Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Desmond Swayne and Ellie Reeves

Thursday 19th March 2026 Commons Chamber

[The Solicitor General]

I recognise the vital role that whistleblowers play in uncovering serious economic crime, and the need to ensure that they are properly protected and supported when they come forward. Through the recently launched UK anti-corruption strategy, the Government have committed to exploring opportunities to reform the UK whistleblowing framework, including through potential financial incentives. I will continue to work across Government to see how we can drive this work forward.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

2. Whether the Attorney General has advised the Lord Chancellor on the potential impact of the Courts and Tribunals Bill on the rule of law.

--- Later in debate ---

[The Solicitor General (Ellie Reeves)]

The Government’s reforms will focus on delivering faster and fairer justice for victims. That includes removing the presumption of parental involvement to prioritise what is in the best interests of children after tireless campaigning by Claire Throssell, whose two sons, Jack and Paul, were killed by their father after their parents’ separation. Reforms also include strengthening the use of special measures and preventing the misuse of evidence to unfairly undermine victims in court.

[Sir Desmond Swayne]

On 3 February, the Lord Chancellor undertook to model his proposals for jury trials and to publish the results. Has the modelling been done and when will the results be published?

[The Solicitor General]

The reforms that the right hon. Gentleman refers to come after Sir Brian Leveson set out a report with 135 recommendations, making it clear that investment in the justice system alone would not solve the backlog left by the previous Conservative Government and that reform is also needed. Estimates show that it will reduce cases by 20%, although, given the modelling from Canada, those are likely conservative estimates.

Alleged Spying Case: Role of Attorney General’s Office

Debate between Desmond Swayne and Ellie Reeves

Thursday 23rd October 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Solicitor General]

As I have set out, consent to prosecute in this case had to be granted by Law Officers, and that was done under the previous Government. Once consent is granted, it is for the CPS to prosecute a case, rightly without political interference. This case was discontinued by the CPS on evidential grounds, as opposed to public interest grounds. I am sure that the hon. Member is aware of the two-part test for prosecutors. When a case is discontinued on evidential grounds, it is not for the CPS to consult with Law Officers in advance of that. I say again that the Attorney General will first give written evidence this week and then oral evidence on Tuesday.

[Sir Desmond Swayne (New Forest West) (Con)]

None of it makes sense—not the collapsed trial, Chagos or the embassy—but, as my right hon. Friend the Member for New Forest East (Sir Julian Lewis) says, it all makes sense if the Government have prioritised a strategic relationship with communist China, does it not?

House of Lords (Hereditary Peers) Bill

Debate between Desmond Swayne and Ellie Reeves

2nd reading
Tuesday 15th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Ellie Reeves]

There is lots of talk of reform from Opposition Members. They had 14 years, but chose not to do it.

[Sir Desmond Swayne]

The Conservative Government introduced a comprehensive Bill involving the election of peers. I was the Prime Minister’s Parliamentary Private Secretary at the time. It failed—notwithstanding the fact that I thought it was awful—because Labour withdrew its support for the timetable motion, which meant, as a constitutional Bill, it would have taken the Government’s entire timetable. For that reason, the Government withdrew the measure.

[Ellie Reeves]

That was four Governments ago. It failed due to the timetabling motion and the fact that the Conservatives could not get agreement even within their own party.

There have been, and are, hereditary peers who have made real and lasting contributions to public life. However, this is a matter of principle. It is not right that anyone should be able to take up a seat in our legislature and vote on our laws purely by virtue of the family that they were born into. Instead, this Government are committed to a smaller second Chamber that better reflects the country it serves. This Bill brings us a step closer to achieving that aim.