The Westminster lensArchive · §02 Speeches · 571 contributions

Speeches by Fox.

Every Hansard contribution by Ashley Fox this parliament, most recent first. Back to the MP page for the headline figures and analysed positions.

Showing 121140 of 571 contributions · most-recent first

← PreviousPage 7 of 29Next →
DateDebate & contributionWords
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Most people would regard that as a retrospective change.

9
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

So you will relook at cases that have been committed for trial at the Crown court and push some of them through the swift court—that is what you are telling me.

31
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

On that, nobody disagrees. It is trial by juries that we are talking about. My view, and I suspect the view of most people here, is that that is just not relevant, and it is not going to take effect until 2028 anyway.

43
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

That is not what the Lord Chancellor said before Christmas.

10
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Your proposal is going to take time, because the Lord Chancellor has confirmed that these proposals will not have retrospective effect. Some parts of the country are booking trials in four years’ time. If you take a year to present your legislation—I think the Lord Chancellor said it would be in autumn 2026—and it take

108
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Minister, the Institute for Government has said, “Proposed restrictions to jury trials are not necessary to turn around performance in criminal courts”. I saw you at the back of the room when Cassia Rowland was giving her evidence. She detailed numerous other things that should be done, and to that extent your proposal

74
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Minister, if you have been committed to trial in the Crown court at the moment, you are expecting to have a jury trial, and what you are telling me is that once these changes take effect, you will divert those people committed but whose trial has not started into the swift court.

52
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

And in your view, addressing those matters would have far more of an effect than scrapping jury trials?

18
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Ms Rowland, tell us your views on how productivity in the Crown court system might be improved. I am conscious that the Institute for Government has said that productivity of the Crown court has declined, and that the number of cases being dealt with each day is down 10% since 2016. Putting aside talk about scrapping j

70
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Let me move on, because the Lord Chancellor might well have been confused.

13
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Chair, can we ask Cassia Rowland to come in? I know the Institute for Government has made some comments on the productivity of the court, and I am very keen to hear from some of the other witnesses.

38
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Good afternoon. I am Ashley Fox, the Member for Bridgwater. I am a former solicitor and my interests are on the register.

22
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

That, I think, is fundamentally different to what the Lord Chancellor said a few weeks ago.

16
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

No, he said the changes would not be retrospective, and now you are giving me a slightly different answer. If someone elects to go to the Crown court at the moment, it is on the assumption that there will be a trial by jury. What you are saying is that it might not be; they might be diverted to the swift court.

62
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

So when the Lord Chancellor said it will not be retrospective, that was not a wholly accurate answer.

18
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

So you will relook at cases that have been committed for trial at the Crown court and push some of them through the swift court—that is what you are telling me.

31
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

On that, nobody disagrees. It is trial by juries that we are talking about. My view, and I suspect the view of most people here, is that that is just not relevant, and it is not going to take effect until 2028 anyway.

43
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Your proposal is going to take time, because the Lord Chancellor has confirmed that these proposals will not have retrospective effect. Some parts of the country are booking trials in four years’ time. If you take a year to present your legislation—I think the Lord Chancellor said it would be in autumn 2026—and it take

108
13 Jan 2026Justice Committee — Oral Evidence (HC 1602)

Minister, the Institute for Government has said, “Proposed restrictions to jury trials are not necessary to turn around performance in criminal courts”. I saw you at the back of the room when Cassia Rowland was giving her evidence. She detailed numerous other things that should be done, and to that extent your proposal

74
12 Jan 2026Finance (No. 2) Bill

A Budget is the most important set of choices that a Government can make, and introducing clause 10 is a choice by this Government. I oppose clause 10 because it extends the freeze on the personal income tax allowance and the basic rate limit for a further three years, from 2028 to 2031. That means that rates will have

fiscal-policyeconomy-jobscost-of-living
284
← PreviousPage 7 of 29 · click a debate to open the transcript with this MP’s speeches highlightedNext →
Sources
SourceHansard · official report
MethodEach row is one contribution (intervention or speech). Word count from the official text.