Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Child Sexual Exploitation: Historical Cases

Tuesday 9 January 2024 · 2 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Debbie Abrahams raised concerns about a constituent's delayed historical child sexual exploitation case.
  • The Minister expressed gratitude and willingness to meet to discuss the case adjournment reasons.
  • There is a backlog of approximately 65,000 Crown court cases, a 33% increase from 2020.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Debbie Abrahams Lab Oldham East and Saddleworth
Context

A constituent waited several years for a historical child sexual exploitation case to be heard, with two cancellations causing significant distress. There is a backlog of approximately 65,000 Crown court cases, nearly one-third waiting over a year compared to 10% in 2020.

Question

My constituent had to wait several years before her historical child sexual exploitation case was finally heard. During that time, the court date was cancelled twice, causing her immense distress. There is a backlog of about 65,000 Crown court cases—a third more there than in 2020—and nearly a third are waiting more than one year, compared with 10% in 2020. I appreciate what the Minister said about the additional barristers and judges recruited, but given the sensitive nature of these cases, could she indicate what percentage of the backlog is down to that and what she and her team are doing specifically to address it?

Answer from Laura Farris

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising this issue again. Listing is a matter for the independent judiciary, but I would like to meet her to discuss the specific reasons for adjourning the case she mentioned. A new police taskforce has led to a 20% increase in child sex charges over the past year alone, and Greater Manchester currently has 59 live investigations into child sexual abuse involving complex cases with multiple perpetrators and victims.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Percentage of backlog related to delays in scheduling historical child sexual exploitation cases was not provided.

How: Listing Is A Matter For The Independent Judiciary, Would Like To Meet To Discuss Specific Reasons

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Debbie Abrahams Lab Oldham East and Saddleworth
Context

A constituent waited several years for a historical child sexual exploitation case to be heard, with two cancellations causing significant distress. There is a backlog of approximately 65,000 Crown court cases, nearly one-third waiting over a year compared to 10% in 2020.

Question

My constituent had to wait several years before her historical child sexual exploitation case was finally heard. During that time, the court date was cancelled twice, causing her immense distress. There is a backlog of about 65,000 Crown court cases—a third more there than in 2020—and nearly a third are waiting more than one year, compared with 10% in 2020. I appreciate what the Minister said about the additional barristers and judges recruited, but given the sensitive nature of these cases, could she indicate what percentage of the backlog is down to that and what she and her team are doing specifically to address it?

Answer from Laura Farris

I am grateful to the hon. Lady for raising this issue again. Listing is a matter for the independent judiciary, but I would like to meet her to discuss the specific reasons for adjourning the case she mentioned. A new police taskforce has led to a 20% increase in child sex charges over the past year alone, and Greater Manchester currently has 59 live investigations into child sexual abuse involving complex cases with multiple perpetrators and victims.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Percentage of backlog related to delays in scheduling historical child sexual exploitation cases was not provided.

How: Listing Is A Matter For The Independent Judiciary, Would Like To Meet To Discuss Specific Reasons

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)