Labour’s commission on legal aid has been described as “the only game in town” by some close to it. This might be true as, so far, the government seems reluctant to review the cuts introduced by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012, but a change of tactics, as well as an acknowledgment of some of the mistakes of the past, could lead to the commission having a more immediate impact.     Speaking at the Legal Voice conference last week, former legal aid minister Lord Bach (pictured above), the head of Labour’s commission, caused some wry amusement when he described himself as “not a Corbynista” (Bach has always been associated with the Blairite wing of the Labour party). He seems happy, though, to serve Corbyn, describing him as the first political party leader who “really gets legal aid”.     In contrast, Tony Blair, while prime minister, seemed somewhat less supportive. He famously promised at the 2003 annual conference to “derail the gravy train of legal aid”, a comment that was met with incredulity by the legal aid lawyers and advice charities involved in delivering the service at the time. It was perhaps barbs like the gravy train one that Lord Bach had in mind when he said Labour might have contributed to ending the “broad consensus which used to exist around access to justice and legal aid”.     Some of Labour’s actions undoubtedly fed a somewhat toxic public image for legal aid, which did not help the battle against the LASPO Act cuts. However,  Bach was quick to point out in his recent speech, while Labour might have made some mistakes in government, it was the coalition government’s policies that led to the devastation of civil legal aid.     Given Bach’s very public stance of support for social welfare law especially, it seems likely to LAG that the commission will recommend some reversal of the recent cuts. It runs the risk, though, of being seen as no more than a talking shop, full of warm words and promises. The stark reality is that they are at least another four years from power. To have any immediate impact, the commission needs to focus on the problems that the legal aid cuts are causing the justice system and (most importantly) the public right now.     Corbyn, to signal his change from his predecessor’s approach to opposition, has used contributions from members of the public at prime minister’s questions. Lord Bach should perhaps adopt a similar approach and highlight the impact of the legal aid cuts by hearing from members of the public who have been denied access to justice. Focusing on statistics and evidence from witnesses (including me!) with a stake in the system runs the risk of producing a worthy report, but of interest only to policy wonks. A more public-focused approach would have wider resonance and could put political pressure on the government to reverse some of the damage caused by the LASPO Act cuts.   Steve Hynes, Director of LAG   Pic: Lord Bach, MoJ.