What do the government’s legal aid changes mean for justice?

4th July, 2013 12:09 pm

Last year the government brought forward draconian cuts to the legal aid budget, the effects of which are already being seen with people unable to get advice and help for their legal problems.  In the last few months the Government has since announced further deep cuts to civil legal aid – including to areas such as judicial review which is the one area where organisations and interest groups can challenge decisions made by the government itself.

But along with this they are now also proposing to introduce a series of changes to criminal legal aid. This includes a £220 million annual cut in funding and a proposal to introduce ‘price competitive tendering’ for defence work. In the eighties we had the Conservative government introduce CCT for services and this is a similar type of policy, driven purely by cost. Under this system firms of defence solicitors will have to bid for government contracts for work and the lowest bidder wins, subject only to a minimum threshold quality of service.

This sector is dominated by high street firms who – if they want to bid – will have to scale up their operations to cover entire counties. And in London for example firms would have to expand their operations to cover areas of ten or more boroughs. And they will have to do this from within only three months from the date of any bid.

The result is that many firms will find themselves in serious difficulty with their ongoing viability seriously threatened. But this actually seems to be the government’s intention as they want ‘new entrants’ into the market. Eddie Stobart have already said they want to enter this market (yes, they’re a road haulage firm) and there are rumours about Serco and Capita being ready to move in. The outcome will be a relentless drive to cut all costs.

Added to this, the Government propose to flatten the fee structure so that these firms will get the same fee for handling a not guilty plea as a guilty plea. So now there will be a financial incentive on these firms to chase profits for shareholders rather than focus on the quality of service that they provide. The result of this is bound to be miscarriages of justice and people being convicted for crimes they haven’t committed. The original proposals also had a clause which would mean that people accused of offences would no longer be able to choose their own solicitor to represent them. This would mean that the Government funded police and prosecution services would bring cases against people – and the Government would then effectively choose who should represent them as well.

This inequality of arms could not be in the best interests of justice.

After a strong campaign led by the Law Society – supported by other legal interest groups – and through a broad based campaign by MPs across the political spectrum the Lord Chancellor signalled on Monday that he was now willing to listen, announcing to the Justice Select Committee that he would remove the requirement for the Government to choose the accused person’s solicitor and would allow client choice to continue. He also signalled “an intention” to consider alternative proposals. Let’s hope the Government keeps on listening, because if the original proposals are eventually implemented, the consequences for access to justice and the rule of law could be incalculable.

Robert Khan is an Islington councillor and a non-practicing barrister

  • Andylabour AlltheWay

    You will get a Lawyer who does not know you or your circumstances .
    They will be reluctant to take you to trial as a guilty plea on day one gets the same payment as a full trial.
    The Top lawyers will still represent the well off and the poor will not get the justice everyone deserves.

  • BusyBeeBuzz

    Justice Alliance
    celebrating 64 years of legal aid
    4.30pm–6.30pm at the Old Bailey. Download the pdf with full details here.
    And 5pm at Manchester Crown Court. Download the pdf with full details here.

    We are an alliance of legal organisations, charities, community groups, grass roots and other campaigning groups, trade unions and individuals who are united in our opposition to the government’s proposed attack on legal aid and the criminal justice system. These legal aid proposals are part of the larger assault on essential parts of the welfare state.

    Legal aid, introduced in 1949, is a vital part of the UK justice system. It ensures that access to justice is not just for the rich and that there is equal justice for all. Legal aid is a cornerstone of our democratic tradition and the rule of law.

    Any justice system needs to ensure: fair and equal access to justice for all; protection for vulnerable people; quality and effective legal representation; that the state is held to account; a right to legal aid and a duty upon the Government to provide it. We consider the proposed cuts and the cuts already experienced to be unjust, unnecessary and profoundly damaging.

    The Government’s proposals on legal aid will affect everyone and will have the following effects on those who cannot pay:

    Remove your right to choose your own solicitor. You will be prosecuted by the state and defended by a lawyer selected and appointed by the state.

    Quality, specialist legal defence will disappear. The removal of choice and the cuts in funding will mean you will be getting a service where the cheapest defence lawyers will get a legal aid contract. BAME and Welsh language firms will not survive.

    With the introduction of the residence test, many people would not be able to access the justice system at all; this will include babies in care proceedings, victims of domestic violence and people who have been trafficked into the UK.

    Legal challenges to decisions made by the state and public authorities will be seriously undermined.

    Prisoners will not have legal aid to make representations about vital issues like their treatment, rehabilitation and progress. They will be left to stagnate.

    We will work as a Justice Alliance to promote national and local action to stop the government proposals and so protect legal aid as an essential part of access to justice.



  • News Weekly Survey: Momentum, fiscal charter and the Privy Council

    Weekly Survey: Momentum, fiscal charter and the Privy Council

    Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn have formed a group called Momentum, which says it will organise to campaign on issues both inside and outside the Labour Party. Do you think it should focus on working inside or outside the party? Having said two weeks ago that Labour will support the proposal, Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell has now said that the party will vote against the fiscal charter on Wednesday. Do you think the move to oppose the charter is a good […]

    Read more →
  • Comment No serious economist supports Osborne’s fiscal charter. Opposing it doesn’t make us deficit deniers

    No serious economist supports Osborne’s fiscal charter. Opposing it doesn’t make us deficit deniers

    I have been worried about the impact of George Osborne’s fiscal charter since it was floated last summer, which is why as a member of the Treasury Select Committee I asked questions of the economists who came to give evidence last July. We found no one, not even the Governor of the Bank of England, who would endorse George Osborne’s latest proposal. This was not just criticism from left wing economists. The Thatcherite professor who now runs the Institute for […]

    Read more →
  • Comment A green London isn’t a luxury, it’s a lifesaver

    A green London isn’t a luxury, it’s a lifesaver

    We’ve reached a tipping point. Most Londoners now say action is urgently needed on climate change. The ICM survey published today for Here Now climate campaigners, shows that this isn’t a preserve of ‘red’ Islington or ‘hipster’ Hackney but a view held across the capital, inner to outer London. As an executive member of SERA, Labour’s environment campaign, we’ve recognised the salience of this argument and that action is not a nice to have but a necessity. ‘It’s the environment, stupid’ […]

    Read more →
  • News Corbyn claims victory after Cameron u-turns on Saudi prison deal

    Corbyn claims victory after Cameron u-turns on Saudi prison deal

    Jeremy Corbyn is this afternoon celebrating the news that the Government has cancelled a £5.9m prisons contract with Saudi Arabia. The deal would have seen training programmes for Saudi prisons, and came under criticism because of the severity of the country’s judicial system. It emerged today, for instance, that a British pensioner is facing 360 lashes after being caught with homemade wine. Corbyn used his Labour Party Conference speech to attack the deal, claiming that overlooking Saudi Arabia’s human rights abuses […]

    Read more →
  • News Full text: McDonnell’s letter to Labour MPs on opposing fiscal charter

    Full text: McDonnell’s letter to Labour MPs on opposing fiscal charter

    Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell yesterday sent a letter to Labour MPs informing them that the party would now be voting against the Charter for Budget Responsibility on Wednesday, having previously stated they would support it. The letter has been passed on to LabourList and can be read in full here: Dear Colleague, Charter for Budget Responsibility and the Fiscal Mandate On Wednesday the vote will take place on an order to adopt the Government’s charter for Budget Responsibility including the fiscal […]

    Read more →
Share with your friends