Speeches by Robertson.

“We traded some figures in previous sittings, and the Minister and I had different figures, but the new clause is about an assessment after the Government’s provisions have come into effect. I do not want them to come in, but the hon. Member for Birmingham Erdington supports them and accepts that they will, and I accept…”

“It rather looks as though yet again we have a clause that, in the interests of trying to rush through legislation, has not been properly thought out. I cannot believe that the Government intend to introduce such vagueness into law. It is perfectly clear that they are trying to tackle the backlog—I do not criticise them…”

“I hope the hon. Member for Birmingham Erdington might consider pressing new clause 29 to a vote, because it is good and fair, and it deals with impact—it does not seek to change what the Government are trying to do. There is clearly a debate, and contested views, about the impact on those from minority ethnic backgroun…”

“The Minister said that she effectively, although not exclusively, considers the issue to be lengthy financial documents. If the provision were expanded across sexual offences and others in future, with powers that a theoretical future Secretary of State might want to apply, that untested, unclear issue of complexity wo…”

“I do not understand why the Government would resist having a review and assessment of the real impact on the ground—not a theoretical, projected impact assessment—of the changes. If the hon. Member for Birmingham Erdington is minded to move her new clause, I suspect she would find some support for it.”

“Amendment 51 seeks to curtail the extension of this clause. I have already spoken about how wide-ranging it is and the wide discretion that it gives judges in making allocation decisions with insufficient legal test, guidance or case law. At least let us leave that as the problem; let us not introduce the potential for…”

“The Government and Labour Back Benchers have spoken about the experience of victims and have said that part of the reason for cutting the backlog is to reduce stress on them. There is nothing in this clause to say that the judge might want to consider the impact on victims or complainants when deciding whether to alloc…”

“The Government have said that this is a matter of thresholds and they have cited other democracies and other countries—indeed, other common-law countries that take their legal system from England and Wales. They have said, “If those countries can do without jury trials at this threshold, so can we.” I am not against ha…”

“On the figures that are being presented, on the one hand, the Government say that only 3% of criminal trials go to a jury, so this is not a significant change to the criminal courts and jury system in this country. On the other hand, they say that this is so essential, and the situation that we find ourselves in is so …”

“The Government talk about a 20% time saving as a result of no longer using a jury in accordance with the Bill, but the reasons given for curtailing a jury trial are not the same as those that Sir Brian Leveson identified. The Government, and indeed Sir Brian Leveson, talk about jury trials taking longer than they used …”

“The reasons for a jury trial taking longer than a judge-only trial, including the swearing in of the jury, jury-related issues causing delay and hearing evidence later in the day, are not new. Those are features of jury trials that have existed for a long time, so the inherent delays that can be caused by a jury trial …”

“On their own terms, however, the Government have recently put in place measures to tackle the backlog, such as increasing sitting days and investment. We have not seen the extent to which those measures will be successful or not—I sincerely hope that they will be. The Government are presenting this Bill, with its measu…”

“A lot has been said about the professionalism of judges in this country, and I wholeheartedly agree, as I have said in previous sittings, but to criticise a judge trial rather than a jury trial is not to criticise judges. Jury trials exist because there is something inherently safer and fairer about 12 men and women of…”

“The hon. Member speaks with eloquence and experience. I understand the Minister’s point: she has framed this as simply removing a choice from a defendant, as though this is a benefit that need not exist, but does the hon. Member agree with my analysis that this constitutes the removal of a right rather than a choice—th…”

“To the extent that it is necessary, I declare an interest in that I used to be a solicitor regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered with the Law Society. I, too, support amendments 25, 12 and 43. They are not technical or political amendments, but constitutional amendments, and I hope that the Co…”

“I do. Perhaps I could encourage a Tea Room conversation between the hon. Members for Gloucester and for Bolton South and Walkden, in the hope that her wisdom might rub off on her hon. Friend when it comes to pitching this as a contest between victim and defendant. Of course, on a technical point, it is not the victim o…”

“The hon. Member for Chichester has set out the reasoning behind her amendment very well. If the amendment were agreed to, it would not go anywhere near restoring jury trials, but it would plainly be an improvement. The leading argument in its favour is that it is what Sir Brian Leveson recommended. The Government have …”

“I echo the points made by the shadow Minister. The issue here is where sentences may go above three years. A sentence of three years or more is fairly significant. The crime, of course, will match the sentence; no one is suggesting that the sentence is inappropriate in these cases—someone has been convicted. However, t…”

“Yes. Let us get back to principles here. I support what the Government are trying to do in reducing the backlog. Of course, that is the right thing to do, and it benefits both those awaiting trial and the victims and complaints who want to see justice. On amendment 25, my particular issue here the retrospective applica…”

“I look forward to spending the afternoon exchanging ideas with the hon. Member. Let me begin by expanding a little on what I had intended to say. I do not agree with the narrative that it is either the defendant or the victim who wins out, not least because not every defendant is a guilty person. I would also say that …”