Joe Robertson

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I congratulate the hon. Member for Peterborough (Andrew Pakes) on securing this important debate. Across the United K…

But the Government want to remove that.

Q My questions cannot be answered because there is no one here representing children’s groups, but that part of the Children Act 1989 is not about presumption of contact, is it? I…

Q Given that there is no one here representing children, as a children’s lawyer, can you help the Committee understand what a presumption of a parent’s involvement in a child’s li…

Q As a former family solicitor, I want to focus my questions on the proposal to remove the presumption that involvement by a parent in a child’s life is in the child’s best intere…

Q My point is that bar is already there. The Children Act starts with it—it is in section 1(1). I do not need to say this, but absolutely every death, particularly where the state…

Q But the law is really clear. Section 1(1) of the Children Act 1989 says that “the child’s welfare shall be the court’s paramount consideration.” That is already there. Section 1…

Q Thank you very much for sharing these very powerful experiences to help all of us here make better decisions. I would like to direct my questions not to the criminal court chang…

Q But we do agree that people with more diverse backgrounds elect jury trials and that option is being removed for them. Dame Vera Baird: Seventy-three per cent of people offered…

Q Victims say that they want to see greater diversity in the criminal justice system, and I agree with them. Which group of people is more diverse: juries, the British public or j…

But jury trials are not the principal reason. Sir Brian Leveson: No, no, I do not and have never blamed jury trials at all. The reason is that the complexity has changed. Pace, di…

Q Why was it possible to get through two trials a day in the ’70s, but it is not now? Sir Brian Leveson: There are lots of reasons.