Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Changes to Jury Trials

Tuesday 3 February 2026 · 5 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 4 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Government not abandoning the jury system but rebalancing the threshold as suggested by Sir Brian Leveson
  • Ministers are exploring ways to improve court access, including local authorities opening bus lanes for quicker transport
  • Justice Secretary refers to Sir Brian Leveson's report on the increasing length of trials and the rise in arrests as reasons for changes

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 John Hayes Con South Holland and The Deepings
Justice & Courts
Context

The Lord Chancellor proposed changes to the right to a jury trial for certain offences. This prompts concern about its impact on criminal justice accountability.

Question

As you know, Mr Speaker, the age-old jury system connects the public to the exercise of law, and is therefore at the heart of popular consent for criminal justice. In abandoning this link, are the Government careless of the accountability that it brings, or are they driven wholly by thoughtless expediency? Are Ministers careless or thoughtless?

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

We are not abandoning the jury system, but as Sir Brian Leveson said in his Sunday Times article this weekend, the threshold needs to be rebalanced. I am not sure if the right hon. Gentleman was in Parliament in 1988, but I am sure that he did not object when Margaret Thatcher rebalanced the threshold and moved criminal damage and driving a vehicle without authority to the magistrates courts.

Partly answered

How: Referring To Historical Precedent

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Steve Darling Lib Dem Torbay
Policing & Resources Justice & Courts
Context

The Lord Chancellor proposed reforms to jury trials, which could affect the efficiency of the court system. Steve Darling mentions concerns about Serco's inadequate service delivery.

Question

There is clear evidence up and down the country of Serco failing to serve the Courts Service appropriately, including for my constituents in Torbay. Does the Secretary of State accept that if we can make sure that Serco can get people to the courts more rapidly, it will give them better access to justice and allow them to access jury trials?

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

The Courts Minister and the Prisons Minister are working together on this issue. Sir Brian Leveson will have more to say tomorrow in part 2 of his report, on efficiencies, but one of the things that we are looking at is local authorities opening bus lanes to those drivers, so that they can speed through.

Partly answered

How: Changing Subject

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Jonathan Brash Lab Hartlepool
Justice & Courts
Context

The Lord Chancellor proposed changes to restrict the right to a jury trial for certain offences, affecting the court backlog. There is concern about making these measures permanent without proper assessment.

Question

I recognise the Justice Secretary’s sincere commitment to tackling the court backlog that was disgracefully left by Conservative and Reform politicians. However, one of the most troubling aspects of the proposals on jury trials is the suggestion that the changes will be permanent, regardless of whether the backlog persists. Will he consider explicitly making these measures temporary and subject to review, so that their impact, if any, on reducing the court backlog can be properly assessed?

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

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that, but may I refer him to Sir Brian’s report, and to his article in The Sunday Times this weekend? He talks about trials being longer, DNA evidence, the fact that we are passing more legislation in this place, and the police arresting more people. For all those reasons, and if we are serious about tackling the backlog and getting to a properly established system in which people do not wait much longer than six months to a year for their trial, the changes that we are making have to be permanent.

Partly answered

How: Relying On Expert Opinion

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q4 David Lammy Lab Tottenham
Justice & Courts
Context

The Justice Secretary suggested that criminal trials without juries could help reduce the backlog in court cases, but this idea faced criticism and has been described as a bad idea by some.

Question

Mr Lammy criticised the government's proposal for criminal trials without juries as a bad idea, pointing out that even the Justice Secretary acknowledges its drawbacks. He challenged the government on how long they must wait for another U-turn regarding this policy.

Answer from David Lammy ( Tottenham ) (Lab)

The hon. Member’s colleagues are going to other Benches in this House, it is a bit rich raising what my colleagues are up to on the Back Benches when the hon. Member knows that article 40 of Magna Carta makes it clear that justice delayed is justice denied.

Not addressed: The specific proposal for non-jury trials was not directly addressed, and instead the response attacked the opposition's credibility.

How: Attack

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q5 Jess Brown-Fuller Lib Dem Chichester
Justice & Courts
Context

The government's proposal for non-jury criminal trials has faced criticism, with the Institute for Government’s report indicating minimal impact on court backlogs. There is also confusion over whether these reforms will be retrospective.

Question

Jess Brown-Fuller cited the Institute for Government’s report which showed that the plans to erode jury trials would contribute little to reducing court backlogs. She questioned who was telling the truth regarding whether the proposals would be retrospective, given conflicting statements from different ministers.

Answer from Lammy

The IfG estimated a 10% contribution. If this were a 10% contribution to bringing down waiting lists at a hospital in the hon. Lady’s constituency, she would have it. Sir Brian estimated a 20% contribution. I said we would bring forward the modelling. Of course, it is right that there is no substantive criminal liability change in our proposals, so in that sense, it is not retrospective, but in terms of caseload, of course, they will be subject to the new mode of trial once this Bill gets Royal Assent.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The answer partially addressed the question by clarifying the contribution and retroactivity of proposals but did not definitively resolve the conflicting statements.

How: Partial Answer

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email