*/
Judges voiced concern that the government’s £1.2bn programme to modernise the courts could compromise access to justice.
In a private consultation with the Lord Chief Justice and the President of the Tribunals Service, reported in The Times newspaper, judges said that the programme, which involves court closures, online and virtual hearings and digitising paper-based services, was ‘driven by austerity and the need to achieve savings, rather than by providing an improved service for the public, the judiciary or staff’.
They said: ‘There is also a strong sense that open justice, access to justice, local justice, should not be compromised,’ stating that ‘thinking about and planning for tomorrow should not come at the expense of delivering justice in the proceedings that come before us today’.
Two weeks earlier a report from the Public Accounts Committee warned that the reforms were being pursued too quickly and without adequate consultation due to the need to make savings. It said the ‘hugely ambitious’ modernisation programme was ‘extremely challenging to deliver’ and already behind schedule.
Committee Chair, Meg Hillier said: ‘Government has cut corners in its rush to push through these reforms. The timetable was unrealistic, consultation has been inadequate and, even now, HMCTS has not clearly explained what the changes will mean in practice.’
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said it was working with the judiciary and remained confident that the programme was ‘on track to creating a better, more straightforward, accessible and efficient justice system’.
Judges voiced concern that the government’s £1.2bn programme to modernise the courts could compromise access to justice.
In a private consultation with the Lord Chief Justice and the President of the Tribunals Service, reported in The Times newspaper, judges said that the programme, which involves court closures, online and virtual hearings and digitising paper-based services, was ‘driven by austerity and the need to achieve savings, rather than by providing an improved service for the public, the judiciary or staff’.
They said: ‘There is also a strong sense that open justice, access to justice, local justice, should not be compromised,’ stating that ‘thinking about and planning for tomorrow should not come at the expense of delivering justice in the proceedings that come before us today’.
Two weeks earlier a report from the Public Accounts Committee warned that the reforms were being pursued too quickly and without adequate consultation due to the need to make savings. It said the ‘hugely ambitious’ modernisation programme was ‘extremely challenging to deliver’ and already behind schedule.
Committee Chair, Meg Hillier said: ‘Government has cut corners in its rush to push through these reforms. The timetable was unrealistic, consultation has been inadequate and, even now, HMCTS has not clearly explained what the changes will mean in practice.’
A spokesman for the Ministry of Justice said it was working with the judiciary and remained confident that the programme was ‘on track to creating a better, more straightforward, accessible and efficient justice system’.
The Chair of the Bar reports back
By Kem Kemal, CEO, Henry Dannell
By BSK Financial Planning
Mário Barroso, Head of R&D and Method Development at AlphaBiolabs
Susie Griffin on the admin that keeps barristers from billable work
Clement Cowley, Partner at The Penny Group, explains how global events can influence the performance of pensions and ISAs, and why taking a long-term approach to investing is often the most effective strategy
Kick off your career at the Bar Council’s Pupillage Fair this October – it’s one of the most valuable opportunities for aspiring barristers, says Amelia Clegg
Join us on Saturday 21 November 2026 at Leeds Beckett University and see for yourself why the North continues to be an exceptional place to build a career at the Bar
The golden age of advocacy? David Langwallner pays homage to the filmic if contentious barrister Sir Edward Carson and some of his contemporaries
Henry Fingerhut outlines what the Bar Standards Board AI guidance means for early career barristers
Not yet, says Jacob Turner. Regulation, unlike the technology itself, is a domain the legal profession can still control
