Deputies voted today to approve the draft law on Courts and Tribunals in the second reading. This legislation contains the government’s controversial reforms to jury trials: 301 MPs voted in favor of the bill, with 201 voting against. There were 90 Labor abstentions.
Under the proposed measures, juries in England and Wales would be replaced by a single judge in cases where the court assesses the likely sentence is three years or less. The plans have drawn criticism from some Labor Party supporters as well as members of the legal profession. on tuesday, 3200 lawyers wrote Prime Minister asking the government to give up reforms.
Rumors of a backbench mutiny have been circulating for some time. But will one materialize? Karl Turner, the Labor MP for Hull East, who has said he would consider resigning over the reforms, the claims that 67 MPs are prepared to challenge the government when the bill returns to the Commons later this month.
The government, however, was confident that the bill would pass the second reading. As it is. A new announcement from Institute for Governmentpublished on Monday, has been circulating in Labor group chats. The ministers have highlighted the conference concluded that the government’s approach to “modeling the impact of the reform is sound”, although the same paragraph notes that it “is based on several assumptions – some of which are very uncertain”.
Subscribe to the New Statesman today for just £1 a week.
This phase is about the general principles of the draft law – MPs voted on the legislation as a whole and not individual measures. As a result, some MPs opposed to the jury reforms are believed to have voted in favor – or abstained – with a view to pressuring the government to change it later at report stage.
“There are good elements in the bill,” said one critical lawmaker who plans to abstain. But they added that “the government must understand that it must change direction on these issues by pursuing other judicial efficiencies.”
Some suggested that disillusionment with the government and Keir Starmer’s leadership could encourage MPs to oppose the reforms. “People don’t care about the rebellion,” said one MP who supports the bill, “or worse, they actively court it as a way to differentiate themselves from Keir.”
Another Labor source disagreed, suggesting that recent events had exhausted the bill of political momentum. “This should have erupted as the next big fight between the front bench and the backbench. But despite the breadth of opposition in the legal sector, I don’t think the political pressure has really built within the PLP.”
Talking to New statesman podcast scholarshipsJustice Secretary David Lammy said he had spent “a lot of time talking to colleagues” and was “confident” the bill would pass.
Elsewhere, members of the Women’s Parliamentary Labor Party have organized to ensure the bill passes. Their argument echoes that of the government – outlined by Justice Minister Sarah Sackman in a interview with New statesman – that the current system is failing the victims. In one papera group of female Labor MPs urged ministers to “stand firm” in pursuing reform.
More concrete opposition may emerge as the bill progresses through the Commons, and some Labor supporters are clearly outraged by the proposals. But whether this objection will materialize in the second reading remains uncertain.
(Further reading: Will NATO divide the Green Party?)
Content from our partners
