So that’s my take. Now it’s open season: tell me why I’m wrong!

Consequences are profound and don't just apply at the point of sentencing. Victims will decide if they’re willing to press on with cases, defendants will decide whether to exercise their right to a jury trial, child custody decisions will be made as people sit in cells awaiting trial.

If they implement this, the gov should commit to review it in say 18 months, like the prison early release scheme, to understand impact and decide whether to keep it. Much better to be clear about a plan to do that now, rather than introduce it as a permanent measure then reverse it (again!)

I’d love to see the MoJ modelling on the impact on the prison population. This is really complex to do: the impact will change over time as cases are heard and people in prison move from being on remand to serving their sentences.

Ideally, I’d combine it with other measures – like a presumption to suspend short sentences (as proposed in the Tories’ Sentencing Bill). This could mitigate or reverse any rise in people serving custodial sentences but still ease pressure on the Crown Court, and hopefully cut reoffending.

“Some of us just want the printers to work,” noted one NHS hospital doctor. on.ft.com/3U7Hd7O

‘It slows everything down’: NHS doctors warn of safety risks from creaking tech

Plans to digitise health service must first tackle ‘flip a coin’ nature of equipment across UK, say medical staff

The decline absolutely can be reversed, but it requires sustained political will and investment. Some pretty clear steps gov could take to improve things: removing sitting day cap, commit to a long-term workforce plan for legal professionals, increase legal aid rates. A lot hangs on the budget!

Gov needs to think about the *purpose* of sentencing: can be about punishment, rehabilitation, deterrence, public protection, or a combo. Then look at the evidence on what helps achieve those goals — just aiming for ‘tougher’ risks same ratchet effect that has lengthened prison sentences.

Absolutely — nothing is ever straightforward when it comes to these datasets!

So it’s possible that some/many of them are held in custody for 4 months, then the court refuses to extend the pre-trial custody time limit, and they get released on bail until their hearing. They’re still recorded in the data as a remanded defendant (bc it’s intended as a record of remand rates)