HC Deb 10 February 1992 vol 203 cc344-5W
Mr. Moate

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what are the policy guidelines for the closure of magistrates courthouses; and if he will make a statement on the position of the Government with regard to the local provision of justice.

Mr. John Patten

As part of their management responsibilities, magistrates courts committees, in consultation with their paying local authorities, must keep under review the number and location of their courthouses, paying close attention to the amount of work which is undertaken at them. It would be a mistake to think that arguments of efficiency would inevitably draw a committee towards closing smaller courthouses or that keeping courthouses open, whatever the circumstances, must inevitably be in the interests of providing a good quality of service for court users.

So far as efficiency is concerned, in some cases it is clearly very difficult to justify keeping a courthouse open. There are a number of courthouses throughout the country that are used for only a limited period each week or even more infrequently, and which are costly in various ways to maintain. Some are only a short distance from other courthouses which have spare capacity.

On the other hand, courts committees need to approach issues of efficiency in a broad and not a narrow way, recognising the interdependence of criminal justice agencies, practitioners and the courts. Committees will need to take account of the possible effects of a closure on the operation of other local services. It is also very important for efficiency improvements to be pursued across the whole range of magistrates courts operations, and not simply in relation to courthouse accommodation. Courthouses are an important local resource and should not be proposed for closure because other savings require more effort to achieve.

But local justice does not and cannot mean that every town or community throughout England and Wales should have its own courthouse. It is also important that courthouses should offer good standards of facilities and service. Unfortunately many courthouses are old or unsuitable buildings, lacking even basic facilities for court users. It would simply not be realistic or affordable to expect that all could be brought up to an acceptable standard. Courts committees will need to consider the balance of advantage between maintaining unsatisfactory courthouses and providing good facilities and accommodation through selective closures.

Each courts committee will obviously also need to take into account the amount of grant within the cash limit for its area. Courts committees can themselves influence that amount: the arrangements for the distribution of grant announced on 18 October are dynamic and not static. So if a higher volume of cases is completed in an area through improvements in efficiency and court management, the proportion of total grant available for that area will increase. This might enable the committee to maintain a courthouse which would otherwise be at risk of closure. The more that courthouses are productively used, the stronger the case for their retention.

The Justices of the Peace Act 1979 provides for a paying authority to appeal to the Secretary of State if it opposes a committee's decision to close a courthouse. All such appeals are considered on the individual merits of the case and in the light of all relevant local circumstances. In addition to looking carefully at details of the grounds for the appeal, we look specifically at the long-term savings to be made, both in terms of running costs, whether they are realisable, as well as the cost of repairs and refurbishment that would otherwise have been met from capital grant; the cost penalties, particularly travelling costs, that would arise for all categories of court users; and the accessibility of alternative courthouses, particularly by public transport.

As will be clear from the Home Secretary's recent reply on the future organisation of the service—20 December 1991, Official Report, columns 250-51—the Government are fully committed to the principle that the magistrates courts are a quality local service, serving local communities. Since 1979 the Home Office has authorised building projects which provide 402 courtrooms at a total cost of about £350 million; over the next five years we expect to see a further 155 new courtrooms. Resources are, of course, limited; but it is important that there should be a network of courts, so that court users do not face unreasonable travelling difficulties and that the principle that magistrates are drawn from local communities is not weakened. But how these objectives are best met is a matter initially for local judgment.