Speeches by Wright.

“I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for opening the debate. I say this mostly for the benefit of those in the Public Gallery, but we are expecting votes in the main Chamber soon. If that happens, I will suspend the sitting and we will reconvene when the votes are complete. I call Jim Shannon.”

“We have 10 speakers to come and I have to start Front-Bench speeches at about 3.30 pm, so speeches will need to be nearer three minutes, I am afraid. I call Pippa Heylings.”

“Order. I am trying to avoid setting a formal time limit, but people will need to help me; I am afraid speeches will need to be sub-three minutes.”

“I will call Dr Allison Gardner to move the motion and then I will call the Minister to respond. I remind other Members who are present that they may make a speech only with the prior permission of both the Member in charge of the debate and the Minister; subject to the discretion of the Minister and the Member in charg…”

“The Government deserve credit for taking seriously a serious report into a serious problem, but is it the Justice Secretary’s preference that the changes he has outlined to jury trial will be permanent or that they will recede when the problem of backlogs recedes? In relation to judges alone deciding either-way cases, …”

“I welcome a great deal of what the Minister said in his statement. As I am sure he agrees, just as we know that China can simultaneously represent a national security threat and economic opportunity, China knows it too. That means that—even if it were not the right thing to do in and of itself, which of course it is—st…”

“I am extremely grateful to the Minister for giving way, especially so early in his remarks. I apologise to him and to the House for not being here for his opening remarks, which he has just mentioned. In them, he talked a little about Government amendments (a) and (b) in lieu of Lords amendment 31. I am grateful to him…”

“There cannot be any harm in making Members of Parliament more aware than they are now of what the sub judice resolution actually says. There is no downside to greater education. By all means, let us find a way of making sure everybody understands clearly what it says, but, as Dominic said, that is a very different thin…”

“One is worse than the other.”

“It is probably worth restating Dominic’s earlier point about comity. There is a reason that judges are undoubtedly more robust than juries. It is not about judges being clever and juries not; it is about their experience of determining what evidence is relevant and what is not. That is what we train judges to do; they …”

“Again, I think I can say I do not think it did happen, and I do not think it even came close to happening in my time. There is a distinction to be made between the application of the sub judice rule and contempt of court proceedings, where certainly things did happen that required our intervention—sometimes by way of w…”

“Again, the same would apply. Essentially, the thing about the Attorney General’s Office is that it is broadly a reactive department, not a proactive one. If somebody came to us with an issue, we would absolutely have been engaged as Attorneys General, but we would also have engaged our staff in the Attorney General’s O…”

“As we indicated earlier, I think the answer to that is very little. It is very different when you are talking about contempt of court more broadly, but if you are asking about the specific workings of the sub judice resolution in the House of Commons, I do not think I had a single occasion where I was obliged, as Attor…”

“I am conscious, Chair, that you do not want us all answering every question, but the only thing I would add is that I think it is clear in the sense that it is clear when it starts and when it stops—it sets that out with clarity. The only thing that makes it unclear, aside from what my colleagues have already said, is …”

“Just to follow on from that, it is absolutely a judge’s responsibility to decide whether, in a case they are trying, a fair trial is possible. If a fair trial has been prejudiced by something that someone, even a Member of Parliament, has said, then it is absolutely not just the opportunity but the responsibility of th…”

“That is true, but I suppose it is conceivable that somebody would none the less, in the course of debate, choose to talk about a case that is sub judice.”

“That is a very good question. You are sitting next to Sir Christopher, who has been doing it for a lot longer than I have. The answer specifically is, I do not think so, but that is likely to be because this hardly every occurs, and certainly not in Committee proceedings. Of course, the Panel of Chairs will chair eithe…”

“I do not have much to add. The reality of this job is that you subject yourself to the judgments of the Chair. Control is in the hands of the Speaker or of the Chair of whichever Committee the proceedings are taking place in. It is up to them to decide whether the sub judice rule applies and, generally speaking, to say…”

“Indeed, but there is nothing, as far as I can see, in the sub judice resolution that prevents anybody here from criticising that quango for acting in that way. The restriction is only in relation to judicial proceedings, and the activities of IPSO are not judicial proceedings.”

“The way I read the sub judice resolution is that it is designed to prevent the corruption or undue influence of legal proceedings when they begin. Frankly, I think that would apply to whichever route is taken to reach legal proceedings. I think, probably, what you are concerned about is already covered. The issue may b…”