The Crown court backlog will take the ‘best part of a decade’ to improve under plans published today, ministers have admitted.

Justice minister Sarah Sackman said things would ‘get worse before they get better’, with the backlog rising from its current record level of 80,000 to hit 100,000 in a year’s time.

Crown courts in England and Wales are ‘on the brink of collapse’, she said, insisting that ministers will press ahead with plans to introduce judge-only trials for offences likely to attract less than three years’ imprisonment.

The measures, first outlined at the end of last year, will see thousands of defendants a year lose the right to trial by jury.

The proposals have faced grave opposition from some Labour backbenchers and the legal profession.

Ms Sackman said: ‘I have got to level with victims that the scale of the crisis that we have inherited, and which is growing, is not going to change overnight.

‘By the end of this Parliament we’ll start to see it heading in the right direction, so they can have confidence the government is doing everything it can, but it will take the best part of a decade for the timeliness of their trials to improve.

‘Things will get worse before they get better – but they do begin to get better by the end of this parliament under this plan.

‘By my reckoning it will hit 100,000 cases before we begin to see a reduction in the backlog.’

She added: ‘I fully appreciate that is not good enough for victims who are in the system in the here and now, but at least what they can see is leadership from a government that is prepared to tackle the problems, rather than sit idly by watch it run out of control.’

Some trials already being listed for 2030.

But asked how long victims would have to wait for justice when the system reaches its peak backlog, the minister said: ‘I’m not going to put a figure on it.’

Despite potential rebellions by Labour backbenchers and expected opposition in the House of Lords, Ms Sackman said the reforms – including judge-only trials – are expected to be in place by 2028.

‘We have an ambition for Royal Assent by the end of the year so we can start implementing by 2028,’ she said.

Asked if the government would make any changes to the proposals for judge-only trials, the minister said: ‘We are sticking to the plan. What we put forward in the Courts Bill will be very much in line with what we’ve set out in previous months.’

The chief critic on Labour’s backbenches – Karl Turner MP – vowed to continue to fight the plans, which he said were ‘not acceptable’.

‘There is deep and growing concern across Parliament that the plan to do away with jury trials is unnecessary and there is no evidential link between the juries and the cause of the backlog,’ Mr Turner said.

‘How much time would actually be saved through the reduction of a right to trial by jury?

‘What are the unintended consequences of such a move for trust in the justice system? Would other measures be more effective?

‘I remain firmly committed to voting against any changes that weaken the right to trial by jury, and I know many colleagues stand ready to do the same in defence of this fundamental right.’

The reforms will apply retrospectively to cases already in the system, meaning defendants who have already opted for jury trial could find their cases being heard by a judge only.

Ms Sackman said barristers’ professional bodies who argue the backlog can be tackled quickly enough just by increasing court sitting days and improving court efficiency were being ‘unrealistic’.

Justice Secretary David Lammy criticised barristers and MPs who have opposed the reforms.

He said the Bar ‘can sometimes be a conservative profession’ and it had previously ‘opposed changes to the double jeopardy rule’.

Those reforms – introduced in 2005 to allow a previously-acquitted defendant to face a second trial for the same offence – were ‘what delivered partial justice to the Lawrence family’, he added, referring to the racist murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence in 1993.

He added that parliamentary opposition to his plans tended to ‘sound quite patrician, quite old fashioned, quite male’ and did not place enough emphasis on how victims of crime were ‘often vulnerable, often minorities, sadly children and very often women’.

Shadow Justice Secretary Nick Timothy said: ‘There is no hiding the fact that Lammy is rushing ahead with his plans to abolish jury trials.

‘Labour have no mandate to do this and there is no need for it either.

‘Lammy still has not explained how he will improve court efficiency around issues like recruitment and retention, courtroom productivity, and case management.

‘At a time when confidence in the criminal justice system is fragile, what we need is a practical plan to tackle the backlog, not Lammy’s ideological drive to scrap juries.’

A new Courts Bill setting out the reforms is due to be published tomorrow.

The Ministry of Justice issued what it described as a ‘doom graph’ – based on new statistical modelling – which predicted the backlog will soar to 200,000 by 2035 if ministers fail to act.

Ministers insisted changes to court processes are necessary to bring the backlog down to manageable levels, in conjunction with efficiency measures and investment in the number of days courts can hold trials.

The new modelling data – to be published in full tomorrow – is designed to convince critics that changes to jury trial are necessary.

But lawyers immediately attacked the Government’s plans. 

Past president of the Law Society, Richard Atkinson, said: ‘The Government’s proposals go too far in eroding the longstanding right to be judged by a jury of our own peers.

‘They allow a single judge to determine guilt in serious, lifechanging cases which could significantly affect people’s liberty and reputations.

‘Lasting reform requires sustained funding for court capacity and the legal profession, not rushed legislation that risks weakening confidence in the justice system.’