Written questions by Ribeiro-Addy.

What steps her Department is taking to help ensure that all available courtrooms are utilised to full capacity in order to reduce waiting times for trials.

This Government inherited a record and rising courts backlog. Incoming demand is so high that even sitting at record levels will not on its own reduce the outstanding caseload. For this financial year (2025/26), this Government is funding a record allocation of Crown Court sitting days to deliver swifter justice for victims – up to 110,000 sitting days this year, 4,000 higher than the last Government funded.That is on top of up to an additional £92 million per year for criminal legal aid solicitor fees and boosting magistrates’ courts sentencing powers from 6 months to 12 months’ imprisonment for a single triable-either way offence. We are also continuing to invest in judicial recruitment of around 1000 judges and tribunals members each year across all jurisdictions.But it is clear that fundamental reform is necessary to bear down on the backlog. That is why the Government has asked Sir Brian Leveson to chair an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, to propose once-in-a-generation reform to deliver swifter justice for victims. Part one of the Review has been published. Part two will consider efficiencies and productivity across the criminal justice system including how we ensure the additional investments being made in judicial and advocate capacity is deployed effectively. We will carefully consider Sir Brian’s proposals before setting out the Government’s full response to part one in the autumn.

What consideration her Department has given to the potential merits of increasing the use of (a) diversion schemes based on (i) deferred prosecution agreements and (ii) referral orders and (b) other diversion schemes to reduce the Crown Court backlog.

This Government inherited a record and rising courts backlog. As of December 2024, the Crown Court outstanding caseload was over 74,000. As of March 2025, the caseload continued to increase, with a new series peak of 76,957. It is clear that fundamental reform is necessary to bear down on the court backlog. That’s why the then Lord Chancellor asked Sir Brian Leveson to propose once-in-a-generation reform that will improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.Sir Brian Leveson published part one of his report on 9 July. The first ten recommendations relate to diversion, and in particular to the use of out of court resolutions (OOCRs) and deferred prosecution schemes. As OOCRs rightly target low-level and generally first-time offending, these are more likely to divert cases from the magistrates’ court than from the Crown Court.The Government is grateful to Sir Brian for his proposals and we are considering these in detail before providing a full response in the autumn.

What assessment she has made of the adequacy of resources available to ensure that increases in police officer numbers do not contribute to an increase in the Crown Court backlog.

We are working closely with the Home Office to monitor and assess the impact of increased police recruitment on the Crown Court, as well as on the prison and probation services.Additionally, the Government commissioned Sir Brian Leveson to undertake an Independent Review of the Criminal Courts to propose once-in-a-generation reforms and efficiency savings to improve timeliness and deliver swifter justice for victims.Sir Brian Leveson published part one of his report on 9 July and the Government will publish a response in due course. We are considering the implications of the reforms to ensure implementation is coordinated with other system partners, including the police and Crown Prosecution Service, and is consistent with system-wide capacity.

If she will make an assessment of the potential savings to the public purse of a diversion model that redirects (a) low-level and (b) first-time offenders from Crown Court proceedings.

This Government inherited a record and rising courts backlog. As of December 2024, the Crown Court outstanding caseload was over 74,000. As of March 2025, the caseload continued to increase, with a new series peak of 76,957. It is clear that fundamental reform is necessary to bear down on the court backlog. That’s why the then Lord Chancellor asked Sir Brian Leveson to propose once-in-a-generation reform that will improve timeliness in the courts and deliver swifter justice for victims.Sir Brian Leveson published part one of his report on 9 July. The first ten recommendations relate to diversion, and in particular to the use of out of court resolutions (OOCRs) and deferred prosecution schemes. As OOCRs rightly target low-level and generally first-time offending, these are more likely to divert cases from the magistrates’ court than from the Crown Court.The Government is grateful to Sir Brian for his proposals and we are considering these in detail before providing a full response in the autumn.

What discussions her Department has had with the (a) government and (b) Bar Council of India on regulatory barriers facing barristers from England and Wales.

The Ministry of Justice has regularly engaged the Indian Ministry of Law and Justice and Bar Council of India (BCI) at Ministerial and official level in recent years to advocate for the interests of UK barristers and advocates, often in conjunction with the Bar Council of England and Wales.The previous Lord Chancellor met her counterpart during the Indian Minister of Law and Justice's visit to London in October 2024, where the BCI regulations were discussed. Additionally, the previous Lord Chancellor wrote to the Indian Minister of Law and Justice to reemphasise her support for UK legal sector access to the Indian market.The previous Lord Chancellor discussed access to India’s legal services market with the previous Chair of the Bar in October 2024. In addition, Ministry of Justice and British High Commission officials work closely with the Bar Council of England and Wales on India engagement. The Ministry of Justice is aware of the Bar Council’s concerns on the 2025 BCI rules, particularly the provisions on ‘fly-in-fly-out’ (FIFO) practice.The Ministry of Justice and British High Commission have engaged the Indian Ministry of Law and Justice and BCI to discuss FIFO practice challenges facing UK barristers, advocates and solicitors under the BCI rules. Issues discussed have included registration; fee structures; and the issue of breaches of confidentiality associated with the BCI's disclosure requirements.

What recent estimate she has made of the number of outstanding Crown Court cases; and whether this estimate takes into account (a) case complexity and (b) the number of defendants involved.

The number of open Crown Court cases can be found in Table_C1 of the Criminal Court Statistics quarterly release, with data currently published up to the end of March 2025. Additional breakdowns of the open caseload published here include the offences of the open caseload, but not the number of defendants involved.

What recent assessment she has made of the adequacy of criminal legal aid fees in ensuring sufficient numbers of publicly funded barristers are available to meet demand.

This Government recognises the vital importance of legal aid and the need to ensure an adequate supply of suitably qualified criminal barristers and solicitors. Since 2022, funding for defence advocates has increased by 17%. In December 2024, we also announced that criminal legal aid solicitors will receive up to £92m more a year, subject to consultation, to help support the sustainability of the criminal legal aid sector. The consultation has now closed, and we will publish the response in due course. This is in addition to our response to the earlier Crime Lower consultation on solicitor fees, confirming an uplift to the lowest police station fees, introducing a new Youth Court fee scheme, and paying for travel in certain circumstances. Together, these changes provided a £24m investment for criminal legal aid providers .This is a significant investment to reflect the valuable and tough work undertaken by advocates criminal legal aid practitioners, helping to make sure that justice is served. The Ministry of Justice runs a Data Sharing Project with the Law Society, Bar Council, Legal Aid Agency, and Crown Prosecution Service to monitor the criminal legal services provider base. Latest data shows that overall criminal barrister numbers appear to be stabilising. The number of “self-declared full practise barristers”, those whose workload is at least 80% criminal work, was 2,726 in 23/24 compared to 2,424 in 20/21. Recruitment and retention remain crucial to maintain a sustainable, diverse workforce, and a pipeline through to the judiciary. The Government is committed to working with the Bar leadership through the Criminal Legal Aid Advisory Board to understand the market, priorities and opportunities for reform, to support the sustainability of the barrister profession.

If she will review restrictions on the number of sitting days available to retired judges under the age of 75.

The number of days that a retired judge can sit is governed by HM Treasury’s abatement policy which ensures that pension benefits and ongoing income do not exceed a judge’s pre-retirement income. Abatement applies to pension benefits from the final salary legacy schemes. The newer judicial pension schemes are career-average revalued earnings schemes, and abatement and sitting day limits do not apply to those schemes.

Whether her Department has had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for appellate jurisdiction currently exercised by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council.

The Commonwealth countries which continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) as their final court of appeal are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Brunei, Cook Islands and Niue, Grenada, Jamaica, Kiribati, Mauritius, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Tuvalu. The Department has not had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for JCPC jurisdiction. The JCPC relies on the continuing consent of independent countries for its jurisdiction in those countries. These independent states, which have a historical connection with the United Kingdom, are free to make a pragmatic judgement on whether they derive benefit from what the JCPC has to offer. The JCPC is funded from the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) budget. The Lord Chancellor has an obligation under section 50 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to ensure the UKSC is provided with the resources appropriate to carry on its business, but under the Department’s concordat with the UKSC, the court’s chief executive, as accounting officer, negotiates with HM Treasury directly. The court’s bid for funding is shared with the Lord Chancellor, who may comment on it without altering it. The Lord Chancellor then submits it to HM Treasury for consideration.

What steps she is taking to ensure that the Privy Council remains adequately resourced to deal with cases from Commonwealth jurisdictions in a timely manner.

The Commonwealth countries which continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) as their final court of appeal are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Brunei, Cook Islands and Niue, Grenada, Jamaica, Kiribati, Mauritius, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Tuvalu. The Department has not had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for JCPC jurisdiction. The JCPC relies on the continuing consent of independent countries for its jurisdiction in those countries. These independent states, which have a historical connection with the United Kingdom, are free to make a pragmatic judgement on whether they derive benefit from what the JCPC has to offer. The JCPC is funded from the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) budget. The Lord Chancellor has an obligation under section 50 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to ensure the UKSC is provided with the resources appropriate to carry on its business, but under the Department’s concordat with the UKSC, the court’s chief executive, as accounting officer, negotiates with HM Treasury directly. The court’s bid for funding is shared with the Lord Chancellor, who may comment on it without altering it. The Lord Chancellor then submits it to HM Treasury for consideration.

Which Commonwealth countries continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as their final court of appeal.

The Commonwealth countries which continue to use the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council (JCPC) as their final court of appeal are Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Brunei, Cook Islands and Niue, Grenada, Jamaica, Kiribati, Mauritius, St Kitts and Nevis, St Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, and Tuvalu. The Department has not had discussions with Commonwealth partners on future arrangements for JCPC jurisdiction. The JCPC relies on the continuing consent of independent countries for its jurisdiction in those countries. These independent states, which have a historical connection with the United Kingdom, are free to make a pragmatic judgement on whether they derive benefit from what the JCPC has to offer. The JCPC is funded from the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) budget. The Lord Chancellor has an obligation under section 50 of the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 to ensure the UKSC is provided with the resources appropriate to carry on its business, but under the Department’s concordat with the UKSC, the court’s chief executive, as accounting officer, negotiates with HM Treasury directly. The court’s bid for funding is shared with the Lord Chancellor, who may comment on it without altering it. The Lord Chancellor then submits it to HM Treasury for consideration.

Whether her Department has issued guidance on expediting visa applications for (a) witnesses, (b) litigants and (c) legal representatives required to attend court hearings in the UK.

UKVI will always seek to ensure those who need to attend court are able to do so in line with the Immigration Rules and wider court instructions.All short term visit visas are governed by our published service standards. These can be found here: Visitors and transit: customer service standards - GOV.UKCustomers are advised to allow enough time to receive their visa before applying. Customers in certain locations have the option to apply for a premium paid service to allow them to receive a decision quicker than the advertised times. Information on premium paid services can be found here: Get a faster decision on your visa or settlement application: Applying for a faster decision - GOV.UKVisa processing times are constantly monitored to ensure that visas are being delivered within our published service standards. Where an application will not be processed within service standards due to the complex nature of the application, the applicant is informed their application will take longer.

If her Department will establish an independent body to review and make recommendations on barristers’ fees for publicly funded criminal work.

This Government recognises that legal aid is a vital part of the justice system. It enables those individuals who need it most to have access to publicly funded legal assistance, in order to uphold their legal rights. This Government has made a significant investment towards criminal legal aid, as part of which we continue to consider the amount and nature of that funding. In December 2024, we announced that criminal legal aid solicitors will receive up to £92 million more a year, subject to consultation, to help support the sustainability of the criminal legal aid sector. The consultation has now closed, and we will publish the response in due course. This is in addition to our response to the Crime Lower consultation, confirming an uplift to the lowest police station fees, introducing a new Youth Court fee scheme, and paying for travel in certain circumstances. Together, these changes provided a £24 million investment for criminal legal aid providers. Since the Criminal Legal Aid Independent Review (CLAIR), funding for defence advocates has increased by 17%. The Ministry of Justice engages closely with representatives from the legal profession through the Criminal Legal Aid Advisory Board (CLAAB). Its purpose is to provide independent advice on the operation and structure of the existing and future criminal legal aid schemes, and to assess how these schemes can support the overall sustainability, diversity, and efficiency of the system.

What steps her Department is taking to expand the use of virtual hearings for short matters.

We recognise the importance of utilising technology to improve the efficiency of criminal and civil court proceedings. That is why, in May 2025, HM Courts & Tribunals Service published its Remote Participation Approach, setting out its principles for enabling remote attendance at hearings where appropriate: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hmcts-remote-participation-approach/hmcts-remote-participation-approach. Additionally, as part of the second phase of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts, Sir Brian Leveson is reviewing court processes to consider how both new and established technologies could be used to enhance productivity and efficiency in the criminal courts. We expect Sir Brian to finalise his report later this year. Virtual hearings are extensively used in civil courts as well. For example, as part of the Virtual Region initiative judges with spare capacity from outside of the London and Southeast remotely hear cases from London and Southeast helping reduce pressure on judiciary in those regions and enable cases to be determined quicker.

What steps her Department is taking to prioritise visa applications from overseas parties required to appear before UK courts.

UKVI will always seek to ensure those who need to attend court are able to do so in line with the Immigration Rules and wider court instructions.All short term visit visas are governed by our published service standards. These can be found here: Visitors and transit: customer service standards - GOV.UKCustomers are advised to allow enough time to receive their visa before applying. Customers in certain locations have the option to apply for a premium paid service to allow them to receive a decision quicker than the advertised times. Information on premium paid services can be found here: Get a faster decision on your visa or settlement application: Applying for a faster decision - GOV.UKVisa processing times are constantly monitored to ensure that visas are being delivered within our published service standards. Where an application will not be processed within service standards due to the complex nature of the application, the applicant is informed their application will take longer.

What recent estimate she has made of average waiting times for visa applications from Commonwealth citizens required to attend court proceedings in the UK.

UKVI will always seek to ensure those who need to attend court are able to do so in line with the Immigration Rules and wider court instructions.All short term visit visas are governed by our published service standards. These can be found here: Visitors and transit: customer service standards - GOV.UKCustomers are advised to allow enough time to receive their visa before applying. Customers in certain locations have the option to apply for a premium paid service to allow them to receive a decision quicker than the advertised times. Information on premium paid services can be found here: Get a faster decision on your visa or settlement application: Applying for a faster decision - GOV.UKVisa processing times are constantly monitored to ensure that visas are being delivered within our published service standards. Where an application will not be processed within service standards due to the complex nature of the application, the applicant is informed their application will take longer.

What assessment she has made of the potential impact of the time taken to issue visas on the ability of Commonwealth citizens to participate effectively in proceedings before UK courts.

UKVI will always seek to ensure those who need to attend court are able to do so in line with the Immigration Rules and wider court instructions.All short term visit visas are governed by our published service standards. These can be found here: Visitors and transit: customer service standards - GOV.UKCustomers are advised to allow enough time to receive their visa before applying. Customers in certain locations have the option to apply for a premium paid service to allow them to receive a decision quicker than the advertised times. Information on premium paid services can be found here: Get a faster decision on your visa or settlement application: Applying for a faster decision - GOV.UKVisa processing times are constantly monitored to ensure that visas are being delivered within our published service standards. Where an application will not be processed within service standards due to the complex nature of the application, the applicant is informed their application will take longer.

If she will make an assessment of the effectiveness of Trial Blitz style listing schemes in reducing backlogs in other Crown Court centres beyond Greater Manchester.

Listing is a judicial responsibility. The judiciary deploy measures, including the concentration of judicial and court resources to hear a specific cohort of cases over a defined period, as part of ongoing efforts to maximise throughput. HMCTS officials support the operation of such activity and ensure appropriate and effective coordination across wider criminal justice partner agencies – such interventions, where appropriate, can be effective short-term measures. Part two of the Independent Review of Criminal Courts will consider how the criminal courts can operate as efficiently as possible. We have asked Sir Brian to consider the end-to-end process, from charge to acquittal. We expect Sir Brian to finalise his report later this year.

Food and Rural Affairs, whether his Department has carried out a health-impact assessment on the levels of air pollution in Clapham and Brixton Hill constituency.

Air quality management in London is devolved to the Mayor of London. Officials from Defra maintain regular engagement with the Greater London Authority to discuss and collaborate on air quality initiatives.

Food and Rural Affairs, what discussions his Department has had with the Department of Health and Social Care on the health impact of air pollution levels in Clapham and Brixton Hill constituency.

Air quality management in London is devolved to the Mayor of London. Officials from Defra maintain regular engagement with the Greater London Authority to discuss and collaborate on air quality initiatives.