1. What advice she has given the Government on the potential impact of removing jury trials in certain circumstances on the rule of law.

3. What advice she has given the Government on the potential impact of removing jury trials in certain circumstances on the rule of law.

7. What advice she has given the Government on the potential impact of removing jury trials in certain circumstances on the rule of law.

Jury trials remain a cornerstone of our justice system, and will always be in place for the most serious crimes. The Government must guarantee everyone a fair trial. Timeliness is essential for fairness, and the fairness of the system is being undermined by the record backlogs in the Crown court, which we inherited from the previous Conservative Government.

In restricting access to jury trials, the Government have leant quite heavily on the Leveson report, but the Government go much further than the report recommends. Will the Solicitor General explain why?

Leveson in his report stated that investment alone was not enough and that the system needs reforming as well. We have made a record £2.7 billion investment in the courts, which provides for unlimited sitting days, an increase in defence fees, and includes half a billion pounds for victims services. That is fixing the mess that we inherited.

Where is the evidence that jury trials are causing the delays? In the south-east and other parts of the country, the backlog is already falling. The Government should be commended for that, but what are the other causes of delays, and are they not much more significant than any delay caused by the fact that they are jury trials?

We have put record investment into the courts, with measures such as unlimited sitting days. The Crown Prosecution Service has increased the number of Crown advocates on the Crown advocate panel and increased support offered to victims. Leveson was clear that investment alone would not fix the problems that we inherited and the 80,000 case backlog. The proposal suggests that it will speed up cases by 20%, and that has been backed by the Institute for Government.

Juries are the bedrock of our legal system, and public involvement in the justice system is central to public trust and consent. It cannot, and it should not, be eroded. This is a prime example of this failing Government implementing reforms for no good reason. Why will the Solicitor General not call this out as the attack on the rule of law that it clearly is?

I am astonished that the hon. Gentleman says that the measures we are introducing are for no good reason. We inherited a courts system in crisis, with a backlog of 80,000 cases and victims waiting years for their cases to get to court. Doing nothing was not an option, which is why we have invested record amounts in our courts and why Justice Ministers are looking at reforming the system.

I call the Chair of the Justice Committee.

Sir Brian Leveson made 180 recommendations, very few of which concerned juries. His review covered the whole criminal justice system, including the CPS. The Government have never responded to Sir Brian’s review, and they have never said how each of those recommendations will be treated and how they will contribute to reducing the backlog. Are they still planning to do that, and if so, when?

We have considered all of Sir Brian’s recommendations. I have met him to discuss those relating to the work of the CPS, and I continue to meet the CPS regularly to discuss what more it can do to support the criminal justice system. For example, just this week I announced the early victims’ right to review, which will be rolled out nationwide. We are also extending more support to victims of domestic abuse, offering them a pre-trial meeting with the prosecution. It is important that we do everything we can, not only to speed up cases but to make sure that victims have confidence in the justice system.

The Solicitor General has just mentioned the early victims’ right to review, or the VRR. As a west midlands MP, I am proud that we were the first area in the country to trial the scheme for victims of rape and serious sexual offences. Will the Solicitor General confirm that jury trials will still be available for such cases, and will she please tell Members what assessment she has made of the impact of the VRR scheme?

Jury trials will always remain in place for the most serious cases. My hon. Friend raises a point about the early victims’ right to review scheme, which will be rolled out nationwide on Monday. He is right that the west midlands led the way with the first pilot of the scheme. Under the scheme, victims of rape and serious sexual offences will have the opportunity for their case to be reviewed by a second independent prosecutor before any decision is taken to stop the case before trial. That gives victims a second chance of justice and a greater say in their case. I am pleased that the west midlands led the way on that.

Although it is a civil matter, where a jury trial cannot apply, yesterday we found out that Virgin Media has been fined a record £28 million for ripping off its customers, yet the chief executive appears to be getting off scot-free. I think that the shareholders should be considering his future and the possibility of bonuses being returned. Does the Solicitor General agree that constituents will be asking who is accountable for such predatory corporate behaviour?

My hon. Friend is a great champion for his constituents, and for all those affected by this issue. I share his concerns about accountability. Although the matter does not sit with the Attorney General’s office, I will ensure that his question is passed on to the relevant Minister and he receives a response.

I call the shadow Solicitor General.

At Justice questions last Tuesday, the Minister for Courts and Legal Services restated her total support for the Government’s attack on jury trials. She described it as “pragmatic structural reform”, and suggested that those who oppose it are burying “their heads in the sand”—[Official Report, 30 June 2026; Vol. 788, c. 743.] She also said that it is a point of principle to limit trial by jury, and that she would pursue the policy regardless of the crisis in the courts. Whatever the practical concerns, are the proposed changes to jury trials also a point of principle for the Solicitor General—yes or no?

As I have set out at this Dispatch Box over recent months, Sir Brian Leveson said in his report that investment alone was not enough, and that reform was also necessary to bring down the backlog of 80,000 cases that we inherited from the previous Conservative Government. Inaction just was not an option. The Ministry of Justice has had to take difficult choices. I remind the hon. Lady that, unlike the previous Conservative Government, we have invested in our courts, introduced unlimited sitting days and invested in victim services. We are doing everything we can to get the backlog down, so that victims can have their cases heard without having to wait years and years for justice.

The right hon. Member for Makerfield (Andy Burnham), likely the next Prime Minister, has said that jury trials are the “lynchpin of a fair society” and that the plans to curb them should be paused. When he takes over, can we look forward to the Solicitor General’s supporting the scrapping or watering down of the very same changes that she has robustly supported? Does she think that any jury would believe a defendant whose story changed quite as often as this Government’s?

The hon. Lady will know that I am not the spokesperson for my right hon. Friend the Member for Makerfield, but I am sure that, like all of us in the House, he is concerned about the unprecedented court backlogs that this Government inherited, and that he will engage with Ministry of Justice Ministers as the Courts and Tribunals Bill progresses through Parliament. Victims are waiting years for a date in court. That is why the Government have invested record amounts in the court system and will continue working to bring down the backlog.

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

I visited Croydon Crown court a few weeks ago with the Bar Council and listened to some of its members. It was clearer than ever that the demands of jury trials are not what is leaving victims waiting years for justice. The real question is how we get the most urgent cases listed, prioritised and heard fast to deliver timely justice for our constituents. Will the Minister listen to calls from the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives and the right hon. Member for Makerfield—I do not know what Count Binface thinks about this, but I am pretty sure he will be on the right side of the argument—to instead consider reforms that would make an immediate difference to Crown court backlogs, such as having specialist sexual offences and domestic abuse courts, as the Bar Council has recommended? Those would ensure that victims get justice sooner, without curtailing the fundamental right to trial by jury.

The hon. Member will know that a national listing framework is being introduced to tackle some of the issues that he describes. He will also know that it was a manifesto commitment to introduce specialist rape courts. The Ministry of Justice is determined to do that, so that victims of rape and serious sexual violence are not waiting years for their cases to get to court.