Another damming report on the government's legal aid changes was published yesterday (12th March). Unfortunately, while the House of Commons Justice Committee report eloquently describes the problems caused by the cuts to legal aid and advice services it is rather light on suggesting solutions.   Like the National Audit Office (NAO) report published in November last year, the Justice Committee raises the concern about advice deserts in England and Wales. It criticises the Ministry of Justices's (MoJ) failure to monitor the impact of the legal aid cuts and to properly research the "geographical distribution of legal aid providers." It calls for the government to begin immediately to rectify this lack of data.   The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) is accused of mismanaging the exceptional funding scheme by the Committee. It observes that the scheme, "has not provided the job that parliament intended" and is critical of the LAA's use of inexperienced officials without detailed knowledge of the relevant areas of law to make decisions on if a case qualifies for assistance or not.   Since the reforms to legal aid were made the Committee observes that there has been an underspend in the civil legal aid budget. It cites the NAO evidence that this amounts to £32m and blames the "lack of public information, including information about the Civil Legal Aid telephone gateway" as partly to blame.   The committee says it "remains concerned" that many victims of domestic violence do not have the necessary evidence to qualify for legal aid.  It also considers that the LAA should have discretion to vary the rule which requires that the evidence on domestic violence to be no-more than two years old.   In the report examples are given of the impact of the cuts from the evidence the Committee heard. Ruth Hayes, director of Islington Law Centre, told the committee of two separates incidents of clients fainting in the Law Centre's reception area because of lack of food, due to problems with the payments of their benefits, an area of law removed from the scope of legal aid.  However, despite describing the damage caused by the changes to legal aid, in its recommendations the committee stops short of arguing for a return of some areas of law to be covered by the scheme.   Many of the issues described, such as the lack of advice on benefits can only be resolved by spending cash. LAG believes, particularly with the £32m underspend identified by the NAO, the Justice Committee could have been a bit bolder in its recommendations, but a member of the committee who spoke to LAG argued that the all party committee would have been unlikely to have reached a consensus on its recommendations if it had been too prescriptive.   We would hope the new government in May will heed the report's findings and look address at least some of the concerns it raises. Looking again at the two year rule to qualify for legal aid in domestic violences cases and implementing the main recommendations of the Low Commission on Social Welfare Law, we suggest, would be a good starting point.