Justice needs new courts more than new laws

Authored by ARAG UK CEO Tony Buss

Legislation is only one side of the justice equation

Our recent surprise general election inevitably kicked a swathe of legislation off the parliamentary agenda and into the long grass. How much of it the new government will dig out and seek to pass remains to be seen but, whatever priorities they may have, the in-tray awaiting incoming Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood, was also overflowing.

The Terrorism (Protection of Premises) Bill, otherwise known as Martyn’s Law, is perhaps the highest profile piece of legislation that the government didn’t manage to rush through in the ‘wash-up’ period, before the last parliament was dissolved. Before the election, Kier Starmer restated Rishi Sunak’s promise to introduce the legislation “at the earliest opportunity”.

The Football Governance Bill, which will create an independent football regulator, also seemed to have broad cross-party backing, but failed to make the cut. As did the Tobacco and Vapes Bill, for which the new government had similarly shown support, in opposition.

Add to these the much-anticipated Renters (Reform) and Criminal Justice Bills, not to mention the planned sale of the state’s remaining stake in NatWest Bank, and there’s plenty to consider, quite aside from whatever legislation the new government wants to introduce.

But legislation is only one side of the justice equation. The widespread and almost catastrophic failures in the administration of justice make a mockery of any attempts to create new law. What is the point of laws if you cannot effectively apply and enforce them.

Considering the seriousness of the situation, there was surprisingly little discussion of our failing justice system in the run-up to the election, though all of the major party’s manifestos addressed the issues to some extent.

Inevitably, the focus of those comments and commitments was the chronic and widespread dysfunction in our criminal courts, where backlogs and delays are ruining and even risking lives, and voters’ imaginations are always more easily captured.

But the problems in civil justice are just as extensive and the consequences, while perhaps not as serious or easily explained as criminal court delays, are significant.

Billions of pounds are tied up in money claims, for which backlogs were mounting before the pandemic and have only continued to increase. The cumulative drag this creates on the economy is almost impossible to quantify but delays undeniably cause major headaches for businesses.

Employment tribunals understandably fall some way down the pecking order, but the financial drag on businesses of all sizes waiting more than a year to resolve disputes with current or former employees is significant too.

The justice system has also been impacted by underinvestment in other areas, such as the NHS. The Birth Trauma Report, published in May, very briefly brought the unconscionable state of maternity services to national attention.

Maternity scandals at specific trusts, such as Shrewsbury and Telford, East Kent, Cwm Taf and Morecambe Bay have hit the headlines from time to time, but the Birth Trauma Report has highlighted what many already suspected.

These trusts may each have had their own particular problems, but the causes seem to be endemic across the country. Time and again, reports have detailed shortages of both equipment and staff, inadequate funding for training, cultures of bullying, secrecy and denial.

Quite aside from the terrible human cost and the huge financial burden this puts on the NHS and other services, these failings push thousands of long and often highly complex cases into a justice system which really doesn’t need the extra work.

The national purse strings will obviously be tight for some time, and the challenges facing the courts and the NHS are unlikely to be solved overnight. But both offer a tempting mix of quick dividends and huge, longer-term benefits.

It’s inevitable that newly elected legislators will want to legislate, but justice will be better served if we can have more courts open, or at least hear more cases in the ones that are available.