The courts backlog will still fall despite plans to curb jury trials being scrapped, the justice secretary has told the BBC.

Alex Norris said introducing legislation for judge-only trials "was always going to be the most complicated to implement" and would have slowed down reforms.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham's decision abandons proposals introduced by Sir Keir Starmer's government to allow judges in England and Wales to make the sole decision on cases that would lead to a sentence of less than three years.

The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) said only complex fraud and financial offences would be judge-only - and it proposes thousands of medium-level crimes should stay with volunteer magistrates, who sit without a jury.

Norris told the BBC's Sunday with Laura Kuenssberg the backlog would start falling "in this Parliament", but would not say by how much.

He said it would fall significantly over the next decade "as a result of the changes we're making".

The Conservatives said it was a "major victory" for those who fought to defend trial by jury, while criminal lawyers welcomed the decision but voiced concern about the implications of abolishing a defendant's right to ask for a jury trial.

The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) warned this would keep more middle-ranking cases before magistrates and shift 25,000 cases a year onto magistrates' courts.

Former justice secretary David Lammy first announced the plans to curb jury trials in December following a recommendation in a major review of the court system in England and Wales.

The series of radical reforms, including scaling back jury trials, were presented as the best way of turning around record backlogs which, in turn, were exacerbating the prison population crisis.

The backlog - which has led to record delays for defendants and victims - currently stands at nearly 81,000 cases, having rocketed largely thanks to cuts before the pandemic and court closures during national lockdowns.

Official projections have estimated it could reach 100,000 before the next general election and, in a worst-case scenario, climb to double that number by 2035.

There are, however, indications the backlog is now stabilising after the government committed unlimited funding to pay for more judges to sit in courts that were otherwise being unused.

Under the original plans, Lammy had wanted to reserve jury trials for the most serious "indictable" offences - meaning cases that are always sent to Crown Court, including murder and rape.

Less serious offences, where the sentence would be no more than three years, would be decided without a jury in the Crown Court by a judge alone. Even less serious offences than that would stay in magistrates' courts, abolishing the right of defendants to ask for a trial by jury when they feel that is their best chance of being cleared.

The proposals triggered an outcry across many parts of the criminal justice world, with many opponents saying eroding the 800-year-old right to trial by jury would not solve the backlogs.

Norris earlier said that he remained committed to bringing down the backlog and delivering swifter justice.

But he added: "I have heard the strength of feeling on the proposals for increasing the number of judge-alone trials in the Crown Court and have made the decision to change course.

"This allows us to start that work far earlier, ensuring that under this government we do not have victims waiting endlessly for justice.

"Justice delayed is justice denied, and I am committed to maximising efficiencies in our system alongside record investment. I remain committed to structural reform which is crucial if we are to bring down the backlog."

Andrew Thomas KC - chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, which represents barristers who work in crown and magistrates courts - said the profession was "delighted".

"Justice needs juries," he said. "Nothing inspires more public trust than 12 ordinary citizens from all walks of life deciding the facts of a case together.

"We are also pleased that the government is going ahead with important changes in the bill to protect victims and witnesses at trial. These include new powers to prevent unfair questioning about a complainant's behaviour and to support witnesses to give their best evidence."

But Thomas warned plans to keep more middle-ranking cases before magistrates could backfire - not least because of a shortage of magistrates.

"The proposal to strip defendants of their right to elect a crown court trial, combined with doubling magistrates' sentencing powers to two years, would shift 25,000 cases a year - including 5,500 jury trials - out of the crown court," he said.

"These are not minor offences. It includes serious and sensitive cases including assaults, sexual assaults, child abuse and grievous bodily harm. Our volunteer magistrates do an excellent job but they are completely unequipped to try complex, multi-day trials.

"It would be a car crash if they tried to do it, especially at this time."

Claire Waxman, victims' commissioner for England and Wales, said victims were "being asked to place their faith in a plan that ministers themselves argued would not be [enough]".

Barrister Karl Turner, a Labour MP who was suspended from the parliamentary party after he criticised the government's plans to reform jury trials, thanked Burnham "for his support during my campaign".

Shadow justice secretary Nick Timothy said: "This is a major victory for everyone who fought to defend trial by jury, and Conservatives led that fight from day one. Labour have been forced to abandon its central attack on jury trials in the Crown Court."

Liberal Democrat justice spokeswoman Jess Brown-Fully added the proposal "should never have been introduced in the first place", while Green MP Sian Berry said it was "a victory for justice and fairness".

Have you been affected by the issues raised in this story? Get in touch.

Court backlog will continue to rise even with new reforms, Lammy says