80 new rape courts

That's great @Alexandra2001 so where will he put anyone found guilty of rape?

I don't think anyone is saying it's a bad policy, just not really doable unless the intention is to find them all not guilty and just clear them off the books.

Well, it IS a lie that Labour will bring in self ID and you know it too.

They have said, as Kemi Badenoch also said, 2 years ago, that they want to simplify the process and will have a wide spread consultation on the subject, so you have no crystal ball, we just don't know the outcome.

ATM 96% of applicants get a GRC, so a 2 year self ID process.

If there are no places to put rapists, thats down to the Tories and austerity but is that a reason to do nothing about the situation?

i don't think so.

My cousin is one, family law.

She says the emphasis can be moved over time to improve rape convictions.

Comes down to aspiration doesn't it, do we accept that we have effectively decriminalised rape or do we have the desire to change this?

As Starmer was knighted for his work at the CPS, i would suggest he knows what he is talking about a little more than the critics on this thread who, lets face it, are offering nothing more but criticism and no new ideas.

Labour cannot simultaneously make the GRC process as easy as self identifying with one letter from any GP (who is not in a position to diagnose a psychiatric condition) and claim they won't bring in Self ID.

They cannot bring in a policy to address rape with nowhere to put the rapists.

And they are relying on a Tory policy for their data. Who they say are lying about everything else.

What are the chances that this is the one thing they are not lying about?

There aren't the resources. Personally I think it is much worse to lead victims to think change is going to happen because this plan has more holes than a sieve, but it is giving false hope to women who've been traumatised. I think that it grossly irresponsible.

What's needed is a long term plan that builds on Soteria. And that must include honesty about all the layers of staffing in the judiciary, CPS and the police, and the things they need to get rape cases to court.

What is definitely unwelcome is false hope. It is wrong.

Every single policy from every political party can and should be dissected to see if it would work with reference to the party's other stated positions and known weaknesses. This is no different. Never forget, we don't owe Labour, Tory or any other party anything.

It's not women friendly when it clearly won't work and they absolutely know this!

They can do better, women expect better, and it's deeply worrying that even at this early stage in policy making, when they could offer the world on a stick, that they don't think it's worth the effort to deal with the obvious issues.

As opposed to the comfort blanket of anyone challenging Labour's position and policies being Tories / right wing, you mean?

As long as we're discussing what it's about (Labour's plans) you can't police what we're posting. But thanks for the guidance!

We're discussing Labour, who are likely to be in government soon.

How many barristers do you know, @CassieMaddox?

Yeah, let's see how well it goes trying to persuade barristers that they want to do this work, given how badly it's paid (if you think they'll ever come close to the pay available in other disciplines, you clearly have a magic money tree).

They've also said that the EqA doesn't need amending and that they'll make it easier to get a GRC. Which creates an effective self ID system.

Yet the Criminal Bar Assoc in the same article, says there aren't enough barristers.

No point judges saying they're available if there aren't enough barristers!

None of the parties have got a track record that suggests they will prioritise women, but yes as it looks like Labour will win it's their policies that need most scrutiny.

Labour will bring in self-id because it's cheap and they see it as a sop to the left and they don't care about consequences.

And when I see policies like this, when there is ample, easily found evidence that court space is not the reason for the horrific backlog in rape trials, I see a cheap sop and assume they don't care about the consequences.

Women deserve better and we need to question and examine and hold to account, not just accept that oh well it's something.

Also there is an important word in that sentence - "theoretical"

Yes. You're trying to diminish this further. It's not airy fairy theory. It's real. It's happening. Labour don't plan to stop it. HTH

OP do you work in the court system at all?