Update on All-Party Group on Legal Aid
The APG on Legal Aid held its latest meeting on 29 October. Karl Turner MP was elected by the APG’s officers as the group’s new chairperson.
Legal aid consultations discussed by Lord McNally
The meeting was addressed by Justice Minister Lord McNally. He maintained that the government’s past and future legal aid cuts were necessary to help reduce the national deficit. However, he noted that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) had modified a number of proposals from its consultation paper, Transforming legal aid: delivering a more credible and efficient system. In particular, legal aid in prison law cases would still be available for all proceedings before the Parole Board and for sentence calculation cases involving a disputed release date; also, the proposed residence test was now subject to a number of further exceptions (see also page 4 of this issue). Lord McNally noted that an additional consultation, Transforming legal aid: next steps (now closed), had covered three main areas: restricting payment for judicial review applications unless permission was granted; revising the criminal advocacy fee scheme; and procurement for criminal legal aid. Regarding the latter, he hoped that the modified model now proposed by the MoJ would better achieve the objectives of reform.
Meeting voices unease over proposals
Audience members, however, raised many concerns over the latest proposals. Nicola Mackintosh of Mackintosh Law, in London, discussed two categories of clients with mental health issues who might not be able to access legal aid in the future: those who lacked capacity and had been forced to come to the UK (and were not lawfully resident), and those who, because of lack of capacity, would be unable to prove lawful residence. Dan Rosenberg of Maxwell Gillott Solicitors, in London, described the ‘chaotic’ lives of many of his teenage clients, whom he assisted when they were denied help from social services. He was deeply concerned that it would become financially unviable for solicitors like him to undertake judicial review work without a guarantee of payment, given that the actions of their clients were also often unpredictable.
Lord McNally’s view was that exceptional funding from the Legal Aid Agency would assist in the situations mentioned. However, it was pointed out that the MoJ’s response to a recent Freedom of Information Act 2000 request suggested that up until 18 June 2013 just five cases out of 212 applications had received funding since the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 came into force.
■ The minutes of the meeting are available at:
www.appg-legalaid.org. To receive updates about the APG and information about future meetings, e-mail:
office@lapg.co.uk quoting ‘APG on Legal Aid’ in the subject line.