Oral Answers to Questions

Ellie Reeves Excerpts

Thursday 9th July 2026 Commons Chamber

[Douglas Lumsden (Aberdeen South) (Con)]

7. What advice she has given the Government on the potential impact of removing jury trials in certain circumstances on the rule of law.

[The Solicitor General (Ellie Reeves)]

Jury trials remain a cornerstone of our justice system, and will always be in place for the most serious crimes. The Government must guarantee everyone a fair trial. Timeliness is essential for fairness, and the fairness of the system is being undermined by the record backlogs in the Crown court, which we inherited from the previous Conservative Government.

[Dr Johnson]

In restricting access to jury trials, the Government have leant quite heavily on the Leveson report, but the Government go much further than the report recommends. Will the Solicitor General explain why?

[The Solicitor General]

Leveson in his report stated that investment alone was not enough and that the system needs reforming as well. We have made a record £2.7 billion investment in the courts, which provides for unlimited sitting days, an increase in defence fees, and includes half a billion pounds for victims services. That is fixing the mess that we inherited.

[Sir Bernard Jenkin]

Where is the evidence that jury trials are causing the delays? In the south-east and other parts of the country, the backlog is already falling. The Government should be commended for that, but what are the other causes of delays, and are they not much more significant than any delay caused by the fact that they are jury trials?

[The Solicitor General]

We have put record investment into the courts, with measures such as unlimited sitting days. The Crown Prosecution Service has increased the number of Crown advocates on the Crown advocate panel and increased support offered to victims. Leveson was clear that investment alone would not fix the problems that we inherited and the 80,000 case backlog. The proposal suggests that it will speed up cases by 20%, and that has been backed by the Institute for Government.

[Douglas Lumsden]

Juries are the bedrock of our legal system, and public involvement in the justice system is central to public trust and consent. It cannot, and it should not, be eroded. This is a prime example of this failing Government implementing reforms for no good reason. Why will the Solicitor General not call this out as the attack on the rule of law that it clearly is?

[The Solicitor General]

I am astonished that the hon. Gentleman says that the measures we are introducing are for no good reason. We inherited a courts system in crisis, with a backlog of 80,000 cases and victims waiting years for their cases to get to court. Doing nothing was not an option, which is why we have invested record amounts in our courts and why Justice Ministers are looking at reforming the system.

[Andy Slaughter (Hammersmith and Chiswick) (Lab)]

Sir Brian Leveson made 180 recommendations, very few of which concerned juries. His review covered the whole criminal justice system, including the CPS. The Government have never responded to Sir Brian’s review, and they have never said how each of those recommendations will be treated and how they will contribute to reducing the backlog. Are they still planning to do that, and if so, when?

[The Solicitor General]

We have considered all of Sir Brian’s recommendations. I have met him to discuss those relating to the work of the CPS, and I continue to meet the CPS regularly to discuss what more it can do to support the criminal justice system. For example, just this week I announced the early victims’ right to review, which will be rolled out nationwide. We are also extending more support to victims of domestic abuse, offering them a pre-trial meeting with the prosecution. It is important that we do everything we can, not only to speed up cases but to make sure that victims have confidence in the justice system.

[Warinder Juss (Wolverhampton West) (Lab)]

The Solicitor General has just mentioned the early victims’ right to review, or the VRR. As a west midlands MP, I am proud that we were the first area in the country to trial the scheme for victims of rape and serious sexual offences. Will the Solicitor General confirm that jury trials will still be available for such cases, and will she please tell Members what assessment she has made of the impact of the VRR scheme?

[The Solicitor General]

Jury trials will always remain in place for the most serious cases. My hon. Friend raises a point about the early victims’ right to review scheme, which will be rolled out nationwide on Monday. He is right that the west midlands led the way with the first pilot of the scheme. Under the scheme, victims of rape and serious sexual offences will have the opportunity for their case to be reviewed by a second independent prosecutor before any decision is taken to stop the case before trial. That gives victims a second chance of justice and a greater say in their case. I am pleased that the west midlands led the way on that.

[Nick Smith (Blaenau Gwent and Rhymney) (Lab)]

Although it is a civil matter, where a jury trial cannot apply, yesterday we found out that Virgin Media has been fined a record £28 million for ripping off its customers, yet the chief executive appears to be getting off scot-free. I think that the shareholders should be considering his future and the possibility of bonuses being returned. Does the Solicitor General agree that constituents will be asking who is accountable for such predatory corporate behaviour?

[The Solicitor General]

My hon. Friend is a great champion for his constituents, and for all those affected by this issue. I share his concerns about accountability. Although the matter does not sit with the Attorney General’s office, I will ensure that his question is passed on to the relevant Minister and he receives a response.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Solicitor General.

[Helen Grant (Maidstone and Malling) (Con)]

At Justice questions last Tuesday, the Minister for Courts and Legal Services restated her total support for the Government’s attack on jury trials. She described it as “pragmatic structural reform”, and suggested that those who oppose it are burying

“their heads in the sand”—[Official Report, 30 June 2026; Vol. 788, c. 743.]

She also said that it is a point of principle to limit trial by jury, and that she would pursue the policy regardless of the crisis in the courts. Whatever the practical concerns, are the proposed changes to jury trials also a point of principle for the Solicitor General—yes or no?

[The Solicitor General]

As I have set out at this Dispatch Box over recent months, Sir Brian Leveson said in his report that investment alone was not enough, and that reform was also necessary to bring down the backlog of 80,000 cases that we inherited from the previous Conservative Government. Inaction just was not an option. The Ministry of Justice has had to take difficult choices. I remind the hon. Lady that, unlike the previous Conservative Government, we have invested in our courts, introduced unlimited sitting days and invested in victim services. We are doing everything we can to get the backlog down, so that victims can have their cases heard without having to wait years and years for justice.

[Helen Grant]

The right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), likely the next Prime Minister, has said that jury trials are the

“lynchpin of a fair society”

and that the plans to curb them should be paused. When he takes over, can we look forward to the Solicitor General’s supporting the scrapping or watering down of the very same changes that she has robustly supported? Does she think that any jury would believe a defendant whose story changed quite as often as this Government’s?

[The Solicitor General]

The hon. Lady will know that I am not the spokesperson for my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield, but I am sure that, like all of us in the House, he is concerned about the unprecedented court backlogs that this Government inherited, and that he will engage with Ministry of Justice Ministers as the Courts and Tribunals Bill progresses through Parliament. Victims are waiting years for a date in court. That is why the Government have invested record amounts in the court system and will continue working to bring down the backlog.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Luke Taylor (Sutton and Cheam) (LD)]

I visited Croydon Crown court a few weeks ago with the Bar Council and listened to some of its members. It was clearer than ever that the demands of jury trials are not what is leaving victims waiting years for justice. The real question is how we get the most urgent cases listed, prioritised and heard fast to deliver timely justice for our constituents.

Will the Minister listen to calls from the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the right hon. Member for Makerfield—I do not know what Count Binface thinks about this, but I am pretty sure he will be on the right side of the argument—to instead consider reforms that would make an immediate difference to Crown court backlogs, such as having specialist sexual offences and domestic abuse courts, as the Bar Council has recommended? Those would ensure that victims get justice sooner, without curtailing the fundamental right to trial by jury.

[The Solicitor General]

The hon. Member will know that a national listing framework is being introduced to tackle some of the issues that he describes. He will also know that it was a manifesto commitment to introduce specialist rape courts. The Ministry of Justice is determined to do that, so that victims of rape and serious sexual violence are not waiting years for their cases to get to court.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

2. What steps she is taking to help increase prosecution rates for crimes involving violence against women and girls.

--- Later in debate ---

[Andrew George (St Ives) (LD)]

8. What steps she is taking to help increase prosecution rates in cases of violence against women and children.

[The Solicitor General]

This week, I announced the national roll-out of the early victims’ right to review scheme. From Monday, if the Crown Prosecution Service is considering dropping a case, rape and serious sexual assault survivors across England and Wales will have the right for that view to be reviewed by a second independent prosecutor before a final decision is taken. I have sat with advocates and survivors who fight every day, and are determined for the system to change. This week, we have changed it.

[Peter Swallow]

My right hon. and learned Friend is right that the system needs to change. I have been contacted by a constituent who has waited four years for her day in court, following her ex-partner being charged with coercive and controlling behaviour. She has seen her trial date repeatedly pushed back, often within two weeks of when it was due to start. My right hon. and learned Friend will know that this is a well-known tactic that abusers use to continue the harassment of their victims, to delay justice, and, ultimately, to frustrate their victims and urge them to drop out of the trial altogether. What work are the Government doing to stop this tactic, and ensure that victims like my constituent see the justice that they deserve?

[The Solicitor General]

I commend the bravery and courage of my hon. Friend’s constituent in coming forward, and I am very sorry to hear about the additional trauma that they have faced waiting for justice to be served. As well as tackling the backlog to reduce delays, this Government are committed to supporting victims. In April, I announced an additional £5 million of Treasury funding to offer domestic abuse victims in Crown court cases a pre-trial meeting with the prosecution team. These crucial meetings will support victims in the lead-up to their trial. A similar service is already offered to victims of rape and serious sexual assault, and I am pleased that we are now able to pilot that for victims of domestic abuse in three CPS areas.

[Catherine Fookes]

I spoke recently, at a surgery, to one of my Monmouthshire constituents who had served on a jury in a case in which the victim had been subject to domestic violence. I was horrified to hear that there were only two women on a jury of 12, and that my constituent had heard other jurors victim blaming and making judgmental comments about the victim’s appearance. They were concerned that prejudices may have impacted the outcome of the trial. Of course, I understand that jurors are picked at random, but in cases of violence against women, what more can we do to change the system, so that survivors get the justice they deserve and are treated fairly?

[The Solicitor General]

I thank my hon. Friend for that question, and for everything that she has done on this important issue. The Government’s landmark strategy to halve violence against women and girls starts with prevention, by focusing on the root causes and designing interventions to tackle outdated societal attitudes. We are investing a record £20 million in education to address harmful attitudes and behaviours head-on, so that young people are taught to identify positive role models, and to challenge unhealthy myths about women and relationships. In trials by jury, the judge gives directions that each juror must evaluate the evidence before them dispassionately, putting aside any bias towards the victim.

[Liz Twist]

It is absolutely vital that victims are at the heart of our justice system. My Blaydon and Consett constituents know that for too long, the system has not been working for victims of rape and serious sexual offences. What impact does the Solicitor General believe that the early victims’ right to review will have for victims?

[The Solicitor General]

I start by paying tribute to the tireless campaigning of Jade Blue. Jade was a victim of rape, but the CPS wrongly dropped her case just 13 days before trial. Ever since, she has campaigned for change. The early victims’ right to review gives rape victims the chance for their case to be reviewed before the CPS makes a final decision. If that had been in place for Jade Blue, her case would have continued, and in the pilot, cases that would previously have been stopped have carried on. I am determined that we will put victims at the heart of our justice system. Because of that, we are rolling out this scheme nationwide.

[Andrew George]

The fact that so many colleagues have raised these questions again today is a clear indication of how serious the issue of low and slow prosecution rates is. If the primary purpose of custodial sentences is public protection, does the Minister understand why victims in my constituency clearly feel discouraged, having witnessed violent offenders being given very short custodial sentences, or being granted early parole in spite of the danger that they represent to society?

[The Solicitor General]

Tackling violence against women and girls is my No. 1 priority as Solicitor General. I oversee the unduly lenient sentence scheme, and where a sentence is clearly unduly lenient, I can refer the case to the Court of Appeal for review. Members of the public, and victims and their family members, can all refer cases to the scheme. It is an important way of ensuring transparency in our system, and that there is an ability to challenge, where things go wrong.

[Wera Hobhouse (Bath) (LD)]

I work with a wonderful charity in Bath called Voices, which supports women through their trauma, and helps them to cope with a complex and often unsympathetic court system. What are the Government doing to make it easier for survivors of abuse to cope with a system that often seems to add insult to injury?

[The Solicitor General]

I commend Voices in Bath and its important support for women. The CPS has introduced an enhanced service for victims of rape and serious sexual abuse. Victims now have a dedicated victim liaison officer, who they can contact throughout their case, and they are offered a pre-trial meeting with the prosecution. Following the success of that scheme, it is being trialled for victims of domestic abuse, and I have secured £5 million of funding to pilot a scheme in which victims of domestic abuse whose cases are in the Crown court are also offered that pre-trial meeting. We are leaving no stone unturned when it comes to supporting victims.

[Clive Jones (Wokingham) (LD)]

Too many abusers escape justice in court, leaving victims, including my constituents, without proper justice. In May, I called for the mandatory involvement of independent domestic violence advisers in the family court process. In response, the Under-Secretary of State for Justice, the hon. Member for Derby North (Catherine Atkinson), said:

“It cannot be warm words; there needs to be action.”——[Official Report, 21 May 2026; Vol. 786, c. 37WH.]

What steps have the Government taken to make independent domestic advisers mandatory in family courts, to help deliver justice?

[The Solicitor General]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for championing the role of independent domestic abuse advisers. They do incredibly important work. I will ensure that his question and comments about the specifics of the family courts are passed to a Minister in the Ministry of Justice, so that he receives a full response.

[Apsana Begum (Poplar and Limehouse) (Lab)]

I am relieved that, ahead of the summer recess, the Government have not brought back to the House their controversial proposals to curtail jury trials, which I opposed on Second Reading of the Courts and Tribunals Bill. Also included in that Bill were crucial measures to repeal the presumption of child contact in family court cases, after years of campaigning by Women’s Aid, Claire Throssell and others. Some reports suggest that the jury trial proposals have now been shelved, but will the Solicitor General confirm that the Government will still deliver the commitment to abolish the presumption of contact, perhaps through alternative legal means?

[The Solicitor General]

My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important and powerful point, and I commend her on all her work to tackle violence against women and girls, and on the courage that she has shown. The presumption of contact changes are incredibly important, and will progress in the usual way, as the Bill goes through Parliament.

[Dr Danny Chambers (Winchester) (LD)]

It is well recognised that people who inflict deliberate pain, injury or violence on animals are more likely to be involved in domestic abuse, yet if someone is prosecuted for deliberately injuring an animal, they are prosecuted under animal welfare laws, meaning that their conviction is unlikely to show up under the domestic abuse disclosure scheme. Will the Minister look at how we can change the recording of such offences, so that people who deliberately harm animals are likely to be reported as being at risk of committing domestic abuse against people?

[The Solicitor General]

The hon. Gentleman makes a really important point: some research has shown a correlation between someone abusing their pet and domestic abuse. That is touched on in the cross-Government VAWG strategy. It is important that vets are aware of that research and that link, and can detect those issues and signpost and escalate when necessary.

[Mr Speaker]

That completes questions. [Interruption.] Hon. Members might be disappointed, but it is not my fault—it was the length of the questions. We allowed almost 30 minutes instead of the allocated 20 minutes, so I ask Members please to look to colleagues who asked the longest questions.