fully aligned with the strategic direction set by the Secretary of State, maintains and directs the capabilities to deliver, oversees the delivery of outcomes and prioritises and allocates financial and other resources.

Meeting composition

12 members

By gender:

• 4 female
• 8 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• assessing the impact of COVID-19 on departmental business and identifying and implementing mitigations to maintain continued delivery
• developing and reviewing the department’s plans for recovery from COVID-19, including plans for court and tribunal recovery
• monitoring the department’s performance against its budget, objectives and managing the delivery of our outcomes
• developing the Spending Review 2021 through to approval and the associated strategic allocations
• examining specific risks or issues that could affect the delivery of the department’s objectives
• reviewing the progress made against agreed diversity priorities in the department’s diversity and inclusion strategy and supporting the department’s work on mental health
• encouraging closer co-operation and relationships with the department’s arm’s length bodies to share good practice and gain a better insight into their work and performance
• monitoring the development of the digital and data strategies
• regularly reviewing projected demand in the justice system to inform long-term planning and identify any risks
• assess and reward the MoJ Awards 2022 finalists and winners

Delivery Board

Chair: Second Permanent Secretary and lead non-executive board member

Meetings in 2021-22: 7

Purpose: The Delivery Board provides assurance to me in my role as the Principal Accounting Officer and to the Departmental Board that the strategic outcomes and commitments defined in the Outcome Delivery Plan and Government Major Projects Portfolio are on track to be delivered. It escalates matters for consideration to the Departmental Board via the Executive Committee.

Meeting composition

8 members

By position:

• 6 executive directors
• 2 non-executive directors

By gender:

• 4 female
• 4 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• oversight and scrutiny of the department’s major projects and programmes, ensuring that plans are well evidenced and strategic benefits are on track to be delivered
• challenge and scrutiny of the robustness of the plans and processes for delivery and the adequacy of their management

Finance, Performance and Risk Committee

Chair: Chief Operating Officer

Meetings in 2021-22: 12

Purpose: The Finance, Performance and Risk Committee oversees and scrutinises delivery against the Outcome Delivery Plan, informs management of the department’s principal and secondary risks, and monitors compliance with functional standards and other government, legal or professional requirements.

Meeting composition

8 members

By gender:

• 1 female
• 7 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• examining the department, its executive agencies and arm’s length bodies’ in-year finances
• reviewing the impact of COVID-19 and other external events on forecasting and budgets
• considering and advising on the departmental spending review settlement conditions
• assessing and challenging performance, delivery and risk against the Outcome Delivery Plan

People Business Committee

Chair: Second Permanent Secretary and Chief People Officer

Meetings in 2021-22: 10

Purpose: Supports the Executive Committee in the development, delivery and evaluation of leadership and management of policies.

Meeting composition

9 members

By gender:

• 6 female
• 3 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• consideration of the benefits realised from staff adjusting to work in a virtual or remote environment due to impacts of COVID-19
• oversight of strategic people risks and correct identification of appropriate mitigations
• monitoring the progress of the 3rd Generation Shared Services Programme and the proposed approach for the development of the next generation of shared services solutions considering and advising on the future approach to pay and reward and monitoring the progress of the employee benefits contract retender

Investment Committee

Chair: Chief Operating Officer

Meetings in 2021-22: 17

Purpose: The Investment Committee has delegated powers to make investment decisions on the Executive Committee’s behalf, with oversight of the MoJ portfolio, including portfolio projects from inception through to implementation, ensuring they remain strategically aligned, affordable and deliverable.

Meeting composition

13 members

By gender:

• 6 female
• 7 male

Activities in the year under review included:

• scrutiny and approval of business cases of £30 million whole‑life cost and above
• agreeing and monitoring departmental change programmes’ funding
• setting permissible tolerances that include costs, benefits, schedule, quality, scope and performance
• release of funds after reviewing progress of programmes and projects

Portfolio Committee

Chair: Second Permanent Secretary

Meetings in 2021-22: 4

Purpose: The Portfolio Committee provides oversight of progress across our major change portfolio, with a reporting line into both the Executive Committee and Delivery Board. It ensures projects are set up for success, resolves issues that may compromise delivery confidence, including advising on prioritisation decisions regarding the deployment of expert resources. The committee ensures that the portfolio is strategically aligned, affordable and deliverable and that project leaders comply with project delivery standards.

Meeting composition

9 members

By gender:

• 4 female
• 5 male

Activities in the year under review included:

Activities in the year under review included: - ensuring that all portfolio programmes and projects comply with agreed delivery standards and best practice, including oversight of the tolerances for time, cost, scope and quality set by the Investment Committee - oversight of delivery confidence of the portfolio and identification of projects and programmes that merit enhanced governance and/or scrutiny, including agreeing a recommended forward programme for Delivery Board scrutiny and challenge - review and resolution of project or programme-level issues (for example, risks and benefit management) - undertaking deep dives on cross-cutting systemic issues, thematic risks and constraints using data to drive improvement actions

Further details and membership of these forums can be found at GOV.UK

HM Treasury Corporate Governance Code

As part of the preparation of this report, the department considers its compliance with the HM Treasury Corporate Governance Code for Central Government Departments. There have been four departures from the code, which are explained below.

The code states that the board should meet on at least a quarterly basis. The Departmental Board met twice in 2021-22. Since his appointment on 15 September 2021, the then Secretary of State, the Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP, chaired one Departmental Board on 22 November. The previous meeting was chaired by the then Secretary of State, Lord Buckland, on 10 June. Two further meetings had been planned in this year. One did not take place as the scheduled time coincided with the change in Secretary of State and other MoJ ministers; one was postponed due to parliamentary business and took place just after the year-end and is therefore not included in this report.

The code states that the lead non-executive board member should support the chair to ensure a board effectiveness evaluation is carried out annually. In view of the anticipated changes to the board membership and the number of meetingsheldin2021-22, the Board Effectiveness Evaluation has been deferred at this stage to ensure a robust and thorough review can be undertaken in 2022-23.

The code states that the chair of the Audit and Risk Assurance Committee (ARAC) should be a non-executive board member of the board, and that there should be at least one other non-executive board member of the board on the committee. The Departmental Board had chosen to have only one non-executive board member on our ARAC because it was felt that sufficient transparency of the committee’s work via written and verbal updates to the board showed appropriate challenge and provided the requisite assurance. Following the Board Effectiveness Review in 2020-21, an additional non-executive, Shirley Cooper, was asked to join ARAC.

The ARAC did not provide an annual report to the board because timely written and verbal updates are provided throughout the year.

Identifying and managing conflicts of interest

Section 4.3 of the Civil Service Management Code sets out the standard of propriety for Civil Servants. It states that, ‘civil servants must not misuse their official position or information acquired in the course of their official duties to further their private interests or those of others’.

The MoJ utilises the Civil Service HR policy on declaration and management of outside interests and has introduced a toolkit to support the application of the policy within the MoJ and which sets out the expectations and process for declaring an interest. It is the responsibility of the individual to declare all interests (actual, potential or perceived) that could be relevant to their role. Failure to do so could result in action being taken against the individual in line with the relevant conduct or discipline policy. The full process is detailed on the MoJ intranet which is accessible to all staff.

The MoJ’s transparency unit holds a register of declarations of interests for all senior civil servants (SCS), special advisers, advisers and contractors. This includes details of any financial interests declared, secondary employment and appointments, personal interests and any other relevant interests. The transparency unit supports line managers to take necessary mitigating action where a declaration of interest has been made.

In line with the current declaration of interests policy for special advisers, all special advisers have declared any relevant interests or confirmed they do not consider they have any relevant interests. I have considered these returns and the following relevant interests are set out in public:

Full name and role: Beatrice Timpson, special adviser to Dominic Raab, Secretary of State for Justice

Details of any interests: Miss Timpson has a shareholding in Kier Group and Relx Plc. Miss Timpson has recused herself from any detailed discussions or decision-making related to these organisations.

Business appointment rules

All officials must obtain written permission before undertaking any outside work (paid or unpaid). In addition, they must make an application under the business appointment rules if they intend to move on from the Civil Service so that any risk of conflict can be identified and managed and any necessary mitigants imposed.

The department’s transparency unit has also put in place a robust procedure for managing the application of business appointment rules and ensuring appropriate records are maintained. Full details on the procedure are available to all staff on the MoJ intranet. In compliance with business appointment rules, the department is transparent in the advice given to individual applications for senior staff, including special advisers. Advice regarding specific business appointments has been published on GOV.UK in line with the Cabinet Office commission requirements. The transparency unit also liaise with the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments for applications from Directors General or grades SCS 3 and above.

Risk management framework

The department’s risk management framework sets out the principles, concepts and accountabilities that underpin how we manage risk in alignment with the Orange Book: Management of Risk - Principles and Concepts. Risk management is an essential part of our governance and leadership, and fundamental to the way that the organisation is directed, managed and controlled at all levels.

As Principal Accounting Officer, supported by the ARAC, I have established the organisation’s overall approach to risk management.

Responsibilities for the management of areas of risk are devolved through the organisational structure, defined roles and responsibilities, and delegated authorities. Responsibility for the operation of the risk framework is delegated to the Chief Operating Officer.

The Chief Risk Officer is responsible for leading the organisation’s overall approach to risk management on behalf of the Chief Operating Officer. They are proactively involved with and influence governance and decision-making forums including the ARAC. The Chief Risk Officer is responsible for:

• setting the framework and guidance in accordance with the principles in the Orange Book
• assessing compliance with this to drive continuous improvement in risk maturity
• supporting understanding of the risk landscape and defining and assessing the department’s management of principal and emerging risk within the nature and extent of risks that the department is exposed to and willing to take to achieve its objectives

Our risk management framework has continued to improve throughout 2021-22:

• the department’s identification, analysis and assessment of its principal and emerging risks was refreshed in April 2021, as our Outcome Delivery Plan was agreed and in accordance with allocative choices made following the Spending Review

• our principal risks (see pages 22 and 23) have been considered and discussed by the Executive Committee quarterly and reported to the ARAC and Departmental Board – in 2021, a Finance, Risk and Performance Committee was introduced to add additional rigour to this reporting
• our strategy, strategic finance, planning, risk management and performance teams worked together closely to ensure that risks informed our Spending Review preparations and the business plan for 2022-23
• risks are routinely assessed as a part of investment decisions and within the lifecycle of our projects, programmes and our commercial relationships

Managing COVID-19 impacts

The COVID-19 pandemic continued to impact the nature and level of risks that we faced throughout 2021-22 and our position on risk tolerance has dynamically evolved to ensure we can support changing government guidelines and the rapid and innovative decision-making needed to protect our people and maintain our services during this extended period. Throughout the year, the department has sought to begin to return services to pre-pandemic levels while responding as necessary to changes in restrictions and guidance. Many of the policies and approaches, such as robust testing in prisons to manage the pandemic and Nightingale courts to help tackle case backlogs, remained in place for at least part of the year. Further details on the safety measures taken during the pandemic in prisons and courts are contained in the Priority 1 and Priority 3 sections of the performance report (pages 24 and 33).

The criminal justice system strategic command continued to be mobilised until March 2022 to provide criminal justice sector co-ordination and co-operation to determine or assist appropriate responses where essential activities across the system were at risk of failure. This included oversight of ‘task and finish’ working groups to mobilise extraordinary delivery, including groups on victims and witnesses, on transportation and transfer, and technology enabled justice.

The Departmental Operations Centre (DOC) has continued to provide assurance to the Executive Committee on the ongoing risks to the resilience of our services, with a focus on risks related to the safety and wellbeing of our people, the resilience of supply chains, continuing safe access to and maintenance of our estate, and the availability and continuity of technologies to support hybrid ways of working.

Decisions on how to respond operationally to the likely impacts of significant COVID-19 outbreaks and the need for further measures were made by executive agency chief executives, supported by their boards, based on the parameters of agreed national frameworks (prisons and HMCTS) and exceptional delivery models (probation), which provided specific detail on the level of operational decision-making. Where decisions were required that went beyond these frameworks, proposals were presented to ministers for decision, following engagement with the Executive Committee.

Business continuity

The business continuity and resilience team has continued to support the department to meet the challenges of the last year, including those presented by the COVID-19 pandemic, by co-ordinating cross-departmental planning and rigorously testing response plans, and engaging with government-wide resilience programmes.

The team’s work has provided oversight of, and support for, preparedness activity across the department, including:

• continuing to roll out a cross-departmental business continuity tool, which will improve the consistency of reporting
• reviewing and updating corporate business continuity management system documentation for the department
• conducting cross-departmental self-assessment exercises against international standards
• Producing horizon scanning reports detailing systemic threats to the department, working with the Civil Contingencies Secretariat on emerging and cross-cutting issues

The DOC has operated throughout 2021-22 to provide oversight and assurance over resilience and the ability of the department to respond to emerging scenarios.

The team will ensure that the department is ready to apply for ‘alignment certification’ to the International Standard ISO22301 Security and Resilience: Business Continuity Management Systems.

Health and safety

The department is fully committed to protecting the health, safety and wellbeing of our employees, the judiciary, those in custody, contractors and all our visitors. In support of this aim we review our corporate health and safety and fire safety policies annually. These provide a clear overarching strategy and the delivery requirements for compliance upon which we report against during the year.

Information security

The MoJ governs security, data protection and information matters through the Information and Security Risk Board which meets bi-monthly. The board is chaired by the Chief Operating Officer, who is also the MoJ senior information risk owner (SIRO) and is attended by executive agency SIROs and functional lead SIROs and non-executive directors. It is also attended by the MoJ Chief Security Officer, Chief Information Security Officer and Data Protection Officer.

The purpose of the board is to monitor the department’s cross-cutting security, information and personal data risks and govern mitigating action to reduce those risks, which are on the departmental strategic risk register.

The ICO issued the MoJ with an enforcement notice on 12 January 2022 as site access issues during the pandemic required changes to the ways of working in relation to subject access requests (SARs), which meant partial responses were sent to offenders. The enforcement notice requires MoJ to respond in full to those offenders in accordance with its legal obligation. The deadline set by the ICO to clear the backlog of offender SARs and ensure no further backlogs accumulate is 31 December 2022. This is being driven through the offender SAR team, with additional third-party support to help process the backlog of historical requests. There is ongoing discussion with the ICO regarding progress in meeting the requirements in the enforcement notice.

Counter fraud

The department’s policy on fraud, bribery and corruption is one of zero tolerance across the spectrum of its diverse activities and its engagement with official bodies and third parties.

The Chief Operating Officer has overall responsibility for counter fraud in the department and the Governance, Risk and Assurance Director is the nominated counter fraud champion, supported by a dedicated Head of Counter Fraud, who leads our counter fraud centre of expertise (CoE). The CoE provides a business partner capability to executive agencies and arm’s length bodies to support understanding and management of their respective response to the threat from fraud, bribery and corruption, ensuring compliance with the counter fraud functional standard. A review of the management of fraud risk across our executive agencies and other arm’s length bodies evidenced a mature and well-embedded approach to counter fraud. Additionally, the CoE drives awareness of the threat from fraud, ensures staff know their responsibilities, and provides practical advice and guidance in the event of an incident or report to ensure a proper response by the most appropriate authority.

The department recognises that some necessary changes to payment processes as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic introduced additional or new fraud risks. A programme of post event assurance was undertaken through 2021-22 to ensure any additional fraud risks were understood and remedial actions taken where appropriate. No fraud has been detected as a result of these changes. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) implemented 22 contingency measures in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Testing found some low value and low volume errors as a result of three of these contingency measures and action has been taken to address the processes that resulted in those errors.

Whistleblowing

We actively encourage employees to speak out and raise concerns about wrongdoing. Our current ‘Raising a concern (including whistleblowing)’ policy, procedures and supporting toolkits provide advice and guidance on the process for raising concerns (including public interest disclosures) and advise on the protection afforded to whistleblowers who raise concerns. The policy is accessible to all staff across all the department’s intranet platforms.

During the period 1 April 2021 to 31 March 2022, the department reported eight official whistleblowing cases. Complaints of harassment, bullying and discrimination are reported separately under the department’s grievance policy. Complaints relating to corruption in HMPPS are dealt with by the HMPPS counter corruption unit.

Nominated officers are continuing to work closely with the department’s counter fraud and investigations team to ensure that staff raising fraud-related concerns get immediate support and understand the protections afforded to them under the policy. A cross-team working group was established in 2021, with representatives from the HR policy team, transparency unit, MoJ counter fraud CoE and HMPPS counter corruption unit to improve processes and streamline reporting routeways.

We continue to engage across the department to ensure our ‘Raising a concern’ policies and procedures are clear and aligned with the civil service employee policies.

Internal control framework

As the Principal Accounting Officer, I am responsible for ensuring that the department, its executive agencies and other arm’s length public bodies operate effectively through a balanced view of opportunity and risk. This includes the design and operation of internal controls to safeguard the use of resources and to gain the necessary assurances over value for money and the quality of delivery. This internal control is supported through a framework of delegated authorities and the standards, policies and practices set and monitored through our governance and risk management frameworks.

COVID-19 response and recovery

In HMPPS, COVID-19 command structures established in March 2020 were maintained with regular review of operational delivery under the COVID-19 Prisons National Framework and Probation COVID-19 exceptional delivery models. Probation National Standards replaced exceptional delivery models in January2022and the Prisons National Framework ended in May 2022. The HMPPS Annual Report and Accounts provides further details at https://www.gov.uk/.

In courts and tribunals, we continued to work with the judiciary and court and tribunal users to maximise our productivity and continue to provide services safely. We opened more courtrooms and hearing rooms which had previously closed due to COVID-19 safety measures. The Lord Chancellor endorsed – on a short-term, timebound basis and at the discretion of local judiciary – a flexible approach known as temporary operating arrangements enabling courts to open for longer. Judges were given greater flexibility to free up space in court buildings by scheduling pre-trial preparation hearings online. We extended the leases of Nightingale courts, and these measures in combination have been crucial in helping reduce delays during the pandemic. For more information on Nightingale courts, please refer to the Priority Outcome 3 section in the performance report (page 33).

Functional reform

Corporate and professional functions play a vital role in the MoJ and include: analytical services, commercial, communications, digital and technology, property, finance, HR, project delivery, security, counter fraud, debt, and grants. Functions support collaboration across organisational boundaries, and efficient and effective delivery of public services. Functional standards are set by each function to provide direction and advice for people working in and with the UK government.

On 1 October 2021, functional standards became mandatory in departments and their arm’s length bodies.

Finance

As the Principal Accounting Officer, I plan to use resources affordably and sustainably within agreed limits. I formally delegate authority to commit resources and incur expenditure ensuring compliance with the financial controls, including those mandated by HM Treasury and the Cabinet Office, as set out in our spending control framework. These controls are designed and operated to ensure that the organisation and the arm’s length public bodies it sponsors operate effectively and to the high standard of probity expected. Each budget holder is required to check expenditure to ensure that all transactions are legitimate and in line with anticipated spend, and to keep records of all approvals with supporting documents. Any anomalies are investigated, with action taken as appropriate, including, where necessary, disciplinary action. Non-compliance and remedial actions are reported to the Finance, Performance and Risk Committee.

In 2020-21, we reported that following a compliance audit, HMRC concluded that incorrect employment status determinations were made by the department. We have since conducted an in-depth review of our application of IR35 regulations. This work is ongoing, given the complex nature of the regulations and how HMRC’s application of them is evolving over time.

We have also set up a new IR35 team to deal with all issues around tax relating to off-payroll workers, who offer advice to ensure compliance with associated tax legislation.

During 2021-22, we have taken steps to improve controls around our payroll and manual payments processes. We have also introduced improved monitoring of the use of government procurement cards.

Commercial

The Chief Commercial Officer holds the delegated commercial authority to sign, vary or extend commercial contracts on behalf of the Secretary of State, entering the department into a commercial agreement with a third-party provider. The delegated commercial authority for property related transactions, such as property deeds, licences and leases, on behalf of the department is held by the Chief Property Officer. This delegation provides authority to manage and approve commitments and expenditure within allocated budgets. Both financial and commercial authorities are exercised in partnership to control these commercial arrangements and third- party spend. Unless specific exemptions have been agreed, national contracts are used where they exist.

Spending by grant recipients

During the year the department has provided funding to multiple programmes. The most significant programmes included:

Total grant funding: £248.1 million

(2020-21: £225.5 million)

Youth Justice Grant

£81.9 million

(2020-21: £75.1 million) To support reducing the level of youth offending, the number of first-time entrants to the justice system, and the use of youth custody

Witness Service

£11.1 million

(2020-21: £10.7 million)

To provide emotional and practical support and information to victims and witnesses giving evidence at criminal courts across England and Wales

Rape and sexual abuse

£16.4 million

(2020-21: £13.9 million) To provide direct and front line support to victims of rape and sexual violence

Local commissioning of victims’ services*

£115.1 million

(2020-21: £103.7 million)

Other grants

£23.6 million

(2020-21: £22.1 million)

Grants funded via 42 Police and Crime Commissioners for provision of victims’ services

Notes:

*Includes £4.8 million for child sexual abuse for the local commissioning of victims’ services and £3.8 million additional payments for pre-trial support for witnesses and exploring the benefits of full local commissioning for sexual violence support services.

As part of MoJ’s finance operating model, the grants centre of excellence (CoE) provides a view of the department’s grant giving in order to improve the effectiveness of grant spend, and to strengthen governance and assurance.

The department also operates a grants challenge panel. The panel has oversight of all grants and ensures a strong focus on value for money by:

• scrutinising and assessing all proposed and existing grants annually and as required for new grants
• providing constructive challenge and advice to grant sponsors
• ensuring consistency across the department with regard in particular to grant necessity and appropriateness, benefits, risk and award level
• supporting financial processes, including the allocations process

Projects and programmes

The department’s projects and programmes are each led by a senior responsible owner (SRO) who is accountable for the delivery of each project and is responsible for ensuring that the project delivers the business case benefits and outcomes. The accountability and responsibilities of an SRO is set out in a statement or letter. The governance structure, including any responsibilities shared or delegated by the SRO is clearly articulated. The accountabilities and responsibilities of the sponsor (where applicable)provide an appropriate strategic and/or policy context for the project, but do not in any way dilute or compromise the accountability of the SRO for delivery of the project.

The appointment of an SRO to a major project is endorsed by the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA). Where the SRO is dependent on functions and services, agreed mechanisms are in place to hold relevant leads to account. The SRO should have sufficient control or influence over the delivery chain in order to deliver the project. We test the effectiveness of SRO delivery via regular reviews and independent assurance. All major projects require an individual project Integrated Assurance and Approvals Plan, quality assured by our Project Delivery Assurance Team and the Infrastructure and Major Project Authority and reported to our Portfolio Committee. Our projects are assured using the standard gateway assurance review process. Business cases above £10 million are also assured through our keyholder process, utilising a panel of functional experts to test against their relevant functional standards.

Security: cyber, personnel and physical

During 2021-22, we have taken steps to address cyber security risks with our legacy technology, particularly in MoJ’s business critical IT systems. We have also centred resource on security monitoring, which is an area we need to improve on in the Cabinet Office minimum cyber security standards.

On personnel security, we have reviewed all our SCS roles to ensure existing SCS carry appropriate levels of security clearance. All SCS roles are assessed at the recruitment stage to ensure consistency of approach. We have introduced a process for developed vetting aftercare, which is an annual review of developed vetting clearance. We are working with the Cabinet Office on implementing the vetting modernisation programme. On physical security, we have carried out a physical site assessment of MoJ’s four corporate HQ buildings and we are working with property group to address the recommendations in those assessments.

The team has had a focus on security culture to raise awareness of good practice so that people can take personal responsibility for embedding good security behaviour into everything they do. We have recruited 110 security champions, developed and rolled out training to staff and reviewed our security policies.

Data protection

Last year, the MoJ data protection team became a team of certified data protection professionals. To demonstrate compliance with the legislation and to ensure MoJ knows what its personal data assets are, who is responsible for them, where they are held and who they are shared with, the team developed a programme of work, with MoJ colleagues to record all assets on OneTrust (the department’s data protection compliance tool).The team also devised a training and audit programme which is embedding robust policy and governance frameworks and recording MoJ processing activities.

The Information Commissioner’s Office carried out an audit on the LAA, focusing on two areas: governance and accountability and information security. MoJ received a ‘reasonable’ rating for both areas and we are implementing the recommendations in the report.

Looking forward, we will continue to carry out mitigating activity to reduce the principal identified departmental personal data risks, including data subject rights, third-party assurance, information security and policies and processes. Since April 2021, we have reported 14 personal data breaches to the ICO. A summary of incidents involving personal data reported to the ICO during 2021-22 is on page 56.

Information services

Our information services division successfully launched the information wise strategy and will continue to embed good information practice across the MoJ group over the coming year.

Data

We have an ambition to be a data-led and digital department that delivers for citizens. We will use data to support analysis, drive innovation, deliver improved productivity and enable better decision-making. This year we have been developing a data strategy to seize the full potential of data and technology. This will take a systematic approach to data, making high quality data and insight available to our users. This goes hand-in-hand with our Justice Digital Strategy to ensure our technology is fit for purpose – now and in the future. We have allocated dedicated tech debt funding to support in addressing priority legacy technology.

Quality of information

Quality assurance of analysis is regularly reviewed, and the department has analytical quality assurance processes which include:

• improving the quality of the analysis behind cases
• advice on analytical quality and develop tools and processes to drive improvement
• annual review of the business-critical models
• evaluation of policy delivery to ensure expected outcomes are realised or otherwise

All analytical advice is underpinned by quality assurance to provide confidence to the Departmental Board. A powerful public example of transparent assured data in the creation to the crime and adult rape scorecards, which has increased assurance over how the whole criminal justice system is working in partnership and enhanced transparency to provide insights to the public and professionals alike.

Environmental sustainability

Governance and assurance of sustainability across MoJ is co-ordinated by the climate change and sustainability unit. Performance is monitored by the MoJ Senior Sustainability Board.

Environmental sustainability has been recognised as an ‘enabler’ in our Outcome Delivery Plan, and particular areas of focus for MoJ in 2021-22 included net zero carbon, Greening Government Commitments, biodiversity and embedding sustainability in our processes and governance arrangements. We have also undertaken an organisation wide climate change risk assessment.

MoJ’s sustainability strategies and policies are published online at GOV.UK and in the last year MoJ has published an updated sustainable construction and BREEAM policy.

For further information on sustainability within the department, see page 44.

Arm’s length bodies (ALBs)

As Principal Accounting Officer, where I don’t fulfil the role personally, I have appointed Senior Sponsors for each ALB.

Continued assurance over the management and performance of our ALBs (excluding executive agencies), and other statutory office holders and associated offices is provided to each senior sponsor primarily by our ALBs Centre of Expertise (the ALB CoE).

I have also established a programme of work to update all framework documents to meet revised HM Treasury requirements.

The ALB CoE is also responsible for ensuring that diverse and high-quality public appointments are made to ALBs, and for carrying out periodic reviews of public bodies in line with Cabinet Office guidance. The relationship between the department and ALBs is informed by the Cabinet Office guidance–‘Partnerships with arm’s length bodies: Code of good practice’.

The arrangements for providing proportionate oversight and engagement with ALBs include:

• an annual assessment of the optimum risk based partnership arrangement between the department and each ALB
• quarterly or six-monthly holding-to-account meetings between the ALB CoE’s assurance partners, finance business partners, policy partners and ALBs, with relevant risks escalated as appropriate to the business group risk register or the departmental risk register
• quarterly updates to senior officials about the oversight of ALBs
• regular attendance at the departmental ARAC to provide assurance in respect of ALBs’ performance, finance and management of risk

The ALB response relating to COVID-19 continued to be reported into MoJ’s main Departmental Operations Centre through the ALB CoE.

Review of effectiveness

As Principal Accounting Officer, I am required to conduct an annual review of the effectiveness of the department’s governance structures, risk management and internal control framework. This review is informed by:

• feedback from senior management with delegated responsibility within the department about the use of resources, responses to risks, compliance with standards and the extent to which in-year budgets and other targets have been met
• information from the department’s executive agencies and other arm’s length bodies on the performance of their organisations and their relevant boards
• insight into the department’s performance from internal audit, including an audit opinion on the overall adequacy and effectiveness of the organisation’s framework of governance, risk and control
• the work of the National Audit Office through their financial audit of the accounts of the department and its ALBs and their value for money reports assessing the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which public money has been deployed
• the views of the ARAC on the design and operation of the department’s risk management and internal control frameworks
• the oversight and assurance provided by the Infrastructure and Projects Authority of the department’s change projects that are included in the Government’s Major Projects Portfolio

As the Principal Accounting Officer, I am responsible for ensuring there is an effective process in place for monitoring and reporting governance issues during the year. In doing so, I rely on assurance from the agency CEOs and directors general who have delegated authority appropriate to their responsibilities. In addition to the in-year assurances provided through the assurance framework, as described in the Accounting Officer System Statement, I prepare the department’s governance statement with sight of the following annual assurance process.

This includes:

• completion of annual director assurance statements across MoJ HQ (which have been reviewed and countersigned by the relevant director general) to provide an assessment of the level of compliance against departmental policies and procedures
• information on levels of compliance with relevant government functional standards from function leads, complemented by assurance statements from function leads on their assessment of compliance within the department
• an overview of material issues from executive agencies and other ALBs, assessed for materiality at MoJ level, supported by a formal assurance statement and narrative from each Accounting Officer, providing an overview of compliance for their organisation

Internal audit

One of the main sources of independent assurance in the department comes from the activities of the internal audit function which provides me and the ARAC with a clear view on issues emerging from internal audit work.

The internal audit programme is closely linked to the principal risks of the department, its executive agencies and other ALBs. Arrangements are in place to ensure that I am made aware of any significant issues that indicate that risks are not being effectively managed. I am assured that the internal audit service complies with the public sector internal audit standards.

The MoJ group Chief Internal Auditor has provided a ‘moderate’ annual opinion on the department’s framework of governance, risk management and control, defined as ‘some improvements are required to enhance the adequacy and effectiveness of the framework of governance, risk management and control’. The overall opinion is also informed by the annual opinions provided across the department’s executive agencies and other ALBs, which have each have been given a moderate opinion.

Internal audit reported that oversight and board- level governance arrangements are operating in line with the Cabinet Office code, with work ongoing to drive further enhancements and improvements beyond this baseline. This is coupled with an increasing maturity in risk management and again a departmental appetite to continue to drive improvements. Their work has also referenced a continuing focus on pandemic recovery, providing positive findings in relation to deployment of revised and changing operating arrangements and effective oversight via the Departmental Operations Centre. They also commented that a strong approach to the Spending Review has been demonstrated providing financial stability for the department and throughout this process the impacts on the Outcome Delivery Plan have been clear.

The significant majority of assurance reports issued by internal audit were rated moderate, although some reports were rated ‘limited’, highlighting the need for improvement within individual policies, processes and oversight mechanisms. Work to embed the department’s functional structures and functional standards remains ongoing and internal audit have made observations in relation to establishing further clarity between functional and Agency/ALB responsibilities as this has an impact on driving compliance with policies and holding to account. Continuing embedding of these arrangements will help in establishing more effective assurance processes.

They have also referenced the ambition of the department to improve on the availability and use of data. They have observed examples of effective use of data in support of the development of policy and in the monitoring of achievement of the Outcome Delivery Plan objectives, but have also highlighted that their work across a number of areas in the department has shown that gaps exist in the availability of management information, which again impacts development of effective assurance frameworks.

Independent oversight of assurance arrangements

The department is subject to independent oversight in a number of areas and implements many of the recommendations made. This oversight includes:

• National Audit Office reports (including value for money) and the audit report for the annual report and accounts
• Independent Projects Authority reviews
• feedback from the Major Projects Review Group
• Cabinet Office and HM Treasury representation on programme boards
• HM Chief Inspector of Prisons publications and annual report
• HM Chief Inspector of Probation publications and annual report
• regular Independent Monitoring Board reports
• OFSTED reports

External audit

The notional cost of the statutory audit for the core department was £625,500 (2020-21: £575,000) which also includes the statutory external audit of the consolidated accounts, Office of the Accountant General and the Judicial Pension Scheme^{[footnote 4]}. The total cost of statutory external audits across the departmental group was £2,187,500, of which £480,500 was cash and £1,707,000 notional cost (2020-21: £2,017,000 comprising £427,000 cash and £1,590,000 notional cost). The notional external audit cost includes the cost of the HM Courts & Tribunals Service Trust Statement which is not consolidated as part of these accounts.

Overall conclusions

I am satisfied that I have effective governance and risk management frameworks and the necessary policies and procedures in place to provide a sound system of internal control to support the MoJ in delivering its statutory duties and to meet the aims and objectives set by ministers while safeguarding the public funds and assets for which I am responsible, in accordance with the responsibilities assigned to me in my letter of delegation and in Managing Public Money.

Antonia Romeo

Principal Accounting Officer 12 December 2022

Remuneration and staff report

The remuneration and staff report summarises the department’s policy on remuneration of ministers, executive board members, non-executive board members and staff. It also provides details of actual costs and contractual arrangements.

The remuneration and staff report has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Financial Reporting Manual as issued by HM Treasury.

Remuneration policy

The remuneration of senior civil servants (SCS) is set by the Prime Minister following independent advice from the Review Body on Senior Salaries. The Review Body on Senior Salaries also advises the Prime Minister from time to time on:

• the pay and pensions of MPs and their allowances
• peers’ allowances
• the pay, pensions and allowances of ministers and others whose pay is determined by the Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975 (as amended)

In reaching its recommendations, the Review Body on Senior Salaries has regard to the following considerations:

• the need to recruit, retain and motivate suitably able and qualified people to exercise their different responsibilities
• regional and local variations in labour markets and their effects on the recruitment and retention of staff
• government policies for improving the public services, including the requirement on departments to meet the output targets for the delivery of departmental services
• the funds available to departments as set out in the government’s departmental expenditure limits
• the government’s inflation target

The Review Body on Senior Salaries takes account of the evidence it receives about wider economic considerations and the affordability of its recommendations. Further information about the work of the Review Body on Senior Salaries can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/organisations/review-body-on-senior-salaries

Board members and senior civil servants remuneration

The salaries of MoJ Departmental Board members (excluding the ministerial and non-executive members) are determined in line with the Cabinet Office SCS reward policy. Non-consolidated performance-related payments for senior civil servants are determined by the Executive Committee (SCS Pay Band 1 and 2) and the Nominations Committee (SCS Pay Band 3).

Service contracts

The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 requires Civil Service appointments to be made on merit on the basis of fair and open competition.

Unless otherwise stated below, the officials covered by this report hold appointments which are open-ended and to which a notice period of three months would usually apply. Early termination, other than for misconduct, would result in the individual receiving compensation as set out in the Civil Service Compensation Scheme. Further information about the work of the Civil Service Commission can be found at: https://civilservicecommission.independent.gov.uk

Remuneration and pension entitlements

The following sections provide details of the remuneration and pension interests of the ministers and senior management of the department.

					2021-22					2020-21
Remuneration	Total amount of salary and fees	All taxable benefits (nearest £100)	Pension related benefits (nearest £1,000)1	Severance payments	2021-22 Total (nearest payments £1,000)	Total amount of salary and fees	All taxable benefits (nearest £100)	Pension related benefits (nearest £1,000)1	Severance payments	2020-21 Total (nearest £1,000)
Ministers	£	£	£	£		£	£	£	£	£
The Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP, Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (from 15 September 2021)2	33,753 (FYE 67,505)	-	-	-	34,000	-	-	-	-	-
The Rt Hon Robert Buckland KC MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (to 14 September 2021)	30752 (FYE 67,505)	-	7,000	16,876	54,000	67,505	-	17,000	-	84,000
Christopher Philp MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State for Justice (to 15 September 2021)	11187 (FYE 22,375)	-	3,000	-	14,000	22,375	-	5,000	-	28,000
The Rt Hon Lucy Frazer KC MP, Minister for Prisons and Probation (from 13 September to 15 September 2021)3	-	-	-	-	-	29,040 (FYE 31,680)	-	7,000	-	36,000
Victoria Atkins MP, Minister for Prisons and Probation (from 16 September 2021)	16228 (FYE 31,680)	-	4,000	-	20,000	-	-	-	-	-
Tom Pursglove MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (from 17 September 2021)4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
James Cartlidge MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (from 17 September 2021)4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Alex Chalk KC MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (to 15 September 2021)4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
The Rt Hon Kit Malthouse MP, Minister of State for Justice4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Lord David Wolfson of Tredegar KC4	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-

Notes to the table:

¹ The value of pension benefits accrued during the year is calculated as the real increase in pension multiplied by 20 plus the real increase in the lump sum less the contributions made by the individual. The real increases exclude increases due to inflation or any increase or decrease due to a transfer of pension rights.

² Dominic Raab MP opted out of the pension scheme.

³ Lucy Frazer MP returned to MoJ to take up an unpaid role as Minister of State.

⁴ Alex Chalk MP and James Cartlidge MP are paid by HM Treasury, Kit Malthouse MP and Tom Pursglove MP are paid by Home Office, Lord David Wolfson is an unpaid Parliamentary Under Secretary of State.

⁵ Information disclosed above relates to the period in which the individuals were in post as ministers.

					2021-22					2020-21
Remuneration	Total amount of salary and fees	All taxable benefits (nearest £100)	Bonuses paid	Pension related benefits (nearest £1,000)1	Total	Total amount of salary and fees	All taxable benefits (nearest £100)	Bonuses paid	Pension related benefits (nearest £1,000)1	Total
Senior managers	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Antonia Romeo, Permanent Secretary (from 18 January 21)	185-190	-	15-20	60	260-265	35-40 (185-190 FYE)	-	-	17	50-55
Sir Richard Heaton KCB, Permanent Secretary (to 28 August 2020)2	-	-	-	-	-	110-115 (190-195 FYE)	-	-	15	125-130
Mike Driver CB, Chief Financial Officer (to 28 August 2020) Interim Permanent Secretary (from 29 August 2020 to 17 January 2021)2	-	-	-	-	-	140-145 (180-185 FYE)	-	10-15	22	175-180
James McEwen, Interim Chief Financial Officer (to 19 January 2022), Chief Operating Officer (from 20 January 2022)	125-130	-	-	36	160-165	70-75 (125-130 FYE)	-	0-5	55	130-135
Jo Farrar, Chief Executive Officer HM Prison and Probation Services and Second Permanent Secretary Ministry of Justice 3,4	160-165	-	-	25	185-190	160-165	-	10-15	25	200-205
Nick Goodwin, Chief Executive Officer, HM Courts & Tribunals Service3,5 (from 14 March 2022)	5-10 (120-125 FYE)	-	-	1	5-10	-	-	-	-	-
Kevin Sadler, Interim Chief Executive Officer, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (to 25 March 2022)3,5	120-125	-	5-10	36	160-165	75-80 (120-125 FYE)	-	10-15	95	175-180
Susan Acland Hood, Chief Executive, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (to 21 August 2020)3	-	-	-	-	-	50-55 (130-135 FYE)	-	-	24	75-80
Jerome Glass, Director General of Policy and Strategy Group (from 2 November 2020)	120-125	-	0-5	69	190-195	45-50 (115-120 FYE)	-	0-5	55	105-110
James Bowler, Director General of Policy, Communication and Analysis Group (to 18 October 2020)	-	-	-	-	-	75-80 (140-145 FYE)	-	-	64	140-145

Notes to the table:

¹ The value of pension benefits accrued during the year is calculated as (the real increase in pension multiplied by 20) plus (the real increase in any lump sum) less (the contributions made by the individual). The real increases exclude increases due to inflation or any increase or decreases due to a transfer of pension rights.

² Sir Richard Heaton and Mike Driver chose not to be covered by the Civil Service pension arrangements and had a partnership pension account in 2020-21.

³ Dr Jo Farrar is remunerated by HMPPS, Nick Goodwin and Kevin Sadler are remunerated by HMCTS. Susan Acland Hood, during her tenure was remunerated by HMCTS.

⁴ Dr Jo Farrar is a member of the partnership pension scheme and as such did not accrue PCSPS pension benefits in 2021-22 and 2020-21. The employer contributions to her partnership pension account are included in the ‘Pension related benefits’ column of this table and CETV table below.

⁵ Nick Goodwin and Kevin Sadler’s remuneration is also published in the 2021-22 HMCTS annual report and accounts. Kevin Sadler’s bonus includes £2,000 relating to performance in 2021-22. Nick Goodwin held the role of Chief Executive and Public Guardian in the Office of the Public Guardian up to 13 March 2022. His remuneration up to that date is included in the OPG remuneration report.

Remuneration			2021-22			2020-21
Non-executive board members	Fees (excluding performance related remuneration)	All taxable benefits (nearest £100)	Bonuses paid	Fees (excluding performance related remuneration)	All taxable benefits (nearest £100)	Bonuses paid
	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Mark Rawlinson, lead non-executive member	20-25	-	-	20-25	-	-
Shirley Cooper, non-executive member	10-15	-	-	10-15	-	-
Nick Campsie, non-executive member	10-15	-	-	10-15	-	-
Paul Smith, non-executive member	20-25	-	-	20-25	-	-

Information disclosed above relates to the period in which the individuals were in post as senior managers or non-executive board members. None of the non-executive board members have pension entitlements with the department.

When a minister moves from one department to another, the exporting department pays their salary at the current rate of pay until the end of the month of departure, and the importing department pays in the following month at the appropriate salary plus any arrears.

Salary

‘Salary’ includes:

• gross salary
• overtime
• reserved rights to London weighting or London allowances
• recruitment and retention allowances
• private office allowances
• any other allowance to the extent that it is subject to UK taxation

This report is based on accrued payments made by the department and thus recorded in these accounts. In respect of ministers in the House of Commons, departments bear only the cost of the additional ministerial remuneration; the salary for their services as an MP: £81,932 (from 1 April 2021), and various allowances to which they are entitled are borne centrally. Ministers in the House of Lords do not receive a salary but rather an additional remuneration, which cannot be quantified separately from their ministerial salaries. This total remuneration, as well as the allowances to which they are entitled, is paid by the department and is therefore shown in full in the figures above.

All taxable benefits

Taxable benefits include all benefits in kind and taxable cash benefits. The monetary value of benefits in kind covers any benefits provided by the department and treated by HM Revenue and Customs as a taxable emolument. Benefits recognised relate to travel and subsistence.

Benefits in kind are an estimate, as the final value is to be agreed between the Secretary of State for Justice and HM Revenue and Customs.

Bonuses

Permanent Secretary bonuses are determined by the Permanent Secretary Remuneration Committee within Cabinet Office.

Bonuses for SCS Pay Band 3 are determined by the Permanent Secretary, with the advice of the Nominations Committee, which is chaired by the Permanent Secretary and includes a non-executive director and the group HR director. Bonuses are subject to in-year performance, following Cabinet Office guidance. The policy for non-consolidated performance related pay remains that such payments should be restricted to the top 25% of performers.

The bonuses reported in 2021-22 relate to performance in 2020-21 and the comparative bonuses reported for 2020-21 relate to performance in 2019-20.

Pension entitlements

Ministerial pensions (audited)

Pension benefits

Ministers	Accrued pension at age 65 as at 31 March 2022	Real increase in pension at age 65	CETV at 31 March 2022	CETV at 31 March 2021	Real increase/ (decrease) in CETV
	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
The Rt Hon Dominic Raab MP, Deputy Prime Minister, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (from 15 September 22)	-	-	-	-	-
The Rt Hon Robert Buckland KC MP, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice (to 14 September 2021)	5-10	0-2.5	119	110	3
The Rt Hon Lucy Frazer KC MP, Minister for Prisons and Probation (from 13 September to 15 September 2021)*	-	-	-	-	-
Christopher Philp MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (to 15 September 2021)	0-5	0-2.5	10	7	1
Victoria Atkins MP, Minister for Prisons and Probations (from 16 September 2021)	0-5	0-2.5	23	19	1
James Cartlidge MP Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (from 17 September 2021)*	-	-	-	-	-
Tom Pursglove MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (from 17 September 2021)*	-	-	-	-	-
The Rt Hon Kit Malthouse MP, Minister of State for Justice (from 14 February 2020)*	-	-	-	-	-
Alex Chalk KC MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (to 15 September 21)*	-	-	-	-	-
Lord David Wolfson of Tredegar KC	-	-	-	-	-

*These ministers were not paid by MoJ during the reporting year. Lord David Wolfson served as an unpaid minister therefore no pension benefits were received by them from the MoJ. Notes to the table: Information disclosed above relates to the full year, whereas dates included above relate to the period in which the individuals were in post as ministers.

Ministerial pension benefits

Pension benefits for ministers are provided by the Parliamentary Contributory Pension Fund(PCPF). The scheme is made under statute and the rules are set out in the Ministers’ Etc. Pension Scheme 2015, available at: http://qna.files.parliament.uk/ws-attachments/170890/original/PCPF MINISTERIAL SCHEME FINAL RULES.doc.

Those ministers who are MPs may also accrue an MPs’ pension under the PCPF (details of which are not included in this report). A new MPs’ pension scheme was introduced from May 2015, although members who were MPs and aged 55 or older on 1 April 2013 have transitional protection to remain in the previous MPs’ final salary pension scheme.

Benefits for ministers are payable from state pension age under the 2015 scheme. Pensions are revalued annually in line with pensions increase legislation both before and after retirement. The contribution rate from May 2015 is 11.1% and the accrual rate is 1.775% of pensionable earnings.

The figure shown for pension value includes the total pension payable to the member under both the pre- and post-2015 ministerial pension schemes.

Cash equivalent transfer value of ministerial pensions

This is the actuarially assessed capitalised value of the pension scheme benefits accrued by a member at a particular point in time. The benefits valued are the member’s accrued benefits and any contingent spouse’s pension payable from the scheme. A cash equivalent transfer value (CETV) is a payment made by a pension scheme or arrangement to secure pension benefits in another pension scheme or arrangement when the member leaves a scheme and chooses to transfer the pension benefits they have accrued in their former scheme. The pension figures shown relate to the benefits that the individual has accrued as a consequence of their total ministerial service, not just their current appointment as a minister. CETVs are calculated in accordance with the Occupational Pension al Schemes(Transfer Values)(Amendment) Regulations 2008 and do not take account of any actual or potential reduction to benefits resulting from Lifetime Allowance Tax which may be due when pension benefits are taken.

Real increase in value of the cash equivalent transfer value on ministerial pensions

This is the element of the increase in accrued pension funded by the exchequer. It excludes increases due to inflation and contributions paid by the minister. It is worked out using common market valuation factors for the start and end of the period.

Civil Service pension benefits

Pension benefits

Senior managers	Accrued pension and related lump sum at pension age as at 31 March 2022	Real increase in pension and related lump sum at pension age	CETV at 31 March 2022	CETV at 31 March 2021	Real increase/ (decrease) in CETV	Employer partnership pension account at 31 March 2022
	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Antonia Romeo, Permanent Secretary (from 18 January 21)	55-60 plus a lump sum of 80-85	2.5-5 plus a lump sum of 0	817	745	25	-
Jo Farrar, Second Permanent Secretary for Ministry of Justice and Chief Executive to HMPPS1	-	-	-	-	-	25
James McEwen, Interim Chief Financial Officer (to 19 January 2022) Chief Operating Officer (from 20 January 2022)	40-45	0-2.5	507	468	9	-
Susan Acland Hood, Chief Executive, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (to 21 August 2020)	-	-	-	656	-	-
Nick Goodwin, Chief Executive, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (from 15 March 2022)2	30-35 plus a lump sum of 55-60	0-2.5 plus a lump sum of 0	506	504	-
Kevin Sadler, Interim Chief Executive Officer, HM Courts & Tribunals Service (to 14 March 2022)2	55-60 plus a lump sum of 175 -180	0-2.5 plus a lump sum of 5-7.5	1,398	1,311	38	-
Jerome Glass, Director General, Policy and Strategy Group (from 2 November 2020)	35-40	2.5-5	443	385	33	-
James Bowler, Director General for Policy Strategy Group (to 18 October 2020)	-	-	-	844	-	-

Notes to the table:

¹ Dr Jo Farrar is a member of the partnership pension scheme. No PCSPS pension benefits were accrued in 2021-22 (2020-21: £0). There were no employer contributions to the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS).

² Nick Goodwin and Kevin Sadler’s remuneration are also published in the 2021-22 HMCTS annual report and accounts.

Pension benefits are provided through the civil service pension arrangements. From 1 April 2015 a new pension scheme for civil servants was introduced – the Civil Servants and Others Pension Scheme, or alpha, which provides benefits on a career average basis with a normal pension age equal to the member’s state pension age (or 65 if higher).

From that date all newly appointed civil servants and the majority of those already in service joined alpha. Prior to that date, civil servants participated in the Principal Civil Service Pension Scheme (PCSPS). The PCSPS has four sections: three providing benefits on a final salary basis (classic, premium or classic plus) with a normal pension age of 60; and one providing benefits on a whole career basis (nuvos) with a normal pension age of 65.

These statutory arrangements are unfunded with the cost of benefits met by monies voted by Parliament each year. Pensions pay able under classic, premium, classic plus, nuvos and alpha are increased annually in line with Pensions Increase legislation.

Existing members of the PCSPS who were within 10 years of their normal pension age on 1 April 2012 remained in the PCSPS after 1 April 2015. Those who were between 10 years and 13 years and 5 months from their normal pension age on 1 April 2012 will switch into alpha at some time between 1 June 2015 and 1 February 2022.

All members who switch to alpha have their PCSPS benefits ‘banked’, with those with earlier benefits in one of the final salary sections of the PCSPS having those benefits based on their final salary when they leave alpha. (The pension figures quoted for officials show pension earned in PCSPS or alpha – as appropriate. Where the official has benefits in both the PCSPS and alpha the figure quoted is the combined value of their benefits in the two schemes.) Members joining from October 2002 may opt for either the appropriate defined benefit arrangement or a ‘money purchase’ stakeholder pension with an employer contribution (partnership pension account).

Contribution rates

Employee contributions are salary-related and range between 4.6% and 8.05% for members of classic, premium, classic plus, nuvos and alpha. Benefits in classic accrue at the rate of 1/80th of final pensionable earnings for each year of service. In addition, a lump sum equivalent to three years’ initial pension is payable on retirement. For premium, benefits accrue at the rate of 1/60th of final pensionable earnings for each year of service. Unlike classic, there is no automatic lump sum. Classic plus is essentially a hybridwithbenefitsforservicebefore1October 2002 calculated broadly as per classic and benefits for service from October 2002 worked out as in premium. In nuvos a member builds up a pension based on their pensionable earnings during their period of scheme membership.

At the end of the scheme year (31 March) the member’s earned pension account is credited with 2.3% of their pensionable earnings in that scheme year and the accrued pension is uprated in line with Pensions Increase legislation. Benefits in alpha build up in a similar way to nuvos, except that the accrual rate is 2.32%. In all cases members may opt to give up (commute) their pension for a lump sum up to the limits set by the Finance Act 2004.

The partnership pension account is a stakeholder pension arrangement. The employer makes a basic contribution of between 8% and 14.75% (depending on the age of the member) into a stakeholder pension product chosen by the employee from the appointed provider – Legal & General. The employee does not have to contribute, but where they do make contributions, the employer will match these up to a limit of 3% of pensionable salary (in addition to the employer’s basic contribution). Employers also contribute a further 0.5% of pensionable salary to cover the cost of centrally-provided risk benefit cover (death in service and ill health retirement).

The accrued pension quoted is the pension the member is entitled to receive when they reach pension age, or immediately on ceasing to be an active member of the scheme if they are already at or over pension age. Pension age is 60 for members of classic, premium and classic plus, 65 for members of nuvos, and the higher of 65 or state pension age for members of alpha. (The pension figures quoted for officials show pension earned in PCSPS or alpha–as appropriate. Where the official has benefits in both the PCSPS and alpha the figure quoted is the combined value of their benefits in the two schemes, but note that part of that pension may be payable from different ages.)

Further details about the civil service pension arrangements can be found at: www.civilservicepensionscheme.org.uk

Fair pay disclosure

This section has been subject to audit.

Reporting bodies are required to disclose the relationship between the remuneration of the highest-paid director in their organisation and the lower quartile, median and upper quartile remuneration of the organisation’s workforce.

The banded remuneration of the highest-paid director in the financial year 2021-22 was £200,000-205,000 (2020-21: £185,000-190,000).

This was 7.4 times (2020-21: 7) the median remuneration of the workforce, which was£27,381 (2020-21: £26,611).

In 2021-22, 8 (2020-21: 3) employees received remuneration in excess of the highest-paid director. Remuneration ranged from £15,000-£20,000 to £365,000-£370,000 (restated 2020-21: £15,000-£20,000 to £210,000 to 215,000). These were agency staff who worked for a part of the reporting year. In line with fair pay disclosure guidance, remuneration for agency workers has been annualised to arrive at the figures disclosed and does not reflect actual remuneration payments made to agency staff in 2021-22. No permanent staff received remuneration in excess of the highest paid director.

Total remuneration includes salary, non-consolidated performance-related pay and benefits-in-kind. It does not include severance payments, employer pension contributions and the cash equivalent transfer value of pensions.

Table 1 - Annual percentage change in remuneration of highest paid director and staff

2021-22

	Salary	Bonus payments
Staff average	4%	-86%*
Highest paid director	0%	N/A**

*There has been a significant decrease in bonus payments made in the year, as the 2020-21 figures include bonus payments relating to COVID-19. Bonuses paid in 2021-22 were lower as the COVID-19 bonus scheme was no longer applicable.

**The highest paid director in 2020-21 did not receive a bonus payment.

Table 2 - Ratio between the highest paid director’s total remuneration and the pay and benefits of employees in the lower quartile, median and upper quartile

	Lower quartile	Median	Upper quartile
2021-22	8.75:1	7.40:1	5.93:1
2020-21	8.64:1	7.05:1	5.60:1

Table 3 - Lower quartile, median and upper quartile remuneration for staff

		Lower quartile		Median		Upper quartile
	2021-22	2020-21	2021-22	2020-21	2021-22	2020-21
Salary	20,975	N/A*	24,689	N/A*	31,649	N/A*
Total remuneration	23,144	21,713	27,381	26,611	34,143	33,492

*2021-22 is the first year these disclosures are required

In 2020-21, following approval from Cabinet Office and HM Treasury, a three-year pay deal was implemented for MoJ employees. The three-year pay deal runs from 1 August 2020 until 31 July 2023.

The implementation of the pay award in 2021-22 increased average staff remuneration.

The banded remuneration of our highest paid director increased due to the payment of a bonus in 2021-22. They did not receive an increase in salary.

Compensation for loss of office

This section has been subject to audit.

The former Lord Chancellor, Robert Buckland KC MP, received compensation in 2021-22 of 16,876. No minister received compensation in 2020-21. No senior managers received compensatory payments in 2021-22 and in 2020-21.

Staff numbers and composition

This section has been subject to audit.

Staff costs

Departmental group

	Permanently employed staff*	Other	Ministers**	Total 2021-22	Total 2020-21
	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0
Wages and salaries	2,794,148	213,563	330	3,008,041	2,847,025
Social security costs***	285,251	1,500	38	286,789	270,398
Other pension costs	840,601	15	-	840,616	670,887
Sub total	3,920,000	215,078	368	4,135,446	3,788,310
Early departure costs	15,159	-	-	15,159	9,990
Early departure provisions	-	-	-	-	43
Add inward secondments	17,578	13,163	-	30,741	16,355
Less recoveries in respect of outward secondments	(32,769)	-	-	(-32,769)	(13,570)
Total net costs	3,919,968	228,241	368	4,148,577	3,801,128
Of which:
Core department and agencies	3,695,324	200,052	368	3,895,744	3,574,478
Non-departmental public bodies	224,644	28,189	-	252,833	226,650
	3,919,968	228,241	368	4,148,577	3,801,128

*Includes staff on permanent and fixed term contracts.

**Ministers’ costs include costs of Scotland Offices ministers and staff which are recovered as secondment income.

***The apprenticeship levy, implemented across England on 6 April 2017, is an employment tax of 0.5% of the annual pay bill and these costs are included within social security costs. Further details of the apprenticeship levy can be found on GOV.UK

During the period ended 31 March 2022, £13.1 million of staff costs (2020-21: £10.3 million) have been capitalised.

The department has disclosed information on the number of hours and associated cost to the department of employees who were relevant union officials during 2020-21 in Annex F.

Under the Ministerial and Other Salaries Act 1975, the salary and social security costs of the Lord Chancellor, included under ‘Ministers’ above, are paid from the consolidated fund. In 2021-22theLordChancellor’sfullyearequivalent salary was £67,505 (2020-21: £67,505) and the associated combined social security costs were £13,000 (2020-21: £13,000). One severance payment of £16,876 was made to ministers in 2021-22 (2020-21: nil).

Special advisers are temporary civil servants. In order to improve efficiency, the administration of staff costs for all special advisers across government was moved to the Cabinet Office in July 2019, with corresponding budget cover transfers. Therefore, special adviser costs are now reported in the Cabinet Office annual report and accounts. Special advisers remain employed by the respective departments of their appointing minister.

In line with the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 and the ‘Model contract for special advisers’, a special adviser’s appointment automatically ends when their appointing minister leaves office. Special advisers are not entitled to a notice period but receive contractual termination benefits to compensate for this. Termination benefits are based on length of service and capped at six months’ salary. If a special adviser returns to work for the government following the receipt of a severance payment, the payment is required to be repaid, less a deduction in lieu of wages for the period until their return. Termination costs for special advisers are reported in the Cabinet Office annual report and accounts.

The PCSPS and the Civil Servants and Other Pension Scheme(known as alpha) are unfunded multi-employer defined benefit schemes where the department is unable to identify its share of the underlying assets and liabilities. The scheme actuary valued the scheme as at 31 March 2016. Details can be found in the accounts of the Cabinet Office: Civil Super annuation on GOV.UK

For 2021-22, employers’ contributions of £531.5 million were payable to the PCSPS (2020-21: £513 million) at one of four rates which ranged from 26.6% to 30.3% (2020-21: 26.6% to 30.3%) of pensionable pay, based on salary bands (34.1% for prison officer grades with reserved rights). The scheme actuary reviews employer contributions approximately every four years following a full scheme valuation. The contribution rates reflect benefits as they are accrued, not when the costs are actually incurred, and reflect past experience of the scheme.

Employer pension contributions equivalent to 0.5% (2020-21:0.5%) of pension able pay were payable to the PCSPS to cover the cost of the future provision of lump sum benefits on death in service and ill health retirement of employees in the PCSPS.

Past employees of the probation trusts, and Local Government Pension Scheme probation staff who transferred to community rehabilitation companies and HMPPS National Probation Service (NPS) are covered by the provisions of the Local Government Pension Scheme via one pension fund, Greater Manchester Pension Fund (GMPF), administered by Tameside Metropolitan Borough Council. For the year to 31 March 2022, HMPPS paid employers’ contributions of £145.8 million to GMPF, relating to current probation staff, at 29.6% (2020-21: £98.5 million at 29.6%).

Employees of Cafcass are members of the Local Government Pension Scheme through the West Yorkshire Pension Fund (WYPF). For 2021-22 employer contributions of £16.2 million were payable at a rate of 19.4% (2020-21 £15.8 million at a rate of 19.4%).

Employees can opt to open a partnership pension account, a stakeholder pension with an employer contribution. Employers’ contributions to partnership pension accounts were £1.7 million (2020-21: £2.5 million) and were paid to one or more of the three appointed stakeholder pension providers. Employer contributions, which are age-related, ranged from 8% to 14.75% (2020-21: 8% to 14.75%) of pensionable pay.

Employers also match employee contributions up to 3% of pensionable pay.

The NEST Defined Contribution Scheme is offered to individuals working in HMPPS who are not civil servants and therefore not eligible to join the Civil Service Pension Scheme or the Local Government Pension Scheme. For the year to 31 March 2022, employer contributions of £0.04 million were paid (2020-21: £0.04 million).

In addition, other pension costs include GMPF pension costs of £122.1 million (2020-21: £29.4 million, WYPF pension costs of £21.1 million (2020-21: £10 million) and other pension scheme costs of £2.3 million (2020- 21: £1.76 million) for some of the department’s ALBs. For further details on employers’ pension contributions and contribution rates for the LSC, Cafcass and Probation pension schemes, refer to Note 25.

35 persons (2020-21: 63 persons) retired early on ill health grounds; the total additional accrued pension liabilities in the year were £160,000 (2020-21: £180,000).

Judicial costs

Departmental group

	Senior judicial salaries	Other judicial salaries	Fee-paid judiciary	Total 2021-22	Total 2020-21
	£0	£0	£0	£0	£0
Wages and salaries	137,958	111,870	141,941	391,769	366,546
Social security costs	18,517	14,843	14,612	47,972	44,588
Other pension costs	68,704	56,404	48,657	173,765	168,844
Total net costs	225,179	183,117	205,210	613,506	579,978

The Judicial Pension Scheme is an unfunded multi-employer defined benefit scheme which prepares its own accounts, but for which the department (through HM Courts & Tribunals Service) is unable to identify its share of the liabilities. Details of the most recent completed valuation (as at March 2016) are available at:

www.gov.uk/government/groups/judicial-pension-board#publications

Judicial pensions are paid out of the consolidated fund where the judicial office holder’s salary was paid from that fund, or the Judicial Pension Scheme where the salary has been paid from the department’s supply estimate. Contributions to the Judicial Pension Scheme have been made at a rate of 51.35%.

The benefits payable are governed by the provisions of either: the Judicial Pensions Regulations 2015 (for newly appointed judicial office holders after 1 April 2015 and those transferring from previous schemes);the Judicial Pensions Act 1981 or the Judicial Pensions and Retirement Act 1993 (for those remaining in these schemes due to transitional protection); or theJudicialPensionsRegulations2017 (for eligible fee-paid judges with reckonable service from 7 April 2000 up to 31 March 2015).

The department makes employer contributions to the Judicial Pension Scheme in respect of all these schemes as service is incurred.

Average number of full-time equivalent staff employed in the year

Ministry of Justice HQ*: 5,968 (7%)

HM Courts & Tribunals Service: 17,318 (20%)

HM Prison and Probation Service*: 58,025 (65%)

Legal Aid Agency: 1,117 (1%)

Other departmental agencies: 1,819 (2%)

Non-departmental public bodies: 4,549 (5%)

*Includes staff engaged in capital projects (MoJ HQ 74 staff; HMPPS 145 staff).

Departmental group

	Permanently employed staff*	Other	Ministers	Special advisers	Total 2021-22	Total 2020-21
Ministry of Justice HQ and associated offices
People group	975.8	22.1	0.1	0.1	998.1	822.9
Chief Operating Officer group	3,264.90	225.8	0.2	1.1	3,492.00	2,618.90
Policy and strategy group	1,397.00	3.8	2.1	1.3	1,404.20	1,674.20
Agencies
HM Courts & Tribunals Service	14,935.00	2,381.00	1	0.6	17,317.60	16,713.90
Office of the Public Guardian	1,291.10	232.3	0.1	0.1	1,523.60	1,487.90
HM Prison and Probation Service	57,012.00	866	1.1	0.7	57,879.80	51,378.10
Legal Aid Agency	1,112.00	4	0.3	0.2	1,116.50	1,137.60
Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority	295	-	0.1	0.1	295.2	277.2
Non-departmental public bodies
Non-departmental public bodies	4,143.90	405	-	-	4,548.90	4,316.70
Capital projects
Staff engaged on capital projects	42.1	177.2	-	-	219.3	192.8
Total	84,468.80	4,317.20	5	4.2	88,795.20	80,620.20
Of which:
Core department and agencies	80,324.90	3,912.20	5	4.2	84,246.30	76,303.50
Non-departmental public bodies	4,143.90	405	-	-	4,548.90	4,316.70
	84,468.80	4,317.20	5	4.2	88,795.20	80,620.20

*Includes staff on permanent and fixed term contracts. Data for agencies is taken from agency published accounts.

The full-time equivalent analysis for ministers and special advisers reflects the proportion of time spent across the different functions within the departmental group.

Average number of full-time equivalent judiciary in post in the year

Departmental group

	Senior judicial salaried	Other judicial salaried	Fee-paid judiciary	Total 2021-22	Total 2020-21
Core department and agencies	918	928	1,113.00	2,959.00	2,787.00
Total	918	928	1,113.00	2,959.00	2,787.00

The judiciary is independent. Their payroll costs disclosed within HM Courts & Tribunals Service are met either directly from the consolidated fund, in the case of senior judiciary, or by the department for other judiciary. All costs are included within these accounts to ensure that the full cost is disclosed.

Civil service and other compensation schemes – exit packages

This section has been subject to audit.

Departmental group

			2021-22			2020-21
	Compulsory redundancies	Other compensated departures	Total exit packages	Compulsory redundancies	Other compensated departures	Total exit packages
Exit package cost band	Number	Number	Total number	Number	Number	Total number
< £10,000	-	107	107	-	154	154
£10,000 - £25,000	1	74	75	1	95	96
£25,001 - £50,000	1	89	90	1	135	136
£50,001 - £100,000	-	108	108	-	106	106
£100,001 - £150,000	-	23	23	-	6	6
£150,001 - £200,000	-	8	8	-	-	-
£200,001 - £250,000	-	2	2	-	-	-
£250,001 - £300,000	-	1	1	-	1	1
Total number of exit packages by type	2	412	414	2	497	499
Total cost of exit packages by type (£000)	54	17,208	17,262	44	15,448	15,492
Number of exit packages
Of which:
Core department and agencies	1	412	413	-	497	497
Non-departmental public bodies	1	-	1	2	-	2
	2	412	414	2	497	499
Cost of exit packages (£000)
Of which:
Core department and agencies	35	17,208	17,243	-	15,448	15,448
Non-departmental public bodies	19	-	19	44	-	44
	54	17,208	17,262	44	15,448	15,492

Redundancy and other departure costs have been paid in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Service Compensation Scheme, a statutory scheme made under the Superannuation Act 1972. Exit costs are accounted for in accordance with IAS19 Employee Benefits within the financial statements. The table above discloses exit packages in the year the exit package is confirmed. Where the department has agreed early retirements, the additional costs are met by the department and not by the PCSPS. Ill health retirement costs are met by the pension scheme and are not included in the table above.

Other departure exit costs include 332 efficiency departure exit packages at a value of £10.9 million (2020-21: 446 at a value of £12.9 million) within payment bands not exceeding £150,000 (2020-21: £150,000). Efficiency departures are authorised in the interests of the continued efficiency of the service and the wellbeing of the individual, under section 6.3 of the Civil Service management code.

Spend on consultancy and temporary staff

	Core and agencies	NDPBs	Total 2021-22	Core and agencies	NDPBs	Total 2020-21
	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Consultancy	10,231	168	10,399	15,742	60	15,802
Temporary staff	185,186	10,790	195,976	221,493	11,841	233,334
Total	195,417	10,958	206,375	237,235	11,901	249,136

The decrease in agency costs is mainly due to backdated IR35 charges (£49 million) incurred in 2020-21 relating to incorrect tax treatment of contingent labour. There were increases in IT and Digitech, due to increased need for IT specialists on various projects, which increased contingent labour costs by £15.7 million.

Staff redeployment related to COVID-19 and EU Exit

	Grade	Long-term loan 2021-22	Short-term loan 2021-22	Long-term loan 2020-21	Short-term loan 2020-21
COVID-19	SCS	-	-	7	2
	Grade 6/7	-	-	16	4
	SEO	-	-	2	-
	HEO	-	-	2	3
	EO and below	-	-	2	-
	Chaplain	-	-	-	1
EU Exit		-	-	-	-
Total		-	-	29	10

No staff were redeployed into the department for the purpose of EU Exit or COVID-19 work.

Our staff

Recruitment

Our recruitment is managed in line with the principles of selection on merit through fair and open competition, as described in the Civil Service Commission recruitment principles available at: http://civilservicecommission.independent.gov.uk/civil-service-recruitment.

As an equal opportunity employer, we take action to attract, recruit, retain and develop talented people from different backgrounds and lived experience, recognising potential at all levels so we can reflect the communities we serve.

The Civil Service success profiles framework is used in recruitment across the department for all grades below SCS to assess candidates and is due to be introduced for SCS Pay Band 1. Our assessment methods ensure that we recruit the right people, with the right skills, capabilities and motivation.

Modernisation and continuous improvement are embedded in our recruitment practice, processes and selection methods, which includes:

• introducing innovation and new technology to improve candidate experience
• focusing on reducing the time to hire
• delivering impactful communications that attract candidates and keep them engaged
• increasing the diversity of new recruits in terms of background, experience and location
• ensuring our campaigns remain compliant with the required legislation

All recruitment below SCS Pay Band 2 is anonymised up to the point of an interview or online assessment. The department has adopted and kept under review the use of diverse recruitment panels and has embedded an inclusive recruitment guide to support business areas in their local recruitment activity and a diverse recruitment framework for our most senior appointments.

Employment of people with disabilities

Following re-accreditation as disability confident leaders in 2021, MoJ committed to ensuring that processes, policies and organisational culture promote the inclusion of people with disabilities.

The department now has access to an in-house workplace adjustments service providing advice and guidance for line managers and staff. The embedding of this service underpins wide-ranging work that supports the department and executive agencies maintain disability confident leaders status and supports workplace change such as return to the office initiatives. The service incorporates support for staff previously provided under the access to work scheme.

This includes inclusive and accessible recruitment for disabled people and offering reasonable adjustments to allow disabled applicants to be considered for a job on an equal basis with non-disabled applicants. It also includes processes and guidance change after the pandemic. Disabled staff continue to have access to targeted career development through the Civil Service ‘Future Leaders Scheme’ Disability Empowers Leadership Talent (DELTA) mentorship.

The department has established a disability action group, chaired by the Executive Committee disability champion, to bring together stakeholders from across the organisation to address thematically remaining disparities identified by both the disability confident work and people survey and other survey data on lived experience, via Task and Finish groups. The department supports disability and other staff networks and a cohort of senior disability champions who role model, raise awareness and lead task and finish work. There is also a network of mental health allies who are trained to provide advice and guidance to those experiencing mental health, signposting specialist support. Their work is underpinned by the mental health strategy and action plan, and all staff have access to disability awareness and mental health awareness training.

Diversity, inclusion and wellbeing

MoJ is committed to meeting our Public Sector Equality Duties and ensuring that this is embedded throughout the work we do across the department and its agencies.

In order to do this, we are delivering against the Civil Service aims as set out in the Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy 2022- 25 and Government Reform Statement^{[footnote 5]}. In MoJ, our core values – purpose, humanity, openness and togetherness – shape our approach to diversity, inclusion and wellbeing. We aim to deliver a justice system that reflects our diverse society, so we are absolutely committed to creating a workplace where all staff feel welcome and valued, and are able to reach their potential and perform effectively. Equality analysis is embedded into all our decision-making processes and equality data is used to monitor the impact of our employee policies and procedures.

We publish diversity information in our workforce monitoring report (last published in 2021 and covering 2019-20). We publish gender pay gap information annually including our action plan to close the gap, available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/ministry-of-justice-gender-pay-gap-report-2021

We also publish our equalities objectives as part of our Outcome Delivery Plan available at: www.gov.uk/government/publications/ministry-of-justice-outcome-delivery-plan/ministry-of-justice-outcome-delivery-plan-2021-22

We continue to make progress against our diversity targets. As at the end of March 2022, women make up 50% of the department’s SCS, and female representation across all grades is 57%. Recording rates (declarations) for ethnicity, disability, religion and sexual orientation in the department overall stand at a similar level in March 2022 as they were in March 2021. As at the end of March 2022, of those staff who have declared their ethnicity, 15% of staff are from black, Asian and minority ethnic communities, and 11% of SCS. Of those staff who have declared their disability status, 15% of staff are disabled, and 12% of SCS are disabled. We maintain our commitment to strengthen the diversity of our workforce.

Modern Slavery

MoJ produced its second Modern Slavery Statement in September 2022. This document sets out MoJ’s approach to guard against modern slavery with regard to supply chains, service users and staff. It confirms our commitment to identify and minimise the risk of exploitation, and our ongoing commitment to continuous improvement.

The statement covers almost all the MoJ family, including its agencies, His Majesty’s Prisons and Probation Service (HMPPS), His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service(HMCTS), and our arm’s length bodies (ALBs) to whom we provide core services, including legal, commercial, and human resources. The MoJ also procures on behalf of the Office of the Secretary of State for Wales and as such they are within the scope of our statement. The Legal Aid Agency, which is our largest ALB by budget and procures some of its own services, is publishing its own modern slavery statement.

Sickness absence data

Across the department (including its executive agencies), the number of average working days lost in the last 12 months was 12.2 at the end of March 2022, compared to 9.8 at the end of March 2021 and reflects the range of operational and non-operational functions across the organisation. The figures include the impact of COVID-19 on absence through this period of the pandemic, which along with absences due to mental health and behavioural disorders (including stress, anxiety and depression), and musculoskeletal system issues were the largest sickness categories.

Business areas actively monitor this data with HR business partner support. The attendance management policy is based on the cross-government Civil Service HR policy and is periodically refreshed. Our proactive approach to wellbeing provides a range of support for staff, as well as encouraging a preventative culture to reduce sickness absence in line with the approach across the civil service. Managers have specialist casework support in managing sickness absence cases and a variety of support is available to staff through occupational health and the employee assistance programme.

Employment and occupation Trade union relationships

MoJ (excluding HMPPS) recognises four trade unions – PCS (Public and Commercial Services Union), FDA (formerly the First Division Association), Prospect and GMB (formerly the General, Municipal and Boilermakers’ Union). GMB is recognised for the Legal Aid Agency only.

This year we have continued to engage on reforming pay strategy, organisational change and supporting our people in emerging from the pandemic.

HMPPS recognises ten trade unions across a complex operational environment. In respect of the prison service, youth custody service and HQ, this includes the Prison Officers Association (the POA), the Prison Governors Association (PGA) and NTUS (an amalgamation of five trade unions representing non-operational staff – the PCS, GMB, UNITE, FDA and PROSPECT). In respect of the probation service, this comprises the National Association of Probation Officers (NAPO), UNISON and GMB SCOOP (for senior probation grades).

Health and safety at work

All MoJ employees are subject to the protection set within the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974^{[footnote 6]}. All work processes are subject to the required risk assessment process.

From early 2020, all MoJ properties have been certified as COVID-19 secure. Risk assessments and guidance were developed for our HQ building, 102 Petty France, London, and then cascaded across our estate. The guidance is available to all staff and includes working from home support, personal risk assessments and travel risk assessments.

During this period, we have had two HSE spot checks and passed both to underpin our COVID-19 secure status. In addition to the current risk assessment, we have carried out an equality impact assessment.

Staff engagement

Some 40,430 MoJ staff (45%) took part in the annual Civil Service People Survey 2021. Although this represents an increase in the number of responses from 2020 (35,668), this is most likely due to the transfer of staff from local Community Rehabilitation Companies into the Probation Service. As in previous years, the MoJ continues strongly to advocate completion of the survey across the department to amplify employee voice.

The overall employee engagement index in MoJ has dropped by 1 percentage point (pp) from 61 to 60, with most business groups seeing a decrease. However, most notable is a 3pp increase in HMCTS which has steadily increased by 10pp over the last four years.

The results in 2021 show that staff belief that action has been taken on last year’s survey results reduced by 1pp from 30% in 2020 to 29%. There was no change in staff belief that senior managers will act on the results of this year’s survey (41%). Most business areas saw an increase in response to both these questions.

Where action has been taken in business areas, and specific interventions put in place, there are signs this is having a positive impact. The best outcomes were seen in business areas who took action around inclusivity (specifically support for carers and those with long-term health conditions), and who increased communication with staff particularly around changes that would impact employees. Although some improvements were seen where action was taken on bullying, harassment and discrimination (BHD), these were smaller, and will take longer to embed.

BHD has consistently and significantly impacted all people survey scores over time. Those who experience BHD score significantly lower across all people survey scores, impacting employee experience and wellbeing. Despite the MoJ seeing a slight improvement in BHD this year, the proportion of those experiencing BHD in MoJ remains significantly higher (11%) than the Civil Service average (7%). However, this is primarily driven by responses in HMPPS with many other business groups sitting below the average score.

Staff turnover

Staff turnover for the department and its agencies is shown below. Turnover increased across all business areas with operational roles in the prison and probation service being most impacted. This situation is not unique to the MoJ and is driven by wider labour market trends.

Attracting and retaining talented people enables the department to deliver its priorities. In response to increasing staff turnover the department has:

• established a Retention Oversight Board focussing on the sites that have the biggest attrition risks, enabling the sequencing and support for both local and national interventions to take place, while collating key information and data to ensure that we are keeping senior leader and ministers briefed on the actions we are taking to address one of our key organisational priorities
• embedded an exit interview survey process, carrying out monthly analysis of the data and insights, ensuring appropriate strategies and action plans are in place to respond
• launched a retention strategy and toolkit, providing guidance, best practice and tools to support the business
• begun a shadow process of the Retention Oversight Process in those establishments and business units that are showing cause for concern in order to take preventative action before they become a risk

To address this risk, we are developing a people strategy, improving and joining up recruitment campaigns across MoJ, focusing on organisational culture as well as ensuring MoJ salaries remain competitive.

		2021-22		2020-21
	Turnover	Departmental turnover	Turnover	Departmental turnover
MoJ HQ	7.2%	14.9%	4.6%	12.7%
HMPPS	11.9%	12.8%	7.7%	8.5%
HMCTS	12.7%	15.9%	8.5%	10.8%
OPG	4.7%	14.6%	4.5%	10.5%
LAA	4.7%	8.8%	3.2%	5.6%
CICA	2.9%	9.6%	3.9%	10.9%

Note: Transfers of staff within the Civil Service are included in ‘Departmental turnover’ and excluded from ‘Turnover’.

Workforce composition^{[footnote 7]}

The number of staff split between male and female as at 31 March 2022

		2021-22		2020-21
	Male	Female	Male	Female
Board members	34	31	26	23
Senior Civil Service (SCS) equivalent[footnote 8]	165	168	157	174
Departmental employees (excluding SCS equivalent)[footnote 8]	37,315	49,776	35,468	43,547

Departmental core diversity statistics - payroll staff in post on 31 March 2022

Gender

Male	Female
43%	57%

Full time/part time

Full time	Part time
83%	17%

Ethnicity

Black, Asian and minority ethnic	White
15%	85%

Disability

Declared disabled	Non-disabled
15%	85%

These statistics provide a snapshot of the department’s workforce. Further detail on MoJ workforce diversity can be found within the Civil Service Statistics 2022 publication. This is available at www.gov.uk/government/statistics/civil-service-statistics-2022.

Senior Civil Service equivalent staff by band

Salary band	SCS or equivalent within band as at 31 March 2022		SCS or equivalent within band as at 31 March 2021
	Number	Percentage	Number	Percentage
£60,000-£69,999	0	0%	0	0%
£70,000-£79,999	131	39%	129	39%
£80,000-£89,999	61	18%	54	16%
£90,000-£99,999	66	20%	65	20%
£100,000-£109,999	47	14%	47	14%
£110,000-£119,999	14	4%	16	5%
£120,000-£129,999	7	2%	11	3%
£130,000-£139,999	1	0%	1	0%
£140,000-£149,999	3	1%	4	1%
£150,000-£159,999	1	0%	1	0%
£160,000-£169,999	1	0%	1	0%
£170,000-£179,999	0	0%	0	0%
£180,000-£189,999	1	0%	2	1%
£190,000-£199,999	0	0%	0	0%
£200,000-£209,999	0	0%	0	0%
Total	333	100%	331	100%

Off-payroll engagements

During the financial year 2021-22, the department has reviewed off-payroll engagements where we are required to consider intermediaries (IR35) legislation using HMRC’s guidance and online status indicator. We have advised our contracting body of the outcome of the status determinations so that, where appropriate, tax deductions are made at source from payments made in respect of the engagement with the MoJ. Further details of off-payroll engagements for the core department, executive agencies and arm’s length bodies are shown in the off-payroll tables in Annex D and form part of the accountability reports.

Parliamentary accountability

Statement of Outturn against Parliamentary Supply

In addition to the primary statements prepared under International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), the financial reporting manual requires the department to prepare a Statement of Outturn against Parliamentary Supply (SOPS) and supporting notes.

The SOPS and related notes are subject to audit, as detailed in the Certificate of the Comptroller and Auditor General to the House of Commons.

The SOPS shows an entity’s spend against its supply estimate. Supply is the monetary provision (for resource and capital purposes) and cash (drawn primarily from the Consolidated Fund), that Parliament gives statutory authority for entities to utilise. The estimate details supply and is voted on by Parliament at the start of the financial year.

Should an entity exceed the limits set by its supply estimate, called control limits, their accounts will receive a qualified opinion.

The format of the SOPS mirrors the supply estimates, published on GOV.UK, to enable comparability between what Parliament approves and the final outturn.

The SOPS contains a summary table, detailing performance against the control limits that Parliament has voted on, cash spent (budgets are compiled on an accruals basis and so outturn will not match exactly to cash spent) and administration.

The supporting notes detail the following: outturn by estimate line, providing a more detailed breakdown (Note 1); a reconciliation of outturn to net operating expenditure in the SOCNE, to tie the SOPS to the financial statements (Note 2); a reconciliation of outturn to net cash requirement (Note 3); and an analysis of income payable to the Consolidated Fund (Note 4).

Summary of resource and capital outturn 2021-22

									2021-22	2020-21
				Outturn			Estimate		Outturn vs Estimate, saving/ (excess)	Outturn
		Voted	Non-Voted	Total	Voted	Non-voted	Total	Voted	Total	Total
Note £000	Note	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Departmental Expenditure Limit
- Resource	SOPS 1.1	9,231,192	145,280	9,376,472	9,269,247	140,460	9,409,707	38,055	33,235	9,165,498
- Capital	SOPS 1.2	1,420,858	-	1,420,858	1,546,230	-	1,546,230	125,372	125,372	1,066,578
Annually Managed Expenditure
- Resource	SOPS 1.1	349,941	-	349,941	659,920	-	659,920	309,979	309,979	158,643
- Capital	SOPS 1.2	10,546	-	10,546	42,131	-	42,131	31,585	31,585	-
Total Budget		11,012,537	145,280	11,157,817	11,517,528	140,460	11,657,988	504,991	500,171	10,390,719
Non-Budget
- Resource	SOPS 1.1	-	-		-	-	-	-	-	-
Total		11,012,537	145,280	11,157,817	11,517,528	140,460	11,657,988	504,991	500,171	10,390,719
Total Resource		9,581,133	145,280	9,726,413	9,929,167	140,460	10,069,627	348,034	343,214	9,324,141
Total Capital		1,431,404	-	1,431,404	1,588,361	-	1,588,361	156,957	156,957	1,066,578
Total		11,012,537	145,280	11,157,817	11,517,528	140,460	11,657,988	504,991	500,171	10,390,719

Net Cash Requirement 2021-22

				2021-22	2020-21
		Outturn	Estimate	Outturn vs Estimate, saving/(excess)	Prior Year Outturn Total
Item	Note	£0	£0	£0	£0
Net cash requirement	Annex A, SOPS 3	10,124,758	10,629,642	504,884	9,215,023

Administration Costs 2021-22

				2021-22	2020-21
		Outturn	Estimate	Outturn vs Estimate, saving/(excess)	Prior Year Outturn Total
Type of spend	SOPS Note	£000	£000	£000	£000
Administration costs	1.1	444,379	495,328	50,949	423,557

Figures in the areas outlined in bold are voted totals subject to Parliamentary control. In addition, although not a separate voted limit, any breach of the administration budget will result in an excess vote. Due to their size, the variances in estimate to outturn of resource departmental expenditure limit (RDEL) and annually managed expenditure (AME) have been explained below.

In 2021-22, the RDEL budget for day-to-day spending was £9,410 million (2020-21: £9,500 million) and the final outturn was £9,376 million (2020- 21: £9,165 million). This meant total RDEL spend was 99.6% of the department’s RDEL budget.

AME spend is by its nature inherently volatile. The department has a relatively small AME budget and therefore large variances are not unusual. In 2021-22, the department budgeted for £660 million (2020-21: £602 million) of resource AME and the final outturn was £350 million (2020-21: £159 million). The main reason for this underspend was that the budgeted figure included prudent assumptions about the value of year-end pension liabilities and the utilisation of provisions, including those for legal aid costs. These areas are always highly uncertain and the actual requirement was significantly lower.

SOPS Note 3 and 4 in Annex A form part of the Statement of Outturn against Parliamentary Supply. These notes are subject to audit.

Notes to the Statement of Outturn against Parliamentary Supply 2021-22

SOPS 1. Outturn detail, by estimate line

SOPS 1.1 Analysis of resource outturn by estimate line

							Resource Outturn				Estimate	Outturn
			Administration			Programme
	Gross	Income	Net	Gross	Income	Net	Total	Total	Virements	Total including virements	Outturn vs Estimate saving/(excess)	2020‑21 Prior year Outturn Total
	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Spending in Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL)
Voted expenditure
A Policy, Corporate Services and Associated Offices	416,282	(46,547)	369,735	1,417,671	(1,083,267)	334,404	704,139	494,279	244,773	739,052	34,913	566,838
B HM Prison and Probation Service	23,698	393	24,091	4,499,491	(282,567)	4,216,924	4,241,015	4,373,585	(131,812)	4,241,773	758	4,599,619
C HM Courts & Tribunals Service	20,321	(33)	20,288	2,105,587	(85,969)	2,019,618	2,039,906	2,053,302	(13,089)	2,040,213	307	1,865,942
D Legal Aid Agency	16,468	-	16,468	1,804,653	(33,978)	1,770,675	1,787,143	1,908,893	(120,387)	1,788,506	1,363	1,550,239
E Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority	770	-	770	170,716	(1,249)	169,467	170,237	143,409	26,828	170,237	-	165,837
F Office of the Public Guardian	67	-	67	65,957	(68,576)	(2,619)	(2,552)	(375)	(2,177)	(2,552)	-	1,512
G Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (net)	5,192	-	5,192	134,592	-	134,592	139,784	140,372	(450)	139,922	138	130,013
H Criminal Cases Review Commission (net)	715	-	715	6,257	-	6,257	6,972	7,303	(331)	6,972	-	6,392
I Judicial Appointments Commission (net)	434	-	434	7,296	-	7,296	7,730	8,186	(447)	7,739	9	7,274
J Legal Services Board (net)	1	-	1	4,098	-	4,098	4,099	4,097	2	4,099	-	3,906
K Office for Legal Complaints (net)	-	-	-	13,757	-	13,757	13,757	13,676	81	13,757	-	13,151
L Parole Board (net)	982	-	982	20,525	-	20,525	21,507	23,478	(1,557)	21,921	414	20,360
M Youth Justice Board (net)	3,094	-	3,094	90,710	-	90,710	93,804	94,282	(478)	93,804	-	86,312
Gov Facility Services Limited (Net)	-	-	-	(360)	-	(360)	(360)	-	(360)	(360)	-	(692)
N Independent Monitoring Authority (Net)	2,542	-	2,542	1,469	-	1,469	4,011	4,760	(596)	4,164	153	1,964
Total Voted expenditure in DEL	490,566	(46,187)	444,379	10,342,419	(1,555,606)	8,786,813	9,231,192	9,269,247	‑	9,269,247	38,055	9,018,667
Non-Voted expenditure
O Higher judiciary judicial salaries	89	-	89	162,995	-	162,995	163,084	158,234	-	158,234	(4,850)	163,898
P Levy income - Legal Services Board and Office for Legal Complaints (CFER)	-	-	-	-	(17,804)	(17,804)	(17,804)	(17,774)	-	(17,774)	30	(17,067)
Total non‑voted expenditure in DEL	89	‑	89	162,995	(17,804)	145,191	145,280	140,460	‑	140,460	(4,820)	146,831
Total Resource DEL Spending	490,655	(46,187)	444,468	10,505,414	(1,573,410)	8,932,004	9,376,472	9,409,707	‑	9,409,707	33,235	9,165,498
Spending in Annually Managed Expenditure Limits (AME)
Voted expenditure
Q Policy, Corporate Services and Associated Offices	-	-	-	119,815	-	119,815	119,815	250,571	(25,773)	224,798	104,983	(34,865)
R HM Prison and Probation Services	-	-	-	104,637	-	104,637	104,637	172,000 -	-	172,000	67,363	63,648
S HM Courts & Tribunals Service	-	-	-	69,436	-	69,436	69,436	44,488 24,948		69,436	-	23,678
T Legal Aid Agency	-	-	-	39,570	-	39,570	39,570	150,000	-	150,000	110,430	89,133
U Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority	-	-	-	(10,613)	-	(10,613)	(10,613)	15,000	-	15,000	25,613	(4,544)
V Office of the Public Guardian	-	-	-	(29)	-	(29)	(29)	300	-	300	329	4,418
W Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (net)	-	-	-	26,925	-	26,925	26,925	26,427	498	26,925	-	16,271
X Criminal Cases Review Commission (net)	-	-	-	(73)	-	(73)	(73)	723	-	723	796	117
Y Judicial Appointments Commission	-	-	-	10	-	10	10	1	9	10	-	-
Z Legal Services Board (net)	-	-	-	(74)	-	(74)	(74)	1	-	1	75	74
AA Office for Legal Complaints (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	24
AB Parole Board (net)	-	-	-	31	-	31	31	165	-	165	134	(141)
AC Youth Justice Board (net)	-	-	-	(54)	-	(54)	(54)	200	-	200	254	100
AD Gov Facility Services Limited (net)	-	-	-	360	-	360	360	42	318	360	-	730
AE Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	-
Total Resource AME Spending	‑	‑	‑	349,941	‑	349,941	349,941	659,920	‑	659,920	309,979	158,643
Total Resource	490,655	(46,187)	444,468	10,855,355	(1,573,410)	9,281,945	9,726,413	10,069,627	‑	10,069,627	343,214	9,324,141

SOPS 1.2 Analysis of capital outturn by Estimate line

			Outturn				Estimate	Outturn
	Gross	Income	Total	Total	Virements	Total including virements	Outturn vs Estimate saving/ (excess)	2020‑21 Prior year Outturn Total
	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000	£000
Spending in Departmental Expenditure Limits (DEL)
Voted expenditure
A Policy, Corporate Services and Associated Offices	426,559	(15)	426,544	406,121	20,423	426,544	-	272,558
B HM Prison and Probation Service	499,177	(2,274)	496,903	636,986	(23,620)	613,366	116,463	502,217
C HM Courts & Tribunals Service	486,435	(3,097)	483,338	485,267	-	485,267	1,929	287,920
D Legal Aid Agency	3,416	-	3,416	4,865	-	4,865	1,449	491
E Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority	(63)	167	104	100	4	104	-	1
F Office of the Public Guardian	8,295	-	8,295	5,254	3,041	8,295	-	(47)
G Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (net)	658	-	658	5,622	-	5,622	4,964	449
H Criminal Cases Review Commission (net)	455	-	455	868	-	868	413	659
I Judicial Appointments Commission (net)	117	-	117	150	-	150	33	513
J Legal Services Board (net)	10	-	10	24	-	24	14	21
K Office for Legal Complaints (net)	145	-	145	250	-	250	105	245
L Parole Board (net)	235	-	235	122	113	235	-	421
M Youth Justice Board (net)	598	-	598	600	-	600	2	729
Gov Facility Services Limited (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	401
N Independent Monitoring Authority (Net)	40	-	40	1	39	40	-	-
Total voted expenditure in DEL	1,426,077	(5,219)	1,420,858	1,546,230	‑	1,546,230	125,372	1,066,578
Non‑voted expenditure
O Higher Judiciary Judicial Salaries	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
P Levy Income - Legal Services Board and Office for Legal Complaints (CFER)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total non‑voted expenditure in DEL	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Total Capital DEL Spending	1,426,077	(5,219)	1,420,858	1,546,230	‑	1,546,230	125,372	1,066,578
Spending in Annually Managed Expenditure Limits (AME)
Voted expenditure
Q Policy, Corporate Services and Associated Offices	3,555	-	3,555	10,437	(249)	10,188	6,633	-
R HM Prison and Probation Service	1,340	-	1,340	22,300	-	22,300	20,960	-
S HM Courts & Tribunals Service	3,919	-	3,919	7,100	-	7,100	3,181	-
T Legal Aid Agency	90	-	90	1	89	90	-	-
U Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	-
V Office of the Public Guardian	1,222	-	1,222	1,088	134	1,222	-	-
W Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (net)	393	-	393	1,200	-	1,200	807	-
X Criminal Cases Review Commission (net)	27	-	27	1	26	27	-	-
Y Judicial Appointments Commission (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Z Legal Services Board (net)	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	-
AA Office for Legal Complaints (net)	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	-
AB Parole Board (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
AC Youth Justice Board (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
AD Government Facility Services Limited (net)	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
AE Independent Monitoring Authority for the Citizens’ Rights Agreements (net)	-	-	-	1	-	1	1	-
Total Capital AME Spending	10,546	‑	10,546	42,131	‑	42,131	31,585	‑
Total Capital	1,436,623	(5,219)	1,431,404	1,588,361	‑	1,588,361	156,957	1,066,578

The total estimate columns include virements. Virements are the reallocation of provision in the Estimates that do not require Parliamentary authority (because Parliament does not vote to that level of detail and delegates to HM Treasury). Further information on virements is provided in the Supply Estimates Manual, available on GOV.UK

The outturn vs estimate column is based on the total including virements. The estimate total before virements have been made is included so that users can compare the value to the estimates laid before Parliament.

SOPS 2 Reconciliation of outturn to net operating expenditure

		Outturn Total	2020‑21 Prior year Outturn Total
	Note	£000	£000
Total resource outturn in SOPS
Voted DEL	SOPS 1.1	9,231,192	9,018,667
Non-voted DEL	SOPS 1.1	145,280	146,831
Total DEL		9,376,472	9,165,498
Total AME	SOPS 1.1	349,941	158,643
Total non-budget		-	-
		9,726,413	9,324,141
Add:
Capital grants (net of EU contributions)		(1)	1,754
Other
Research costs classified as capital under ESA 10		2,873	4,101
Other costs and income transferred to capital		29	-
Adjustment for other capital expenditure in CSoCNE		-	-
		2,901	5,855
Less:
Income payable to the Consolidated Fund (excluding non-voted levy income)		(2,820)	(267)
Other
Private Finance Initiatives adjustments		32,471	380
Prior period adjustments		-	-
		29,651	113
Net Operating Expenditure in CSoCNE	CSoCNE	9,758,965	9,330,109

As noted in the introduction to the SOPS above, outturn and the estimates are compiled against the budgeting framework, which is similar to, but different from, IFRS. This reconciliation therefore bridges the resource outturn to net operating expenditure, linking the SOPS to the financial statements. Capital grants and research costs are budgeted for as CDEL but accounted for as spend on the face of the CSoCNE, and therefore function as a reconciling item between Resource and Net Operating Expenditure. The depreciation on certain PFI contract assets is accounted for as spend in the CSoCNE, but is non-budget spend and therefore does not appear in the SOPS.

Regularity of expenditure

Losses statement

		31 March 2022		31 March 2021
Values	Core department and agencies	Departmental group	Core department and agencies	Departmental group
	£0	£0	£0	£0
Cash losses	242	242	554	554
Claims abandoned	176	176	2,642	2,642
Administrative write-offs	7,624	7,625	5,499	5,500
Fruitless payments	10,265	10,265	196,524	196,683
Store losses	2,184	2,184	2,215	2,215
Constructive losses	5,660	5,660	30,615	30,625
Total value of losses	26,151	26,152	238,049	238,219

		31 March 2022		31 March 2021
Numbers	Core department and agencies	Departmental group	Core department and agencies	Departmental group
Cash losses	1,031	1,031	865	865
Claims abandoned	55	55	108	108
Administrative write-offs	4,313	4,318	2,166	2,167
Fruitless payments	4	4	41	42
Store losses	16,648	16,648	17,343	17,343
Constructive losses	4	4	2	10
Total number of losses	22,055	22,060	20,525	20,535

In 2021-22 there were six losses (2020-21: eight) over £300,000 as follows:

In 2020-21, HMRC carried out an audit of our historic IR35 assessments procured through the public sector framework and challenged our interpretation of some of the IR35 rules. This audit is closed, and all liabilities settled. In 2021-22, MoJ has carried out an internal review of managed service arrangements and examined contracts to assess whether any contingent labour has been brought into the business and incorrectly badged as being part of an outsourcing arrangement. The review identified a small number of contracts which had been incorrectly classed as part of an outsourced arrangement, resulting in a liability of £3.9 million due to HMRC (fruitless payment).

HMCTS is developing with CPS the Common Platform as a case management system in the criminal courts. The Crime Programme Board (which includes membership from across the criminal justice system, including HMCTS and CPS) decided that CPS will retain their own case management system and interface into common platform. As a result the work to date relating to CPS case management directly on the common platform is no longer useable, leading to a £4.2 million impairment (constructive loss).

In November 2021, HMPPS took the decision to terminate early its contract for the operational management of Rainsbrook Secure Training Centre following openly reported safety concerns, resulting in a loss of £5.7 million. This consists of £4.7 million for payments made to Management and Training Corporation Limited (MTC) to cover costs incurred prior to termination, and £1.0 million for contract breakage made to MTC (fruitless payment).

In HMPPS, £681,000 for contract breakage payments due to the management decision to discontinue the electronic monitoring legacy programme, based on three months of service cost which was an obligation in the event of early termination. This is the final payment arising from the decision in 2020-21 to cancel a case management system for electronic monitoring, which gave rise to a loss in that year (fruitless payment).

In HMPPS, £485,000 due to excess PPE (personal protective equipment) resulting from a significant reduction in the need for PPE due to a change in UK Health Security Agency (previously Public Health England) guidelines which was bought in as part of the fight against the spread of the COVID-19 infection (constructive loss).

In MoJ, £868,000 in respect of recoverable VAT which was not reclaimed from HMRC. There is no net loss to the taxpayer.

		31 March 2022			31 March 2021
Values	Core department and agencies	Departmental group	Core department and agencies	Departmental group
	£0	£0	£0	£0
Compensation payments	26,320	26,459	33,721	33,895
Ex gratia	2,921	2,953	6,754	6,754
Extra-contractual payments	25,058	25,058	50,560	50,560
Total value of special payments	54,299	54,470	91,035	91,209

		31 March 2022		31 March 2021
Numbers	Core department and agencies	Departmental group	Core department and agencies	Departmental group
Compensation payments	6,768	6,893	7,760	£7,895
Ex gratia	8,694	8,702	2,677	2,677
Extra-contractual payments	357	357	1,461	1,461
Total number of special payments	15,819	15,952	11,898	12,033

In 2021-22 there were eight (2020-21: thirteen) special payments over £300,000:

£23.7 million payable to retired fee-paid judiciary in lieu of pensions. The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled that pre-2000 judicial service should be included when calculating pension entitlement for fee- paid judges. However, pension benefits for this period cannot be paid from the Judicial Pension Scheme until the scheme regulations have been amended by legislation. In the interim the department is compensating eligible retired fee-paid judges for the additional pension benefits due.

Historical payments totalling £3.3 million have been made in relation to partial retirements to fee-paid judicial office holders which were subsequently found to not be in line with the FPJPS 2017 regulations. Within this total

£1.3 million was paid through the Judicial Pensions Scheme and £2 million reimbursed by MoJ at the time as part of payments in lieu of pension (PILs). These payments have been regularised via a special payment authorisation and within the JPS accounts, the £1.3 million has been recorded as a PILs debtor due from MoJ.

Five compensation payments were made to operational members of HMPPS staff injured in the course of their duties: £610,863, £490,907, £410,000, £409,734, £350,548.

One compensation payment was made to a third party for work-related injuries: £325,000.

Charitable donations

HMCTS made charitable donations totalling £25,000 in 2021-22 (2020-21: £25,000). These donations were made to an organisation that provides young people with an opportunity to take part in mock trials, to build their confidence, understanding and interest in the law.

Publicity and advertising

The department spent £824,260 on publicity and advertising in 2021-22 (£611,205 in 2020-21). This includes advertising for the recruitment of prison and probation officers and magistrates.

Gifts and hospitality

Details of the department’s ministers, directors general, permanent secretary and special advisers’ gifts, hospitality, travel and meetings can be found at: [www.gov.uk/government/collections/moj-gifts-hospitality-travel-and-meetings]

Fees and charges

This section has been subject to audit.

The department is required, in accordance with HM Treasury’s Managing Public Money, to disclose results for the areas of its activities where fees and charges are levied. The analysis provided below is for fees and charges purposes and is not intended to meet the requirements of IFRS 8 Operating Segments.

	2021-22					2020-21
	Gross income net of remissions	Full cost	Surplus/ (deficit)	Fee recovery actual	Fee recovery target	Fee recovery actual
	£0	£0	£0	%	%	%
Office of the Accountant General	3,738	6,858	(3,120)	55%	100%	0%
Official Solicitor and Public Trustee
Litigation	1,467	8,004	(6,537)	18%	-	20%
Trust and Estates	653	467	186	140%	-	102%
HM Courts & Tribunals Service
Family	168,147	310,594	(142,447)	54%	100%	49%
Civil	480,774	554,762	(73,988)	87%	100%	74%
Asylum and Immigration	4,885	107,527	(102,642)	5%	-	3%
Other	1,274	18,579	(17,305)	7%	-	14%
Office of the Public Guardian	68,576	77,319	(8,743)	89%	100%	77%
Legal Services Board	4,047	4,047	-	100%	100%	100%
Office for Legal Complaints	13,757	13,757	-	100%	100%	100%
HMCTS - Employment tribunal refunds	(71)	-	(71)	-	-	-
HMCTS CTLO Fee refunds and interest paid	(31,495)	-	(31,495)	-	-	-
HMCTS - Other fee refunds	(658)	-	(658)	-	-	-
HMCTS - Movement in fee refunds provision	46,611	-	46,611	-	-	-
	761,705	1,101,914	(340,209)	-	-	-

Fee charging segments

Office of the Accountant General (OAG)

The OAG invests money on behalf of its clients in the court funds investment account, which earns interest at the Bank of England base rate, or in the equity index tracker fund for long-term investments. Clients do not pay fees for investment services but the operational costs of OAG are paid out of the surplus interest earned on their funds.

OAG is therefore intended to run at nil net cost to the department’s vote and in terms of the principles of cost recovery should be 100% self-funding.

Official Solicitor and the Public Trustee (OSPT)

The Official Solicitor’s civil, family and court of protection (CoP) litigation services continue to be largely publicly funded due to the nature of the cases dealt with, although where appropriate, alternative funding arrangements (such as conditional fee agreements) are also entered into. In some classes of CoP case, where appropriate to do so, the Official Solicitor charges clients at full cost for services provided.

The Official Solicitor and the Public Trustee charge for their work in administering trusts and estates. The fee income associated with Public Trustee trusts and estates cases is governed by a Fees Order and the Official Solicitor’s trusts and estates work is charged for on an hourly rate basis.

The Public Trustee also processes ‘Title on death’ applications under the Law of Property Act.

The budget allocation to the OSPT also covers the cost of the Lord Chancellor’s ‘Reciprocal enforcement of maintenance orders’ unit and the ‘International child abduction and contact unit’. This service is publicly funded in full.

HM Courts & Tribunals Service

HMCTS collects and reports upon fee charges that have been set by MoJ policy and which appear in statutory instrument fees orders. Section 180 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 gives the Lord Chancellor, with the consent of HM Treasury, the statutory power to set certain court and tribunal fees above cost recovery levels. The income generated must be reinvested back into the courts and tribunals service. Government introduced enhanced fee charging for money claims on 9 March 2015, and further enhanced fees including divorce, civil and some tribunals in March, April and July 2016. The system of ‘Help with fees’ (fee remissions) exists to ensure that individuals are not denied access to the courts if they genuinely cannot afford the fee. Only the civil and tribunal businesses have systems for charging fees.

HMCTS reports on both the civil and tribunal fee-charging business segments. Civil business contains two business streams: family (including probate and court of protection) and civil (including civil business in the county court, higher courts and magistrates’ courts). Tribunal business contains two business streams: immigration and asylum; and other fee charging special tribunals (including lands, residential property, gambling and gender recognition).

Further detail regarding current fees orders can be found within the HMCTS Annual Report and Accounts.

Office of the Public Guardian (OPG)

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 provides for fees to be charged for proceedings brought in relation to the functions carried out by the Public Guardian. The levels of charges are contained in two statutory instruments as well as the Lasting Powers of Attorney, Enduring Powers of Attorney, Public Guardian Regulations 2007 and the Public Guardian (Fees etc.) Regulations 2007.

Legal Services Board (LSB) and Office for Legal Complaints (OLC)

LSB and the OLC income relates to levies receipted from approved regulators. This income is surrendered to the Consolidated Fund in line with the Legal Services Act 2007. In return, LSB and OLC receive grant-in-aid funding from the department equal to the income surrendered.

Remote contingent liabilities

As required by Managing Public Money, in addition to contingent liabilities disclosed in accordance with IAS 37 in Note 25 to the accounts, MoJ discloses, for Parliamentary reporting and accountability purposes, certain statutory and non-statutory contingent liabilities where the likelihood of transfer of economic benefit is remote. This section has been subject to audit.

Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited indemnity: Assurance has been given to Heathrow Airport Holdings Limited and other third parties (e.g. airlines) which may be affected by the operations of HM Prison and Probation Service. The likelihood of a liability arising from these contingencies is considered to be remote.

The assurance covers the following amounts:

• up to £50 million for damage or injury per incident to third parties caused airside in the event of negligence of HMPPS
• up to £250 million to damage or injury to third parties per incident in the event of negligence by HMPPS while on board an aeroplane
• personal accident and/or sickness for HMPPS staff while on escorting duties

Privately managed prisons: HMPPS would be liable as underwriter of last resort to meet certain losses incurred by the privately managed prisons.

Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) guarantee: The Secretary of State for Justice has provided a guarantee to the Greater Manchester Pension Fund (GMPF) in respect of the Community Rehabilitation Companies’ (CRCs) participation in the GMPF for pension liabilities that transferred to the CRCs. The responsibility for funding the past service liabilities associated with the original employees who are deferred or pensioner members of the LGPS transferred to HMPPS under the Secretary of State for Justice.

Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA): on occasions, compensation cases at appeal stage, under the jurisdiction of the First-tier Tribunal – Criminal Injuries Compensation, may proceed to judicial review. These could have an impact on CICA’s future liabilities. These cases are not included within the provision due to the fact that a possible obligation exists which will only be confirmed by the occurrence or non-occurrence of one or more uncertain future events not wholly within the control of CICA.

Antonia Romeo

Principal Accounting Officer

12 December 2022

The Certificate and Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General to the House of Commons

Opinion on financial statements

I certify that I have audited the financial statements of the Ministry of Justice and of its departmental group for the year ended 31 March 2022 under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000. The department comprises the core department and its agencies. The departmental group consists of the department and the bodies designated for inclusion under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 (Estimates and Accounts) Order 2021. The financial statements comprise: the department’s and the departmental group’s:

• Statement of Financial Position as at 31 March 2022;
• Statement of Comprehensive Net Expenditure, Statement of Cash Flows and Statement of Changes in Taxpayers’ Equity for the year then ended; and
• the related notes including the significant accounting policies.

The financial reporting framework that has been applied in the preparation of the group financial statements is applicable law and UK adopted international accounting standards.

In my opinion, the financial statements:

• give a true and fair view of the state of the department and the departmental group’s affairs as at 31 March 2022 and its net expenditure for the year then ended; and
• have been properly prepared in accordance with the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 and HM Treasury directions issued thereunder.

Opinion on regularity

In my opinion, in all material respects:

• the Statement of Outturn Against Parliamentary Supply properly presents the outturn against voted Parliamentary control totals for the year ended 31 March 2022 and shows that those totals have not been exceeded; and

• the income and expenditure recorded in the financial statements have been applied to the purposes intended by Parliament and the financial transactions recorded in the financial statements conform to the authorities which govern them.

Basis for opinions

I conducted my audit in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (UK) (ISAs UK), applicable law and Practice Note 10 Audit of Financial Statements of Public Sector Entities in the United Kingdom.

My responsibilities under those standards are further described in the Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements section of my certificate.

Those standards require me and my staff to comply with the Financial Reporting Council’s Revised Ethical Standard 2019. I have also elected to apply the ethical standards relevant to listed entities. I am independent of the department and its group in accordance with the ethical requirements that are relevant to my audit of the financial statements in the UK. My staff and I have fulfilled our other ethical responsibilities in accordance with these requirements.

I believe that the audit evidence I have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for my opinion.

Conclusions relating to going concern

In auditing the financial statements, I have concluded that the department and its group’s use of the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements is appropriate.

Based on the work I have performed, I have not identified any material uncertainties relating to events or conditions that, individually or collectively, may cast significant doubt on the department and its group’s ability to continue as a going concern for a period of at least twelve months from when the financial statements are authorised for issue.

My responsibilities and the responsibilities of the Accounting Officer with respect to going concern are described in the relevant sections of this certificate.

The going concern basis of accounting for the department and its group is adopted in consideration of the requirements set out in HM Treasury’s Government Financial

Reporting Manual, which requires entities to adopt the going concern basis of accounting in the preparation of the financial statements where it anticipated that the services which they provide will continue into the future.

Other information

The other information comprises information included in the Annual Report, but does not include the financial statements nor my auditor’s certificate and report. The Accounting Officer is responsible for the other information.

My opinion on the financial statements does not cover the other information and, except to the extent otherwise explicitly stated in my certificate, I do not express any form of assurance conclusion thereon.

In connection with my audit of the financial statements, my responsibility is to read the other information and, in doing so, consider whether the other information is materially inconsistent with the financial statements or my knowledge obtained in the audit, or otherwise appears to be materially misstated.

If I identify such material inconsistencies or apparent material misstatements, I am required to determine whether this gives rise to a material misstatement in the financial statements themselves. If, based on the work I have performed, I conclude that there is a material misstatement of this other information, I am required to report that fact.

I have nothing to report in this regard.

Opinion on other matters

In my opinion the part of the Remuneration and Staff Report to be audited has been properly prepared in accordance with HM Treasury directions made under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000.

In my opinion, based on the work undertaken in the course of the audit:

• the parts of the Accountability Report subject to audit have been properly prepared in accordance with HM Treasury directions made under the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000;
• the information given in the Performance and Accountability Reports for the financial year for which the financial statements are prepared is consistent with the financial statements and is in accordance with the applicable legal requirements.

Matters on which I report by exception

In the light of the knowledge and understanding of the Ministry of Justice and its group and its environment obtained in the course of the audit, I have not identified material misstatements in the Performance and Accountability Report.

I have nothing to report in respect of the following matters which I report to you if, in my opinion:

• I have not received all of the information and explanations I require for my audit; or
• adequate accounting records have not been kept by the department or returns adequate for my audit have not been received from branches not visited by my staff; or
• the financial statements and the parts of the Accountability Report subject to audit are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or
• certain disclosures of remuneration specified by HM Treasury’s Government Financial Reporting Manual have not been made or parts of the Remuneration and Staff Report to be audited is not in agreement with the accounting records and returns; or
• the Governance Statement does not reflect compliance with HM Treasury’s guidance.

Responsibilities of the Accounting Officer for the financial statements

As explained more fully in the Statement of Accounting Officer’s Responsibilities, the Accounting Officer is responsible for:

• maintaining proper accounting records;
• the preparation of the financial statements and Annual Report in accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework and for being satisfied that they give a true and fair view;
• ensuring that the Annual Report and accounts as a whole is fair, balanced and understandable;
• internal controls as the Accounting Officer determines is necessary to enable the preparation of financial statements to be free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error; and
• assessing the department and its group’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting unless the Accounting Officer anticipates that the services provided by the department and its group will not continue to be provided in the future.

Auditor’s responsibilities for the audit of the financial statements

My responsibility is to audit, certify and report on the financial statements in accordance with the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000.

My objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue a certificate that includes my opinion. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with ISAs (UK) will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. Misstatements can arise from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in the aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these financial statements.

Extent to which the audit was considered capable of detecting non- compliance with laws and regulations including fraud

I design procedures in line with my responsibilities, outlined above, to detect material misstatements in respect of non- compliance with laws and regulations, including fraud. The extent to which my procedures are capable of detecting non-compliance with laws and regulations, including fraud is detailed below.

March 2022.

1. Permanent Secretary and Chief Operating Officer attend Audit and Risk Assurance Committee meetings. ↩

2. Chief People Officer is a member of the Nominations committee but is not listed in this table as they are not a member of the Departmental Board. ↩

3. In April 2022, the Policy and Strategy Group was renamed the Policy Group. ↩

4. No cash is paid, as these costs are settled through the funding process. ↩

5. Civil Service Diversity and Inclusion Strategy: 2022 to 2025 ↩

6. Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974 (legislation.gov.uk) ↩

7. The data represents the department and executive agencies (HMPPS, HMCTS, LAA, OPG and CICA). Disability and ethnicity percentages are calculated based on all staff who have provided information on their ethnicity or disability status. ↩

8. Headcount for the department and its executive agencies (excluding NDPB’s), at 31 March 2022. The number of staff reported on page 98 represent the average number of full time equivalent (FTE) staff over the year. The number of staff reported on page 13 represent the headcount of the department, its executive agencies and NDPB’s at 31 ↩ ↩²