Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Neil Shastri-Hurst and Ellie Reeves(1 week, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Solicitor General
I thank the hon. Gentleman for that question—I know that he is a huge champion on these issues. I was really pleased to secure that £5 million investment to enable victims of domestic abuse in the Crown court to be offered meetings with the prosecution team before a case gets to trial and to have the benefit of dedicated victim liaison officer.
We know that attrition rates in these cases are still too high. That is why we are doing everything we can to bring them down. In Wales, for example, a domestic abuse charging pilot is going on, which enables the police to charge in some domestic abuse cases. We are seeing that significantly shorten the amount of time it takes to get a case into court, and we know that the quicker a case gets to court, the lower the attrition rate is likely to be. We are doing everything we can to tackle this issue.
Dr Neil Shastri-Hurst (Solihull West and Shirley) (Con)
The Solicitor General
This Government inherited a justice system in crisis, with a backlog of 80,000 criminal cases in the Crown court. That is why we are investing over £2.5 billion in our courts to fund unlimited sitting days, boost legal aid and, ultimately, speed up justice for victims. Let me be clear: jury trials will remain a cornerstone of our justice system, but justice delayed is justice denied.
Dr Shastri-Hurst
Imagine a scenario in which two individuals are both charged with the same offence and the factual matrix of each case is identical. However, the first defendant has a string of previous convictions, whereas the second has none. Under the Government’s proposal, the first defendant would be able to elect for a jury trial, depending on the length of the potential sentence, whereas the second would not. How does that align with the Solicitor General’s assessment of the rule of law?
The Solicitor General
Access to a jury trial is determined by the seriousness of the alleged offending, not by who the defendant is. As the hon. Gentleman will know, likely sentence is already used to determine court allocation and is a feature of our system. Every defendant in the Crown court will receive a fair trial, and that is not affected by the mode of trial decision.
Oral Answers to Questions
Debate between Neil Shastri-Hurst and Ellie Reeves(2 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
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.
Dr Shastri-Hurst
The contentious element of the Courts and Tribunals Bill relates to the proposed changes to jury trials. It has united the legal profession, the Opposition Benches and a significant number of Government MPs. To avoid the embarrassment of Government MPs coming out and defending the policy only to face a U-turn, can the Solicitor General give a categorical assurance to those on her own Benches that there will be no U-turn or watering down of this folly of a policy?
The Solicitor General
I am sure the hon. Gentleman listened to what the Deputy Prime Minister had to say at Justice questions two days ago. The reality is that the last Conservative Government left the justice system on its knees, with a backlog of 80,000 cases, which, without both investment and reform, will simply go up. That is why we are funding unlimited sitting days, increasing spending on criminal defence lawyers and investing in the crumbling courts that the last Government left behind. But Sir Brian was clear that investment alone would not tackle the backlog sufficiently, and that is why radical reform is also needed.