Linsey Farnsworth MP: speeches

181 published records · newest first.

Speeches

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    On that point, will the hon. Member give way?

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    On a point of order, Ms Butler. I seek guidance on how we get back to clause 2, because we have veered off significantly from it. Clause 2 relates to provisions that have not yet come into force but could well come into force in the future, specifically in relation to how cases could proceed from the magistrates court to the Crown court by way of written submissions. The idea behind that provision was to avoid the need for a court hearing if everybody agreed. How can we get back on to clause 2, because I fear we are veering significantly away from what it is trying to do?

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Mr Guest was giving evidence to the Justice Committee in his capacity on behalf of the CPS. He was talking with authority from the CPS, on the organisation’s behalf, on its official policy position. It is fair to say that the CPS, as Tom Guest said, is in favour of the structural reform we are making, is it not?

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    On that point, will the hon. Member give way?

  • 14 Apr 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Fourth sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Clause 2 relates to measures that have not come into force yet, so my hon. Friend the Member for Kingston upon Hull East cannot possibly have any experience of that.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q I serve on the Justice Committee and am a former Crown prosecutor, so I have an interest in the Crown prosecutions aspect of this. On 17 March, we heard evidence on the Justice Committee from Tom Guest, the director of policy at the Crown Prosecution Service. He talked about the CPS being supportive of the structural reform that is proposed in the Bill. He said that we were “at a critical juncture” and that this is “a generational opportunity for end-to-end reform. Our view is that we have gone far beyond the point where piecemeal or non-legislative solutions will suffice. They are definitely part of the solution, but they will not solve the problem. The status quo is failing victims, witnesses and defendants.” Do you recognise that sentiment, and do you have any comments in relation to the view of the Crown Prosecution Service and its role to play in this structural reform? Sir Brian Leveson: I do recognise the sentiment: it is exactly my own. I think the CPS has an enormous role to play. You will know from the report that I wrote that there are lots of areas in which improvement and co-ordination of activity is critical. IT changes have to made: there are 43 forces with 43 different IT systems, each of which the CPS have to negotiate with. Redaction is an enormous problem, as is file build. The relationship between the police and the CPS, and the inability of police defence lawyers to speak to CPS lawyers—all that needs to change, and that is why I suggested the adviser.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q Thank you so much for being here today. I am really interested in the victim’s perspective on fairness, the treatment of victims within the current criminal justice system and the changes being made. As a former Crown prosecutor, one aspect of the criminal justice system that concerned me was the appeals process from the magistrates court to the Crown court. As you all know, if somebody is convicted in the magistrates court, they have an automatic right to a retrial at the Crown court without having to give any reasons, regardless of whether there was a fair trial in the magistrates court or otherwise. If the victims and witnesses want to continue the process, they have to give evidence all over again through that appeal, otherwise the appeal is successful. The Bill seeks to get rid of that automatic right and put the process more in line with the Crown court appeals process. There will have to be grounds to suggest that the original trial was unfair. As victims and survivors who have had access to the criminal justice system, what is your view on the current system of retrials and appeals from the magistrates court in terms of fairness to victims and the likelihood of victims attending to give evidence and being re-traumatised? I am also interested in whether the automatic right to appeal and have a retrial is used as coercive control in the current justice system. There is a lot to unpack there, I grant you. Charlotte Meijer: There are a lot of questions there. From my experience, we will never know whether my perpetrator picked a magistrates court because he knew that, if he was found guilty, he could have then dragged me on to a Crown court case—we do not know. It is absolutely terrifying because, as we all know, going through a trial for the first time is horrific—it is something that I never want to do in my life again. I had the ability to go to court again for rape, and I declined it; if there had been an appeal and I had to go again to a Crown court, I probably would have dropped out. It is not something that I would want to experience twice. There is also a really interesting thing there. What does that say about our magistrates courts? Are we basically saying that they cannot do what they should be doing? I think that changing the system strengthens the trials and credibility of magistrates courts—they should be credible, given that 90% of cases go there. It also shows that it is the final choice; the decision will be made there, unless more evidence comes forward. On what you said about fairness to the victim, there is obviously no right to appeal for a victim if there is a not guilty verdict. I know there is a tiny bit of legislation to say that, if there is a huge amount of new evidence, they could reopen a case. However, that barely happens. You are basically told no, so how come a perpetrator can just appeal without any reason? From victims’ perspectives, and from my perspective, it is an absolute no-brainer.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q So potentially there would be less repetitive listing of the same trial over and over again through those issues. Clement Goldstone: You would have one trial listed once, hopefully.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Having been a Crown prosecutor for 21 years, I find it very disturbing that you take that view.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q On the practicalities of jury trials, you talked about the time savings of having judge-only trials over jury trials. I want to talk about other potential savings in terms of the backlog generally through jury trials. Personally, I think that a judge-only trial would make listing more agile. If a witness becomes ill, the judge could sit in a few days’ time, whereas a jury trial might be aborted and have to go back into the court list. What is the impact of those sorts of features on the court list more generally, rather than on the time saving in a particular trial in that moment? Clement Goldstone: It would give the opportunity to a judge who was in the middle of a judge-alone or judge-with-magistrates trial to say, “We will have to break off because this witness is ill,” to use your example, or, “because the defendant is ill,” and that would enable him to start another trial. At the moment, in the Crown court, where there is a judge and a jury, when a witness is ill, very often there is an abortive trial. If a witness does not turn up and the witness cannot be found, a decision has to be taken whether to go on or to give a little limited time for the witness to be found. Therefore, one of the other savings of time that will follow is that there will be no retrials and no juries to discharge, for whatever reason. I know that is not a direct answer to your question, but it is another by-product of restricting the right to trial by jury to the cases that are envisaged. There is, of course, a catch-all for the cases in which the public interest requires a trial by jury, even if conviction merits a sentence of less than three years.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Is it not the case that magistrates courts can be more agile in terms of court listing and picking up cases, like we heard from the Canadian—

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I am getting to my point; I am very conscious of time. It is fair to say that the CPS has a good overview of the system. Caroline Goodwin: Yes.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    I want to declare that, as Crown prosecutor, I was assigned to the team that looked at the Insulate Britain campaign and reviewed the evidence as to whether charges should be brought. I want to make that clear and put it out in the open. Tim Crosland: Thank you.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q It is fair to say that the CPS’s breadth of experience across the criminal justice system is unparalleled, given that it takes cases through the system, from advising the police at charge through to the magistrates court, the Crown court and the appeals court. Is it right that it is in a good position to understand the system fully, from start to finish? Caroline Goodwin: It might understand the system, but it is about the application of the system. You may have a set of papers that comes in from the police and is sent to a reviewing lawyer—

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q My last question is about the allocation process. In previous debates, we have heard concern that the judge’s allocation decision about whether it is the Crown court bench division or a jury trial would be a very long process. There would be a lot of work and a lot of written submissions, and it would take the judge a long time to make those decisions. That mirrors the process of the decisions that magistrates make every day, which, in my experience, often take three or four minutes to decide. The system would essentially require a defence advocate to argue for a higher sentence if they are pushing for a jury trial. Does that strike you as an unusual argument for a defence barrister to be making? Do you think the allocation process could actually be quite efficient? Lord Burnett of Maldon: I have read some of these arguments, and I have been slightly surprised by them. I cannot help the old advocate in me thinking that lawyers are terribly good at finding nine reasons why you should not do something. We all did that; that is what lawyers are sometimes asked to do. I think this one will very much depend upon the procedures that are put in place for dealing with it. Obviously, if you are going to create a new decision that has to be made, there will need to be adjustments to the practice direction and probably the criminal procedure rules, and I am not sure that detail has been thought through yet. If it has, I am not aware of it. I imagine that most of these decisions would be done on the papers. It strikes me as rather extravagant to suppose that you list it for half an hour for argument to deal with something like that, so I think that one is a bit of a bogeyman. Sir Richard Henriques: Paper applications seem to me to be fairly obvious. Clement Goldstone: Judges in the Crown court are very good at paper applications. They are used to them.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q You said that your preference would be for two magistrates and a judge to sit together, and I understand your views on that. There are already examples in our criminal justice system of where a judge sits alone in the magistrates court. We have district judges, which I am old enough to remember as stipendiary magistrates. I am not aware of any big campaigns or calls for them to be abolished. They deal with the most serious cases in the magistrates court, or tend to. Are you aware of any campaign to get rid of them because of unfairness or otherwise? Lord Burnett of Maldon: District judges (magistrates’ court), formerly stipendiary magistrates, have been a feature of our system since the mid-19th century—I cannot remember precisely which year they were introduced. I have never been aware of any reasoned criticism of the way in which they conduct cases. On the contrary, the rate of appeal that Sir Richard referred to includes cases that have been tried by district judges and deputy district judges. It is a phenomenon that we are used to in the criminal justice system.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q Thank you. Tom Guest, one of the directors at the CPS, recently gave evidence to the Justice Committee. He said: “Our view is that we have gone far beyond the point where piecemeal or non-legislative solutions will suffice.” He went on to say that the official view of the CPS is that the 20% time-saving projection regarding jury trials in the independent report is “very much on the conservative side”. Does the CPS not have a credible voice on those two points? Caroline Goodwin: May I deal with that? It may be a credible voice in terms of having an argument in the debate, but it is not actually addressing the efficiencies of the Crown Prosecution Service; it is merely saying, “Yes, we think 20% could be a parsimonious figure. It could be a far greater saving of time.” But if we turn and look inwards, at ourselves, the CPS is the start of a lot of the difficulties that there can be around case preparation. That is why I say that there needs to be a rigorous approach when material is sent in to a reviewing lawyer, which is really when the process starts. They need to be saying, “I need you to find me that telecommunications evidence. I need to make sure that that media evidence from those telephones has been produced.” All that should be starting from the word go. Tom Guest may be right in terms of— [ Interruption. ] May I finish, please? He may have a voice in the debate and the argument, but in so far as the efficiencies of the service are concerned, the CPS really needs to start looking at itself, and then perhaps it can come on a very strong footing.

  • 25 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source
    More

    Q Indeed. I think part of the CPS’s role is to look at the impact of the court backlog on the system as a whole, and jury trials are a part of that. A big part of the work of the CPS is in the court back office, in relation to other aspects of juries that create time pressures on the system: preparation of jury bundles, dealing with jury queries when people have been summoned, juror expenses, and so on. Having fewer jury trials in itself will help with that back-office preparation and work, will it not? Caroline Goodwin: With respect, often what happens is that counsel are told, “Please make sure that you know what’s going to be in the jury bundle.” That gets sent to counsel; counsel deals with that. Counsel is asked, “Can you make sure you can deal with the witness order?” Counsel produces that. All that you are having to do, basically, is either put material on a photocopier or put it into a media form so it can be played in court.

  • 23 Mar 2026 · Rail Connections to London: Rural Towns · Hansard source
    More

    Shrewsbury certainly does sound like a wonderful place to visit. I am working hard on the visitor economy for Amber Valley, and an integrated transport system and good transport links are a vital part of that. There was a daily railway service running from London to Alfreton in my constituency until 2021, when it was unfortunately discontinued. Does my hon. Friend agree that it is important for us to encourage people to come out of the big smoke and into our rural areas to see what we have to offer in, for instance, her constituency and mine, and that it is important that they have the transport links to facilitate their visits?

  • 19 Mar 2026 · Business of the House · Hansard source
    More

    Denby Pottery has been the heart of Amber Valley since 1809. It provides over 500 jobs and brings in 250,000 visitors a year, but it has sadly had to apply for administration support. While the Prime Minister has already committed to a review of the supercharger scheme, which helps with energy costs, I hope that it will be sped up in the light of the current situation and include the ceramics industry. Today, the #SaveDenby campaign has launched, which asks people to buy Denby pottery, visit the brilliant pottery village in Derbyshire or just simply share the campaign far and wide. With Easter around the corner, might I invite the Leader of the House to consider picking up some Denby pottery, and will he join me in encouraging other Members to do the same and help me save Denby Pottery?

  • 19 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill · Hansard source
    More

    Our plan for court reform implements time savings across the system, not just in the courtroom but in a number of other aspects of the justice system that contribute to delays with the administration of jury trials, such as the summoning of jurors, the compiling of jury bundles, juror expenses and behind-the-scenes preparation. Does the Solicitor General agree that those crucial changes will address the bigger picture of delays across the system and allow the Crown Prosecution Service to focus on delivering swift justice for victims?

  • 18 Mar 2026 · Draft Warm Home Discount (England and Wales) Regulations 2026 · Hansard source
    More

    At a recent coffee morning that I held in the village of Holbrook, constituents raised their worries about energy bills. In 2024-25, 6,219 people, or 14.5% of all households in Amber Valley, received the warm home discount. Particularly in the light of ongoing uncertainty on household energy costs due to international events, I am really pleased that the Government are continuing to support the scheme and that I am a member of this Committee. Does the Minister agree that the Government should be focused on this issue absolutely?

  • 17 Mar 2026 · Productivity and Economic Growth: East Midlands · Hansard source
    More

    It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rushcliffe (James Naish) for securing the debate. Many in Amber Valley—including me—are proud descendants of coalminers, textile makers and engineers. That heritage still shapes our economy: 20% of the workforce are in manufacturing, mining and utilities. Amber Valley’s industrial history, national significance and visitor offer are currently underdeveloped, but I am working hard to change that through my visitor economy strategy. A thriving visitor economy will boost footfall, inject money into hospitality and support local businesses and high streets. I am therefore delighted that my three towns of Alfreton, Heanor and Ripley have come together to submit a joint bid to the UK town of culture competition in recognition of their remarkable shared story. My visitor economy work complements that of East Midlands Mayor Claire Ward, whose vision for growth projects an additional £960 million in direct gross value added for the region and £730 million indirectly through the visitor economy. No discussion of Amber Valley’s heritage and economy is complete without mentioning the Denby Pottery Company. Founded in 1809, it has made stoneware in Derbyshire since the industrial revolution. It is the constituency’s largest employer: about 350 of its 500 staff are local, and many have worked there for decades. As a tourist attraction, Denby Pottery Village brings in more than 250,000 visitors a year. However, as Members know, the company has filed a notice of intention to appoint administrators, which is devastating news for staff facing uncertainty about their livelihoods. I have spoken to the GMB union, and I encourage colleagues to support any affected constituents. I have also met Denby’s leadership and ensured engagement with the Department for Business and Trade, and I remain in contact with the Treasury and the Under-Secretary of State for Business and Trade, my hon. Friend the Member for Stockton North (Chris McDonald). Although the news may feel sudden, the truth is that the UK ceramics industry has been hit by sharp and unpredictable swings in energy prices, and the impact of new trading arrangements and global tariff pressures have hampered competitiveness. We hope that an investor will come forward to secure a future for the business, as it is hugely important to save the company. I urge Ministers to expand the British industry supercharger scheme, as very few ceramics companies currently qualify. Amber Valley contains some of the most deprived areas in Derbyshire. People know that they have been overlooked and left behind for years, and a much-loved employer going into administration, putting 500 jobs at risk, compounds that belief. Bringing pride in place back to communities such as mine is absolutely essential, so will the Minister outline what more can be done for Amber Valley and how she will work with colleagues across Government to support Denby Pottery?

  • 10 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill · Hansard source
    More

    Anyone who has worked on the frontline of the criminal justice system knows that the Crown court crisis has been years in the making. Underfunding, austerity, covid and the changing nature of crime, with cases becoming increasingly complex and evidential volumes growing exponentially, have compounded the issue. The changes in the Bill offer a pragmatic solution, and it is important that we are all clear about what is being proposed. The Bill does not abolish jury trials; it simply adjusts the threshold at which a case warrants a jury’s involvement. Magistrates are absolutely capable of hearing cases commanding a sentence of up two years; they already do in the youth court and there has been no outcry that young people do not get justice because of it. As the Crown court backlog has increased, so has the percentage of cases committed to that court, because defendants have overruled the magistrates’ decision, and that is despite the sentence, in the most serious version of the Crown’s case, not exceeding the magistrates’ maximum powers. One may wonder why a defendant would seek to take his case to a court with greater sentencing powers, but the calculation is clear. The longer the wait for a trial, the harder it will be for witnesses to have a clear recollection of events and the more likely it is for victims to withdraw. Indeed, in one of my cases, a defendant hoped that the 96-year-old victim of burglary would die before the trial took place.

  • 10 Mar 2026 · Courts and Tribunals Bill · Hansard source
    More

    I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend, and I thank all those people working in the criminal justice system who, frankly, have been propping up the system with the generosity of their time, working extra hours over and above, and giving everything. They have propped up the criminal justice system in that way for years. If we do not act now, the wait time for cases to reach trial is projected to increase, and the consequences will be stark. First, justice will be delayed. That means victims waiting years for closure and a chance to heal, it means the wrongly accused waiting years for their name to be cleared, and it means those who have offended waiting years until they can be rehabilitated. Secondly, if we do not act, we will not fix the vicious cycle of interconnected crises: the staffing crisis, the prison crises, the recidivism crisis and the VAWG crisis. We finally have a Government brave enough to grip these problems through record levels of investment, through the emergency early release scheme, through sentencing reform and through the measures in this Bill. The Bill rebalances the criminal justice system to ensure that jury trials are always available for the most serious cases, that cases are heard sooner, that victims are treated more fairly, that our criminal justice system continues to provide justice now, and that it is future-proofed for years to come. I wholeheartedly support the Government and this Bill.

Published records only — not a full account of an MP’s work. How we work →