Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Jury Trials Proposal: Impact

Tuesday 16 December 2025 · 8 questions

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

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 8 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Justice Secretary rejects criticism of judicial independence, stating it is crucial for democracy.
  • Government will publish impact assessments for proposed jury trial legislation, including economic and equality impacts.
  • Reforms aim to address the backlog of cases, particularly for sex crime victims waiting over a year for trial.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Peter Bedford Con Mid Leicestershire
Justice & Courts
Context

Concerns about the independence and impartiality of the judiciary, particularly in cases involving freedom of speech.

Question

The Justice Secretary may have complete faith in the independence of the judiciary; sadly, I do not. We have seen a plethora of cases, particularly involving freedom of speech, where the judiciary has arguably been influenced by political correctness and the virtue signalling of bodies such as the Sentencing Council. If his proposals are designed to reduce the backlog, why do they not include a sunset clause?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

I completely reject what the hon. Gentleman said. It is an absolute essential foundation of our democracy that all of us in this House and in government respect the independence of the judiciary. I remind him that it is precisely because of the judiciary’s independence that it is not able to answer for itself. The Lord Chancellor has that responsibility, and I will do it robustly.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The questioner's concern about the independence and impartiality of the judiciary was not directly addressed.

How: Rejection Of Premise

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Ashley Fox Con Bridgwater
Justice & Courts Standards & Ethics
Context

The Lord Chancellor's statement last week about restricting the right to a jury trial and promise of an impact assessment.

Question

When the Lord Chancellor made his statement on jury trials last week, he said that an impact assessment would be published with the legislation. Given how powerful a defender of jury trials he has been in the past, will he publish the evidence and the modelling that he has seen since coming to office that caused him to change his mind?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. Whenever a Government propose legislation, there must be an impact assessment—both an economic impact assessment and an equality impact assessment—and of course we will publish it in the usual way.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific evidence and modelling leading to the change in stance were not addressed.

How: Promise Of Standard Procedure

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Jessica Toale Lab Bournemouth West
Justice & Courts
Context

Concerns about the length and trauma experienced by victims waiting for justice.

Question

Victims must be at the forefront of our minds when thinking about reforms to our justice system. Many of them wait years and are often retraumatised by going through the process of a criminal court trial. Can the Secretary of State tell me how these changes will ensure that we bring criminals properly and promptly to justice, to bring matters to a close for victims?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. A third of all sex victims in the backlog have now been waiting a year or more, and she knows that in many of those cases, there are also defendants playing the system, pleading late with pre-hearing after pre-hearing, with the result that witnesses fall away and cases collapse. It is for that reason that it is absolutely right that we change the threshold and introduce the measures that Brian Leveson has properly looked at, to speed up the process and get those victims justice.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not address how changes ensure prompt justice without undermining due process.

How: Highlighting Backlog Issues

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q4 Karl Turner Ind Kingston upon Hull East
Justice & Courts
Context

Concerns about the impact of extending magistrates' powers and reducing jury trials on prison capacity.

Question

The Justice Secretary wants to do away with some jury trials. He wants to extend the powers of magistrates to sentence up to 24 months without the right to appeal a conviction or sentence. I think I am right in saying that the capacity in prisons is at 88,000 as we speak today. Where are all those apparently guilty people going to be put?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

My hon. Friend and I have been friends for a very long time and I recognise his experience in matters related to criminal trials. May I just remind him that we have the Sentencing Bill passing through the House? That will give us greater capacity in the prison system. He will also know that the Government are on track to provide 40,000 extra prison places by the early 2030s—under the last Government, there were only 500. All of that increases capacity, and of course we hope that jury trials will also make a difference for victims.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not fully address immediate concerns about prison overcrowding.

How: Highlighting Future Plans

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q5 David Davis Con Goole and Pocklington
Justice & Courts
Context

Concerns about the analysis of the review by Geoffrey Rivlin KC, who described much of it as unfounded and misguided due to poor data.

Question

The Justice Secretary quite rightly says that justice delayed is justice denied, but summary justice is no justice at all. He based much of his argument on the views of the eminent Lord Leveson, but has he read the analysis of that review by Geoffrey Rivlin KC, who went through the report in expert detail and described much of it as unfounded and misguided because it was based on poor data. If the Justice Secretary has not read it, will he please do so before he comes back to the House?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

I say to the right hon. Gentleman that it was a serious independent panel and I do not think he can reject Sir Brian Leveson out of hand in that way. I remind him that David Ormerod was also on the panel. The analysis was based on data and on evidence internationally, and that is why it is important that we implement it. There is no silver bullet. To affect change, we have to do it all; otherwise, at the next general election, the backlog will have soared to over 100,000.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not address whether he has read Rivlin's analysis.

How: Rejection Of Premise

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q6 Sarah Coombes Lab West Bromwich
Justice & Courts
Context

Heartbreaking stories of women waiting years for their abuser to be brought to trial.

Question

I have heard heartbreaking stories of women from my constituency who have waited years for their abuser to be brought to trial. The crisis that has developed in our courts is having a devastating impact on victims. Given that many of the previous reforms to judge, jury and magistrate trials over the past 50 years were also intended to speed up the system, will the Secretary of State outline how these proposed changes will fix the broken system and deliver swift justice for victims?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. First, we need investment and more sitting days. We did not get that under the last Government—we are getting that now. Secondly, we need reform. We asked Sir Brian Leveson to look at this in great detail. He did that, and we must now respond and not shirk from the reform that is necessary. Thirdly, we need modernisation. That is why, for example, being able to get a transcript and a recording at magistrates is so important.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not fully address how changes specifically ensure swift justice without undermining due process.

How: Highlighting Past Failures

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q7 Robert Jenrick Reform Newark
Justice & Courts
Context

Concerns about the automatic right to appeal and its importance as a safety valve in courtrooms.

Question

Under the Justice Secretary’s plans to slash jury trials, he is giving magistrates more serious cases. However, he also plans to scrap the automatic right to appeal—a vital safety valve in courtrooms where justice is delivered at pace by volunteers. Last year, 5,000 cases from magistrates courts were appealed, of which more than 40% were upheld. Given that very high rate of successful appeals, will the Secretary of State be honest with the public and concede that curtailing appeals will unquestionably lead to miscarriages of justice?

Answer from David Lammy (The Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice)

The right hon. Member for Goole and Pocklington (David Davis) on the Conservative Back Benches has just said that summary justice is no justice—either they believe in our magistrates or they do not. I believe in our magistrates. Sir Brian recommended a permission stage, and we accept his recommendation for creating a permission stage on appeal. That is the right thing to do, particularly because many appeals have no merits, and that is why victims fall away.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not directly address concerns about miscarriages of justice.

How: Rejection Of Premise

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q8 Lammy Lab Tottenham
Justice & Courts
Context

The MP is addressing reforms in the justice system, particularly focusing on jury trials and modernisation recommended by Justice Leveson.

Question

We are accepting a permission stage that was recommended by Brian Leveson. We need more sitting days and investment to continue with reform. Jury trials will remain a cornerstone of the Crown court system, but we require modernisation. The previous government did not address these issues adequately.

Answer from The Prime Minister (Rishi Sunak) or other minister with title

I acknowledge that reforms are necessary in the justice system. We will continue to ensure jury trials remain a cornerstone of our legal proceedings while also embracing modernisation as recommended by Justice Leveson. The government is committed to providing more sitting days and investment, building upon previous efforts.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specific commitments on increased sitting days and exact amounts of investment

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email