Tabled by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what steps they are taking to
reduce the backlog of outstanding cases in the Crown Courts.
(LD)
[V]
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in the name of
my noble friend , who is
regrettably attending a family funeral. Given that physical
accommodation has at last been made available for Nightingale
courts—
(Con)
My Lords, we ought to allow the Minister to reply.
The Advocate-General for Scotland ( of Dirleton)
(Con)
My Lords, in relation to the Question posed by the noble Lord on
behalf of the noble Lord, , we spent more
than a quarter of £1 billion on recovery in the last financial
year, making court buildings safe, rolling out new technology for
remote hearings and opening 60 Nightingale courtrooms. Although
there is further to go, this has made a difference. In the Crown
Courts, we are completing around 2,000 cases each week, which is
the same as before the pandemic.
(LD)
[V]
My Lords, my apologies. Given that physical accommodation has at
last been made available for Nightingale courts in football
grounds, hotels, theatres and even the ballroom in Chester Town
Hall, how are these being manned by trained court staff? Given
the fact that very few have custody facilities, to what extent
are serious cases being held back and periods of remand in
custody thereby lengthened?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, at the Nightingale venues, we use experienced court
staff who are trained to deal with the type of work heard on
site. While Nightingales deal with non-custodial cases, by taking
this work away from the main court estate, custody cases can be
heard in our specialist facilities faster than would otherwise be
possible. To expand further our capacity to hear complex cases,
we have also modified around 70 courtrooms to increase the
capability to hear multi-handed trials of up to 10 defendants. In
addition, work has begun on a super-courtroom in Manchester,
which will further increase capacity for multi-handed cases. For
those on remand in custody, our systems show that the majority of
such cases had their first hearing in February 2021, and those
who have pleaded not guilty have been listed for trial prior to
September 2021. I acknowledge the courtesy shown by the noble
Lord, , by
intimating to my department the terms of his supplementary
question in order that a specific answer could be given to this
important point.
(GP)
My Lords, the Minister must be well aware that this problem has
been going on for much longer than just the pandemic. The big
problem is the Government’s savage cuts to court processes. The
solution is not Nightingale courts but better funding. Will the
Government do that?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, prior to Covid, the outstanding case load in the Crown
Court was 39,000, which is well within the range of 33,000 to
55,000 over the last decade. At its lowest point, it was even as
low as 33,000, in 2018-19. Immediately before the pandemic, the
Government were increasing sitting days in the criminal courts to
address rising demand.
(Con)
[V]
My Lords, on 25 January, I tabled a Written Question to my noble
friend regarding the
closing, selling and standing empty of courts. My noble friend’s
swift, detailed reply was that around 110 had been closed since
2015 but 21 new Nightingale courts, which have just been
mentioned, had been made. Have these courts had what the Minister
feels is the desired effect of reducing the backlog in the Crown
Court as well?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, I am obliged to my noble friend for her question. The
recovery steps taken have made a difference, allowing us to
complete around 2,000 cases each week—the same figure as before
the pandemic. I assure my noble friend that the decisions taken
to close courts were not, and are not, taken lightly; they are
taken alongside public consultation.
(CB)
[V]
My Lords, the Covid pandemic has led to a surge of cases awaiting
trial in the Crown Court. While the setting up of special
Nightingale courts to help clear the backlog is welcome, delays
to effective hearings are leading to additional stress and
anxiety, particularly for vulnerable victims. Does the Minister
agree that, in looking to greater efficiency, we need to look
harder at cutting the considerable time spent on cases that do
not move to trial?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, we are keenly aware of the need to improve timeliness
for both defendants and victims, and to mitigate the impact of
delays on complainers and witnesses in such cases. To that
extent, I agree with what the noble Lord asked in his question.
(Lab)
[V]
My Lords, in a Written Question on 17 December, my honourable
friend asked the
Secretary of State for Justice
“what assessment he has made of trends in the level of defendants
offending while awaiting delayed court dates.”
On 15 January, the dismissive one-sentence reply was:
“We do not hold any data on offences committed by offenders.”
Is data about the number of offences committed on bail no longer
held on the police national computer? Why have this Government
apparently lost interest in trends of the criminal behaviour of
offenders awaiting trial?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, I repeat the answer given previously: the department
does not collect specific data on the level of offending by
defendants on court bail. However, as the noble Lord is aware—and
as Members present may not be aware—the commission of a crime on
bail is itself an aggravation, which will be reflected in the
sentence.
(LD)
[V]
My Lords, the recent Constitution Committee report pointed out
that, because of delays to the courts reform programme,
improvements to IT systems had not been sufficiently implemented
by the time of the pandemic, meaning that remote hearings relied
on antiquated systems and participants in the criminal and family
courts in particular struggled with virtual hearings. How do the
Government intend to supply adequate investment in training in IT
while also guaranteeing fairness for all through physical
participation for those for whom remote hearings are not a
solution?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, we acknowledge that, in many cases, participation by
way of remote hearings is valuable for people in such positions.
None the less, we also appreciate that it is not appropriate for
all such people, whether they be witnesses or complainers in
cases.
(Con)
My Lords, I am delighted that the Nightingale courts are being
expanded. Can my noble friend comment on any plans that the
Government might have to extend the serving period for, or bring
back, retired judges so that we can deal with the backlog more
rapidly—perhaps by extending court hours—and deal with ongoing
ageism in the workplace, which seems to write off older people
when they are too young?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, prior to retirement, judges below the High Court are
already able to have their appointments extended on an annual
basis up to the age of 75 where there is a business need. After
retirement, salaried judges are already able to be authorised to
sit beyond the current retirement age of 70, on an ad hoc basis,
up to the age of 75. We are using our fee-paid judges, as well as
salaried judges who wish to sit following retirement, to ensure
that we maximise judicial capacity.
In answer to the second part of my noble friend’s question, we
are looking at more flexible working. Temporary Covid operating
hours have been piloted at seven Crown Court sites to test
whether even more could be done, and we are looking at the
extension of the working day as a short-term—I emphasise
“short-term”—tool and aid to managing recovery. Magistrates’
courts also sat on at least 100 additional Saturday courts per
month between September and December.
(Lab) [V]
My Lords, justice delayed is justice denied. Is not the root
cause of the delays the reduced finance that the Justice
Department too speedily agreed to long before the pandemic? Have
the Government given up on the alternatives that I have canvassed
to speed up trials—for example, a reduction in the size of juries
or trials of less serious offences decided by judges alone, with
the consent of the defendant?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, I repeat the figure that I gave earlier: over a quarter
of £1 billion has been spent on a range of measures to increase
Crown Court capacity. With respect to the additional measures
that the noble and learned Lord outlined, I regret that I do not
have to hand details of consultation and discussions, but I
undertake to write to him on behalf of my noble friend in the Ministry
of Justice.
(Lab)
My Lords, does the Minister accept that this mountainous backlog
impacts most upon victims, witnesses to crime and members of the
public waiting for years to see justice done? Does he also accept
that this backlog began well before Covid and is directly because
of this Government’s savage funding cuts in courts and tribunals
and even more punitive cuts in legal aid? Is it not high time
that the Conservatives started investing in increased court
capacity, qualified staff and victim support instead of cuts,
cuts and still more cuts, benefiting only criminals?
of Dirleton
(Con)
My Lords, I do not accept the adjectival premises on which the
noble Lord’s questions were based. I refer to my earlier answers
about the spending that has been identified in relation to these
matters.
