Labour MPs Rebel Over Lammy’s “Mad” Jury Plans
Dozens of Labour MPs mainly from the Left of the party have warned Sir Keir Starmer they are ready to vote against David Lammy’s “mad” plans to restrict jury trials. The Telegraph has the story.
In a letter to the Prime Minister, the 39 MPs – led by Karl Turner, a former barrister – urged Sir Keir to “think again” and come back with a “more credible proposal”.
They said the plan to restrict jury trials was an “ineffective” way to deal with the backlog of almost 80,000 cases and would have “an incredibly limited impact while also depriving individuals of a fundamental right to trial by their peers”.
They wrote: “When this is put to the House as primary legislation, there is a growing number of our colleagues who are not prepared to support these proposals.”
The group is predominantly, but not exclusively, drawn from the Left of the party. It includes Diane Abbott, the former shadow home secretary, Vicky Foxcroft, former whip and a leading member of the Tribune group of Labour MPs, and Dan Carden, who leads the Blue Labour group of backbenchers.
Outlining their objection to the proposal, they said: “The drastic restriction of the right to trial by jury is not a silver bullet. To limit a fundamental right for what will make a marginal difference to the backlog, if any, is madness and will cause more problems than it solves.”
Mr Lammy, the Justice Secretary, announced the reforms on December 3rd. They would scrap jury trials in England and Wales for crimes likely to carry a sentence of fewer than three years and remove the right for defendants to ask for a jury trial where a case can be dealt with by either magistrates or a new form of judge-only crown court.
He would also extend magistrates’ powers to handle cases which carry a maximum sentence of 12 months, possibly up to 18 months or two years.
The MPs said: “It is our belief that the public will not stand for the erosion of a fundamental right, particularly given that there are numerous other things the Government could do to more effectively reduce the backlog.
“This problem was not caused by jurors, nor will it be fixed by their eradication from public duty. Every day during the Second World War, juries continued to sit, reverting from 12 to seven jurors. We are not at war!”
With Left and Right united against the erosion of a basic democratic safeguard, Lammy and Starmer would be foolish to press ahead with such an unpopular reform. But then, the folly of this Government appears to know no bounds.
Worth reading in full.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Even if a change seems superficially worthwhile, it’s always worth imagining that new power in the hands of a government that you’d consider as your worst nightmare.
We all need protection from the state’s whims. The concessions gained 800 years ago in the Magna Carta were wrested from a king who held the arbitrary power of life and death. The US was created with a deep wariness of the totalising power of a single ruler. Neither were a panacea, but removing these safeguards would be a disaster.
Nothing “temporary” that the Government does remains “temporary”.
Income tax was a “temporary” measure in the late 19th Century to pay down war debt and would “only” affect the wealthy.
You are 100 years out as it started in 1799 – the end of the 18th century – and indeed has to be renewed every year.
I rather suspect David Lammy is just a figurehead for the idea… there will be others who promoted this idea. What were their motivations I wonder?
As if that wigged nutta thought of the jury plan himself 🤪😂
Black Labour minister wants people accused of incitement of racial hatred on behalf of Labour attorney general to be exclusively judged by government officials appointed by Labour-invented commission.
No rat to be smelled here. Absolutely not, in no conceivable case, this cannot be!
Correction to the headline: Labour MPs Rebel Over Mad Lammy’s Jury Plans.
Given the adjective “Mad” can be applied to most of the Labour Front Bench, Government resembles a lunatic asylum.
I do find it interesting that they are mainly drawn from “the left” of the party. There is something of a libertarian streak in the more “old left” elements. Corbyn is opposed to Digital ID.
The truth is that Clammy was unlikely to get his plan through both houses any time before he becomes part of history.
I sincerely hope you’re correct!