Member

More generally, I would argue that we should not be operating a cap at all. Crown Courts should be sitting for as many days as capacity would allow to cut the backlogs. That would involve a significant increase in sitting days. The important point is that all these cases have to be heard eventually, except in the unwelcome case, which we should discourage, that witnesses abandon contested cases for want of a timely trial because they give up hope of their case being heard quickly. However, in the generality of cases, there is no saving of resources to be made by deferring trials. Delays merely make trials less just, as recollections fade and events become further apart from the hearing and the disposal. That is also true of delayed sentencing hearings, just as it is of delayed trials.