Agenda item

To highlight the detrimental effect that the closure of Newbury Magistrate’s Court would have on the delivery of services.

 (Councillor Richard Crumly declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4 by virtue of the fact that he used the County Court in his professional capacity. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

(Councillor Ellen Crumly declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4 by virtue of the fact that she worked as a Legal Executive for her husband. As her interest was personal and not prejudicial she determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

(Councillor Julian Swift-Hook declared a personal interest in Agenda item 4 by virtue of the fact that his partner was a Magistrate on the East Berkshire Bench. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial he determined to take part in the debate and vote on the matter).

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 4) which highlighted the detrimental effect that the proposed closure of Newbury Magistrate’s Court would have on the delivery of services locally.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Graham Jones and seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

That the Council:

“request that the Head of Legal and Electoral Services respond to the consultation with an objection”.

In proposing the motion Councillor Jones immediately suggested the following AMENDMENT to the substantive motion: The amendment was seconded by Councillor Jeff Brooks:

And That the Council

“invites the Leaders of both parties to jointly write to the Justice Minister making clear their detailed objections to the proposed closure”

In discussing the item Members raised a number of issues including the fact that :

·        although they recognised the national financial situation and the need for the public sector to make significant savings they could not support the closure of Newbury Magistrate’s Court;

·        the closure did not take cognisance of the fact that many West Berkshire residents did not live along the main railway line and would therefore incur long(and expensive) journeys to the remaining courts;

·        the Council currently had to wait six months to get a court date. Travelling to the other courts would take up a significant amount of officer time and would therefore increase the costs to the Council;

·        longer delays in getting court dates would impact negatively on those involved in the hearings and could add to the costs that they would have to incur;

·        they supported the sentiments set out in the letter from the CAB which had been circulated to all members outside of the meeting. In particular they noted the difficulties that the CAB team would have in supporting their clients at hearings in Reading;

·        the silo based cutting would mean that the savings of £132k would be transferred to other parties including the West Berkshire Council, Thames Valley Police etc which was at odds with the Total Place agenda. Any savings generated by the closure for the Ministry of Justice would be at the expense of the West Berkshire Community;

·        the map attached to the consultation showed clearly that West Berkshire would be the worst affected area in the region;

·        it was possible that some defendants would not arrive at court which would mean that the police would need to issue warrants which would waste valuable police time;

·        the closure would result in a loss of local knowledge for those making decisions and would therefore impact on local justice;

·        the custody suites at Newbury Court had recently been rebuilt at a cost of around £2m, and the closure would therefore represent a waste of public funds;

·        the victims of domestic violence might be less inclined to report abuse if they knew that they would need to travel all the way to Reading for court appearances;

·        the Reading County Court was already overbooked and the building was unsuitable and it would cost money to make the necessary changes;

·        solicitors fees would increase to compensate them for the additional travelling costs and time spent on court appearances;

·        Members queried the 70% usage figures quoted in the report which were at odds with the long waiting times for court appearances;

·        although these were difficult financial times there was a compelling case not to close the Newbury Magistrate’s Court

The Amended Motion was put to the vote and declared CARRIED.