Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Jury Trials

Tuesday 17 March 2026 · 8 questions

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

At a glance

Answered 3 Partly answered 2 Not answered 0

Key points

  • The detailed impact assessment, published alongside the Courts and Tribunals Bill, shows that the proposed measures will save about 27,000 sitting days per year.
  • The Government argues that the increase in police arrests and overall demand in the system justifies the reforms to jury trials.
  • The Justice Secretary contends that the proposed changes will help reduce the backlog of cases and improve the efficiency of the criminal justice system.

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Lincoln Jopp Con Spelthorne
Context

The Conservative government proposed changes to jury trials to address the criminal justice backlog. The question seeks an evaluation of these changes.

Question

What assessment has been made of the potential impact of proposed changes to jury trials on the criminal justice system?

Answer from David Lammy

The Conservatives left our criminal justice system on the brink of collapse, and we are taking action to clean up the mess they left behind. Our detailed impact assessment, published alongside the Courts and Tribunals Bill, shows that our package of measures will save about 27,000 sitting days per year, a saving of almost 20%. Only through reform, together with record investment and action to modernise our courts, can we finally turn the tide on the backlog and deliver swifter justice for victims.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q2 Jerome Mayhew Con Broadland and Fakenham
Context

The Justice Secretary's proposal to cut jury trials aims at reducing the backlog. The question seeks clarity on whether there will be a sunset clause.

Question

If cutting jury trials is to reduce the backlog, why is there not a sunset clause that would allow for the restoration of full jury trials once the backlog is reduced?

Answer from David Lammy

If the hon. Gentleman had listened during the Second Reading debate, he would have heard me say that demand in the system is up. Police arrests are 10% up. For all those reasons, alongside the backlog that we inherited from the Conservative Government, it is important that we put in place reform that is sustainable for the long term, and that is why there is not a sunset clause.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q3 Rebecca Smith Con South West Devon
Context

There are about 6,200 cases awaiting justice in the south-west and the question seeks alternatives to cutting jury trials.

Question

With about 6,200 cases waiting justice in the south-west, why not focus on efficiency improvements instead of reducing the right to a jury trial?

Answer from David Lammy

It was not un-British when the Callaghan Government made reforms at the end of the 1970s, and it was not un-British when Margaret Thatcher made changes in 1989. It is precisely because we are lifting the system, which was on its knees under the last Government, that it is absolutely the opposite of un-British to support victims, especially women, who find themselves in the criminal justice system.

Not addressed: The questioner's request for alternatives and efficiency measures.

How: Historical Context

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q4 Neil Shastri-Hurst Con Solihull West and Shirley
NHS
Context

The government's case for curtailing jury trials is based on an impact assessment that rests on assumptions rather than hard evidence.

Question

Is the Government asking Parliament to weaken a fundamental safeguard based solely on hearsay, as the case for curtailment does not rest on hard evidence?

Answer from David Lammy

Sir Brian Leveson spent months delivering part 1 and part 2 of his reforms. We are building on that. I have set out that this is a 20% saving. If the hon. Gentleman was Health Secretary—I am not sure he ever will be, but if he were—and he was told that a 20% saving could get the waiting list down, he would take it in an instant; so am I.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Specifically addressing the hearsay concern by referring to other reforms and savings percentages without directly confirming or denying evidence quality.

How: Referencing Other Reforms

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q5 Lincoln Jopp Con Spelthorne
Context

There are concerns that the government's current stance on jury trials is based on misleading data and that no circumstances justify curtailment.

Question

Are there any circumstances in which he would consider reintroducing jury trials for cases currently slated to lose this right?

Answer from David Lammy

I know the hon. Gentleman has studied this closely, but there are two problems we have to fix. Demand is going up—I said that the police are arresting more. But he will know that because of the use of smartphones, social media, DNA evidence and forensics—for all those reasons—trials are taking longer. That is what we are seeking to fix in the Courts and Tribunals Bill and that is why we have to put the system on a sustainable footing for the next generation. That is what the Bill will deliver.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Commitment or conditions for reintroduction of jury trials.

How: Explaining Reforms Without Addressing Potential Reinstatement

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Context

Victims of crime have been experiencing long wait times and uncertainty due to the backlog.

Question

Will these changes mean that victims are more likely to report crimes, get outcomes in a reasonable time, and feel less like they are on trial?

Answer from David Lammy

I am hugely grateful for my hon. Friend's continual advocacy in the Chamber on behalf of victims. She is absolutely right. If we do nothing, we head to a backlog of 200,000, and many, many victims sitting behind that backlog. If we do as Opposition Members suggest, we head to a backlog of 133,000. That is why we have to do these reforms and why I am very pleased to put forward a Bill that also does more, in particular for victims of sexual crime and rape.

Answered
Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q7 Alex McIntyre Lab Gloucester
Context

The previous Conservative government cut criminal justice funding and closed half of the magistrates courts, leading to a significant backlog.

Question

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the changes being driven through by our Government will mean victims are more able to report crimes and get outcomes in reasonable time?

Answer from David Lammy

One hundred per cent. That is why the shadow Justice Secretary, when he stands up, should apologise. He was sat in the Home Office while that was happening.

Not addressed: Agreement on proposed reforms effectiveness.

How: Criticising Opposition

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email
Q8 Nick Timothy Con West Suffolk
Context

The Justice Secretary's stance on criminal trials without juries has shifted, causing confusion. Previously, he opposed such trials but now supports them, changing his justification frequently.

Question

I think the public will be disappointed by this behaviour. The Justice Secretary cannot get his story straight. Like the Prime Minister, he once said: “Criminal trials without juries are a bad idea”. Now he says they are a good idea, with his justification for this change changing by the minute. Last week, 10 Labour MPs voted against the courts Bill and 90 abstained. They are looking for a compromise—not in the House of Lords, but while the Bill is in this House. The Justice Secretary just refused to agree a sunset clause in answer to my hon. Friend the Member for Broadland and Fakenham (Jerome Mayhew), so, for the sake of the 100 Labour MPs who do not trust him or his intentions, I will ask again: will he consider a sunset clause, or will he tell his own MPs no?

Answer from David Lammy

I have to say, the hon. Gentleman has not apologised for the state that the Conservatives left the criminal justice system in, closing 40% of court buildings in England—[Interruption.]

Not addressed: The specific request for a sunset clause was not addressed.

How: Changing The Subject To Criticise The Conservatives

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

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

Get updates like this by email