It gives me great pleasure to be here today. I'm delighted so many of you are here - I know some of you travelled some distance.
The voices we heard in the video are a snapshot - they weren't specially selected by the DCA, nor are they a scientific study. But they paint a very interesting picture nonetheless.
You get a clear sense of the commitment and motivation of magistrates: the desire to make a difference and to serve the community.
You hear magistrates described as 'pillars of the community' - it's a cliched expression, but it's true. It would be simply impossible to administer justice, to reduce crime, to make people feel safe and secure - without magistrates providing their time, their energy and their expertise.
But equally, as we heard on the video, there's a perception gap between what you actually do and what people think you do. Together, we need to close this gap and dispel some of the myths.
I am sure that today will help us do this and help us make progress, so that people know what you do, understand what you do and, above all, respect what you do.
This is why we are here today. And this is why I spoke, less than six months ago, at the Magistrates' Association conference here in London. It's been six months, I'm sure, have passed as quickly for you as they have for me.
But not without significant progress.
In October I announced a new programme of work - Supporting Magistrates to Provide Justice. Not a Whitehall review, not a consultation without consequence, not a paper exercise.
Instead, this programme marks a significant shift in the relationship between Government and the magistracy.
Less about, us telling you what to do.
Much more about you telling us how you want to do things differently and
more efficiently.
What I want to do today is report back to you what you have told us to
do. For the first time, setting out what you want. Your ideas. Your suggestions.
Your proposals. All designed to make the magistracy work better - for
us all.
But, first, the context. Let me begin by setting out my vision for the Magistracy - a vision that sees Magistrates Courts at the very centre of our response to crime and anti-social behaviour.
That's not to overlook your increasingly important role in family
justice. This conference focuses much on criminal justice - that includes
the work of the youth courts. But there are also the family courts and the
family justice system. The importance of that work, and of having a group
of magistrates familiar with and experienced in family work is vital, and
increasingly so. On another occasion I will set out our plans in this area.
But, in terms of criminal justice, the facts speak for themselves. I make
no apology for reminding people - magistrates' courts deal with
95% of criminal cases.
And we should never forget that Magistrates serve voluntarily - giving your time freely in the name of public service. I don't underestimate for a moment the work you do, nor the commitment and dedication needed to serve as a Magistrate.
And we want to recognise this more formally. As Alex said, the relationship between the DCA and the magistrates' courts is changing - and changing for the better - come April 1st. The magistracy is more important than ever. The new HMCS will be the stronger for your involvement.
My vision for the magistracy can be captured in the title of the conference and in three words: connected, respected, effective.
There is much meaning contained in these simple words.
I want a magistracy which is connected to the communities it serves - and seen to be connected. Where local magistrates understand the issues specific to their neighbourhoods. The importance of the local aspect of justice is vital. Where the decisions of the magistrates court make a real difference - reducing anti-social behaviour and reducing crime. Where people understand the local justice system, understand how and why you, as magistrates, come to your decisions. And where they know what the other local agencies do - and work with them.
And the magistracy should be respected. You are the judges who, crucially, will determine whether the community have faith in the court system.
For the magistracy to be respected, it must be representative. We need magistrates drawn from across the community, from different age groups, from all ethnic and social backgrounds.
But we will not dilute the current high quality of magistrates to achieve this.
And, crucially, the magistracy should be effective. Court orders obeyed. Sentences served. Trials happening on time. Victims and witnesses supported.
I know that this vision is one that very many of you share - I hear the same desires when I talk to magistrates across the country.
Much has happened which will help us achieve this vision. But I wanted to
know how we could do more to remove the barriers that prevent you from
doing the job as well as you want.
So we asked every single magistrate and District Judge in the country for their ideas, their suggestions, their views. I also asked court staff and other groups working in the criminal justice system.
We got more than 2000 responses - the breadth and depth of the responses was fantastic. My principal job here today is to set out the initial responses and findings. To play back to you for the first time what you are telling us.
Some of the ideas can be implemented quickly and easily, some we need to look at more closely. I can't say yet that we will be able to agree to everything you're proposing. But I can say that that there are real possibilities and real prospects for real change and real improvement on which I'm confident we can work together. There is a real agenda here for the future. We will publish a full account of the responses we have received as soon as possible.
Before any of these three themes however, is the question of recruitment and retention.
A vital task if we are to support the magistracy and allow you to be as effective, connected and respected as you can be, is to ensure that we recruit diverse and high calibre magistrates - and do all we can to keep magistrates when they have been recruited.
We have the highest possible calibre at the moment. I repeat, I will do nothing to lower the current standards. But how do we make it easier to recruit a more diverse bench, and then retain it?
It is vital that the magistracy is reflective of the community it serves. This idea is the historic lynchpin of the magistracy - local justice delivered by local people. We must ensure that this idea is not lost, and indeed, that it is promoted. And that every part of the community feel they are represented.
And we must do all this without diluting the quality of the magistracy.
You're telling us in the survey that the sitting burden for all magistrates must be manageable. We must reverse the trend of sitting in panels of two rather than three. We must ensure that benches can accommodate those magistrates - typically younger magistrates in employment - who cannot commit to more than the minimum number of sittings.
You're telling us that you want employers to be supportive and to release you for your magisterial duties. You want flexibility in your terms and conditions. You want us to look at the recognition, rewards and allowances you receive. You want us to use modern recruiting practices to encourage more applications to become a magistrate.
I support your aims - I agree with that feedback. We do need to attract more younger people, more people with disabilities, more people from ethnic minorities, particularly where the composition of the bench does not reflect the local community, and more people in full-time work.
So, we will work closely with Advisory Committees to improve our recruitment efforts, target recruitment at communities under-represented on the bench and raise awareness of the crucial role magistrates have in the criminal justice system.
We will also encourage employers to release staff to sit as Magistrates. We know many of you face tensions in that area. We will try and ease them. We will take steps, including facing up to the public sector at middle management level and we must do more.
We are working closely with the Magistrates Association and the Senior District Judge to develop good practice guidance on court cancellations. You take great effort to allow you to attend courts throughout the year. When courts need to be cancelled because of unavoidable circumstances you have a right to early advice and the administration has a responsibility to understand and take account of the impact changes to the programme have for you. And you should, where appropriate, get credit for cancelled sittings.
We will have in place local systems for developing flexible and effective rosters.
And I am pleased to report that following consultation with the Magistrates
Association and senior Judiciary an agreed protocol will ensure that HMCS
will give the most careful consideration to the creation of any new District
Judge (Magistrates Courts) post.
Such an exercise will need to be underpinned by a business case to ensure
there is appropriate work for both Magistrates and a District Judge and
that local Benches and MA branches for the areas concerned, are informed
of the intention to prepare such a business case.
The protocol also provides that if a case for a new post is approved any consequential appointment will be commenced taking into account the importance of avoiding changes to rotas for Magistrates. Or if changes are unavoidable, ensure the appointment takes effect where the maximum possible notice of changes to rotas can be given.
One further point.
The service you provide requires training and professional commitment. The JP title reflects this status, yet many magistrates are confused about its proper use.
You should feel confident in the appropriate use of the JP title and for it to signify the status you rightly deserve. As a result of your concerns, we will review the guidance on the use of JP.
And, with the advent of HMCS, magistrates will formally become a part of the judicial family. I've talked a lot about how we can encourage more people into the magistracy - I also want to look at how we can support magistrates who want to progress further up the judicial ladder.
A diverse magistracy is important - so too is a diverse judiciary. I want to open up the pathways to becoming a judge. The robust test of merit will in no way be diluted - it will be just as hard to pass the test.
But I will be looking closely at how we could make a broader range of people, with appropriate and measured experience, eligible for judicial appointment in the higher judiciary. Who am I thinking of? I am thinking of ILEX-qualified legal executives. I am thinking of legal academics. I am thinking perhaps of patent and trademark attorneys.
But I am thinking also of magistrates with an appropriate legal qualification. These are examples and we need to look at the detail.
And there may well be other ways in which the knowledge and experience of
magistrates might be taken into account on the route towards judicial appointment.
For example, it might be possible to allow barristers and solicitors who
are Justices of the Peace to apply for salaried judicial appointment,
with their sittings as lay magistrates counting in lieu of service in
fee-paid judicial office.
Or we might be able to say that a barrister or a solicitor who is a magistrate will become eligible for appointment to fee-paid judicial appointment after a reduced period of call or admission. On current timescales, that might be after five years' call or admission, as compared to the required seven or ten.
We need to capitalise on Magistrates' experience and the skills they offer.
Before arriving at a decision, we will need to be satisfied that we have the right selection processes in place, both for fee-paid and salaried appointments. We must also have a robust system for appraising fee-paid office-holders. There is plenty for us all to do, but looking at it now will mean that we can be ready when an appropriate legislative opportunity arises.
Let me move on now to talk about each of the three themes of the conference. First - connected.
An obvious issue for magistrates is the importance of bridging the gap between court and community. You're telling us you want the community to know and understand what you do.
You want more contact with schools and local organisations.
And you want balanced coverage of your work in the local press - not just scare stories or the exceptional case blown out of all proportion. But fair, balanced coverage in the press.
You are telling me loud and clear that you want to improve the way people are treated when they come to court. So that when court and community meet, they part with a sense that the justice system is on their side and working with them.
You're saying a particular issue is when vulnerable witnesses come into contact with defendants. Going to court can be hard enough, the trauma of a witness meeting defendant face to face is, in many cases, an unnecessary and unbearable burden for people.
Some of the written material people receive can be confusing or unnecessarily complex. It's clear that you want documents to be in simple, plain language - no legal jargon.
You value the Magistrates Shadowing Scheme, run with Operation Black Vote. This enables people from ethnic minority groups to gain a valuable insight into the work of a magistrate. We are looking at how to expand that scheme.
And in other areas, progress is underway.
We are already committed to having separate waiting rooms in 90% of all Magistrates' courts by 2008. And our commitment to having video link facilities in 75% of magistrates' courts by April 2006 has already been met - a year early.
But because of what you have told us, we will go further.
We need to explore how we can raise standards throughout the country.
Next year, we are increasing funding to the Magistrates' Association Magistrates in the Community Scheme, by almost a third. This is an invaluable scheme, involving over 3,000 magistrates visiting schools, employers and community groups to raise the profile of the magistracy.
We are also continuing to work with the Magistrates' Association and the Citizenship Foundation to support the Magistrates Mock Trial Competition.
And we want to ensure you have a proper place and a voice locally. Last week, the Lord Chief Justice and I wrote to all Bench Chairs to support and offer guidance for magistrates to get in involved in local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships. This guidance is designed to help you engage with your local communities, without compromising your judicial independence. I'm delighted that Lord Justice Thomas is with us today to say a little more about this important development.
And, I have to say, I sympathise completely with the frustrations of press coverage that is less than favourable. I know how you feel!
But there is something we can do about it. The advent of HMCS presents us with a real opportunity. It means there can be a single, clear, consistent approach when advocating and arguing on your behalf.
And new Communications Teams will be set up under the new HMCS Director of Communications. They will actively help get the message across about the work you do and hopefully ensure reporting is at least balanced with good news stories about the work you do in your communities.
I hope these proposals are ones you will support.
Let me also set out what you're telling us on the second theme - how we can work together to make the Magistrates Courts more effective.
I'm sure you will agree - one of the main frustrations for magistrates are delayed, prolonged or cancelled trials. You want the process managed better and much less time wasted. You don't want to be sitting in your retiring room when nothing's happening.
In particular, magistrates are frustrated about the amount of time you spend "rubber- stamping" cases and you have suggested some of these cases could be taken out of the court-room and dealt with administratively.
Think of all those TV license cases. It's got to remain a crime, but do we really need to spend a whole afternoon listening to a recital of people's names and addresses to no purpose?
You also want to see more effective work with the CPS, police and the other agencies.
We've made a start to deal with these issues. The effective trial management programme is improving things. The Attorney General will speak about some of these issues later. And contact with Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships will ensure other agencies understand your work.
But, as a result of your responses and your ideas, we need to go further.
Because of what you told us, I will look closely at whether we can lighten the load of some of your more routine, administrative, 'tick-box' responsibilities. I want to make sure we don't dilute the seriousness of offences, but we will develop ways to free up your time to focus more on the cases where your expertise and judgement is needed.
So these proposals - shifting some of the routine, but time-consuming, work out of the normal court settings, your closer involvement with other local agencies - will I'm sure help make the courts more efficient and effective.
Next - how we can ensure the courts, your work and your sentences are respected.
There are some recurrent, common points in the responses to the survey.
You're telling me that when you impose a fine, you want it to be paid. You think that, in an age of internet banking and technology, people should have no excuse for not paying a fine. You also understand, however, the financial problems some people have - and think that they should be given help and advice, not left to spiral into uncontrolled debt. But you think where people are wilfully avoiding fines, we should clamp down hard.
I know that many MCCs have local arrangements that allow for the payment of fines through Post Offices, Banks and retail outlets. As a result you see less defaulters in those courts where those arrangements are available - and it gives offenders no excuse but to pay. We are taking steps to ensure that such arrangements will be available nationally during the first year of HMCS.
There is work underway. Operation Payback 1 and Operation Payback 2 were a resounding success and helped drive home the message that fines must be paid. We will be pressing ahead with further measures shortly. I can't quite say when today - but watch this space, very soon.
Two other points you're raising - you're telling us that when Compensation Orders are awarded, payment should be made straight away and the victim should not have to wait months to receive it in drips and drabs.
And the issue of driving without insurance has come up time and time again. The punishment doesn't seem to match the crime - there is not much of a deterrent if the fine imposed is less than the cost of the insurance.
I want to seek a real and practical way forward on both these issues.
So I hope that has given you a flavour of what is happening following our consultation with you and outlined what possibilities lie ahead.
As I explained at the start, we are not here today to tell you "what we in government think is best for you". That's not the way I want to work with the magistracy.
Instead, today I have shared with you the outcomes of the questionnaire - your thoughts, your ideas, your views. I have shared mine too. I have indicated where our thinking lies. What the way ahead may look like.
This programme of work is to support magistrates to provide justice, but it's only just beginning. We will continue to work with you as we take your ideas forward over the coming months. Some need more research and development - and some, as is apparent from what I've said, we can put in place swiftly.
I can assure you that our aim is to support you in our shared goals. Tackling crime. Reducing anti-social behaviour. Making our communities safer places to live. Helping families in difficulty. Protecting children.
And making the vision a reality. Connecting with the community. Generating respect. And having a real effect on all the people out there who depend on magistrates to uphold justice.
Remember, you are the judges by which the justice system itself will frequently be judged. We must help you deliver the best justice.
Thank you very much.