Figures published in LAG’s newsblog which show an underspend of £117m by the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) are being hotly contested by the Ministry of Justice’s press office. They argue that LAG’s figures are “factually incorrect” and assert that the LAA spending was within 0.01% of its budget. This is difficult to reconcile with other published figures and the falling numbers of cases which the LAA has reported.

 

The disputed figures concern the last financial year 2013/14. We argue expenditure was around £1.7b which is lower than the £1.8b that was budgeted for and is based  on comparing the LAA's budget in their business plan with their final accounts. According to this analysis the LAA also overspent its administrative budget by £20m. The MoJ believe that the discrepancy in the figures arises from “accounting differences” between the LAA and the MoJ accounts. This seems to LAG an attempt to muddy the waters by the ministry.

 

LAG accepts that the government’s policy is to make cuts from the legal aid budget “rising to £220m a year.”[1] The cuts in scope introduced by the LASPO Act and the accompanying reductions in fees were designed to achieve these savings. However, there is also an underlying downward trend in the numbers of cases going through the system, which we think is leading to cumulative savings in the budget. These are being made in addition to the LASPO Act cuts.

 

Volumes of cases have been falling since a peak in 2009-10. They are down by a staggering 39% and most of this reduction has been in civil legal aid, which has reduced by two thirds. Criminal legal aid cases have fallen by 14 per cent in the same period.[2] We believe that these reductions can mainly be attributed to the increasing lack of accessible civil legal aid services for the public.

 

Given what has been reported on case volumes it is rather incredulous that the MoJ are now trying to claim that the expenditure on legal aid in the last financial year was about break-even on the budget. It seems to LAG that the MoJ is banking the savings from falling case numbers, along with the LASPO Act cuts, but does not want to admit this. By failing to acknowledge any underspend the MoJ is spurning a chance to address the problems which the lack of civil legal aid services are causing the public.

 

[1] MoJ Accounts 2013-14 p11

[2] Legal Aid Statistics in England and Wales, LAA 2013-14 p9