FOI reference: FOI-2026-3510
You asked
I am writing to request information relating to the recording and reporting of prison releases in error, and in particular to the review of statistical methodology referenced by the Lord Chancellor in his written statement to the House of Commons on 15 April 2026 (HCWS1518).
In that statement, the Lord Chancellor stated that Dame Lynne Owens' review "highlights the shortcomings in recording releases in error, under the last government and since the general election, which led to underreporting under successive governments." He further stated that the Ministry of Justice is "working with the Office for National Statistics to ensure our statistics reflect the totality of releases in error."
In light of these admissions, I request the following:
All documents, analysis or correspondence produced by or shared between the Ministry of Justice and the Office for National Statistics since 1 July 2024 relating to the methodology used to record and report releases in error, including any identification of errors, gaps or underreporting in previously published figures.
The data published alongside HCWS1518 described as an "ad hoc data release," if not already in the public domain, broken down by:
prison establishment
offence category of the prisoner released in error
whether the prisoner was returned to custody voluntarily or by arrest
the time elapsed between erroneous release and return to custody
We said
Thank you for your request.
Please see the associated download containing the information eligible for release in scope of your first question. Redactions have been applied to some personal data contained in the bundle under s.40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (FOIA), as disclosure of this information would contravene the data protection principles.
Some information in scope of your first question has been withheld under s.36(2)(b)(i), (2)(b)(ii), and (2)(c) of FOIA.
The material withheld contains particularly candid and frank exchanges of views and provision of advice between ONS and MoJ. This process is essential for other government departments (OGDs) to accurately portray their methodology and receive expert advice from ONS with the purpose of enhancing their statistical analyses. This ensures that quality and accurate statistics are produced across government, which are vital for evidence-based and fit-for-purpose policy formation that effectively identifies and resolves issues. Additionally, if the substance of these conversations are made public, it could compromise the effectiveness of future reviews by stifling the debate.
Disclosure of the information would therefore prejudice the trust between OGDs and ONS and is highly likely to have a chilling effect on open discussions, where OGDs do not feel able to be as open and honest about issues they are facing for fear of this being disclosed. Given this, ONS's function to effectively assist OGDs with their statistical production would be compromised.
This exemption is subject to a public interest test. Arguments in favour of disclosure centre on transparency regarding the exact discussions between ONS and MoJ that led to the report's conclusions. However, the report itself contains substantial detail about the basis for its conclusions which arguably fulfils this public interest requirement.
Arguments in favour of withholding the information are that ONS's position as a trusted, expert advisor to OGDs to assist and improve their statistics would be compromised if we were to disclose the candid discussions between us and OGDs. If we were to do so, they would be less willing to honestly and openly engage with us. In turn, this would reduce the quality and accuracy of statistics produced across government, which would have a detrimental impact on effective policy-formation. Therefore, there is a strong public interest in upholding the confidence of MoJ and OGDs and the public interest test falls in favour of withholding the information at this time.
We do not hold a copy of the data referenced in your second request. We would recommend contacting the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) for advice on where this can be found.