Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Jury Trials

Thursday 5 February 2026 · 4 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 3 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Helen Grant questioned the Government on contradictions regarding legal certainty and retrospective decision making.
  • The Minister responded that any changes will go through normal legislative procedures and invited scrutiny from the Conservatives.
  • Ben Maguire expressed concern over scrapping jury trials and called for clear evidence before proceeding with reforms.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Helen Grant Con Maidstone and Malling
Justice & Courts
Context

There is a contradiction between the Minister for Courts and Legal Services who says she would scrap jury trials even if there was not a crisis in courts, and the Lord Chancellor who wants to look at alternatives to reduce the backlog.

Question

The Government cannot champion legal certainty on the one hand and flirt with retrospective decision making on the other. There is another contradiction too, this time on retrospectivity. The Courts Minister says that cases already committed for trial at Crown court could be pushed back to swift courts. The Lord Chancellor suggests that the changes would only apply to new cases. That is not a minor discrepancy; it is about people’s lives. Which version are we meant to believe: the Lord Chancellor’s or the Minister’s?

Answer from The Solicitor General

Any changes will need to go through legislation in this House in the normal way, and I am sure that the Conservatives will want to scrutinise any proposals we put forward. I am happy to take away those questions to the Ministry of Justice and ensure that the hon. Lady receives an answer.

Not addressed: Clarification on whether changes would be retroactive or which statement is accurate was not provided.

How: Taking Questions Away To The Ministry Of Justice For Clarification

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Helen Grant Con Maidstone and Malling
Justice & Courts
Context

The Minister for Courts and Legal Services says she would scrap jury trials even if there was not a crisis in the courts. The Lord Chancellor wants to look at alternatives to reduce the backlog.

Question

Which is it? Is it about the backlog, in which case what alternatives to scrapping jury trials are actually being considered, or is this just an unworkable attack on our civil liberties wrapped up in ideology?

Answer from The Solicitor General

I would remind the hon. Lady that 90% of cases in this country are already heard without a jury, but I do not think it can be denied that 14 years of Conservative Government left a crisis in our courts. It cannot be right that victims of rape are waiting three or sometimes four years for their cases to get to court. As I have said before, reform on its own is not enough. That is why we have a record number of sitting days, and it is why we are putting £550 million into support for victims and have increased solicitor fees. We have to look across the system at how we can do better, because justice delayed is justice denied.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Alternatives besides scrapping jury trials were not provided, only a reminder that 90% of cases already proceed without juries and an explanation of measures to support victims and increase sitting days.

How: Reminding The Questioner That 90% Of Cases Do Not Use Juries, Emphasizing Investment In Support For Victims

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Ben Maguire Lib Dem North Cornwall
Justice & Courts
Context

Jury trials are a fundamental pillar of the justice system, but under proposed court reforms, they may be scrapped. The MP is concerned about the erosion of this right.

Question

Serious reforms should focus on reducing inefficiencies that waste sitting days, increasing court capacity and making use of vacant courtrooms, not scrapping the right to trial by jury. If the proposals are intended to reduce the Crown court backlog, should this House not be given clear evidence before core constitutional protections are weakened? Will the Solicitor General please tell us whether the Government will publish an estimate of what proportion of current Crown court backlog would be sent to judge-only trials as a result of the reforms?

Answer from The Solicitor General

The proposed changes would apply to less than 2% of all criminal trial cases. Under the reforms, almost three quarters of trial cases coming to the Crown court would still be heard by a jury, and that includes offences such as rape.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not directly address whether an estimate will be published on proportion of backlog redirected to judge-only trials.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q4 Ben Maguire Lib Dem North Cornwall
Justice & Courts Women & Equalities
Context

The question is asked during Sexual Abuse and Sexual Violence Awareness Week, highlighting concerns about the effect of judge-only proposals on victims of domestic abuse.

Question

Given that it is Sexual Abuse and Sexual Violence Awareness Week, what assessments have been made of how the judge-only proposals will affect vulnerable victims of domestic abuse?

Answer from The Solicitor General

There are transparency measures built in to safeguard justice, with judges setting out reasons for their verdicts and introducing recording in the magistrates courts.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not address specific assessments on impact of judge-only proposals on vulnerable victims.

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email