.
MPs’ committee defers comment on legal aid proposals
The Justice Select Committee has decided not to report its views on the proposals set out in the coalition government’s consultation paper, Transforming legal aid: delivering a more credible and efficient system, given that this month there will be a further short consultation on the finalised plans for legal aid (see July/August 2013 Legal Action 4). Instead, the committee published a report of the evidence given to it, noting that ‘the Ministry [of Justice (MoJ)] has not concluded its analysis of responses to the consultation … We intend to invite the Lord Chancellor to appear again before the committee to examine the government’s overall response to its initial consultation, and the proposals which are included in its second consultation on the competitive tendering process, in autumn this year’.
In June, the Justice Committee began holding evidence sessions on the proposals for the reform of criminal and civil legal aid in the consultation paper. The first evidence session was with organisations representing lawyers and others on the proposals for price competitive tendering of criminal legal aid provision. The witnesses included Lucy Scott-Moncrieff, the then president of the Law Society; Bill Waddington, chairperson of the Criminal Law Solicitors’ Association; Michael Turner QC, chairperson of the Criminal Bar Association; and Maura McGowan QC, chairperson of the Bar Council. Following the initial session, the committee decided to take oral evidence from Chris Grayling, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice.
In a letter sent to Sir Alan Beith, chairperson of the Justice Committee, just before the hearing in July, the Justice Secretary said that he expected to ‘make changes to allow a choice of solicitor for clients receiving criminal legal aid’ and that discussions were ongoing with the Law Society over a managed consolidation of the market for criminal defence services ‘using quality and capacity criteria to achieve this’. This seemed to confirm that after listening to the concerns of several organisations, including LAG, he had conceded that client choice should remain for criminal cases. However, in his evidence to the committee, Chris Grayling indicated that he was not going to rethink ending legal aid for many prison law cases or limiting further legal aid in judicial review cases. One issue which he was ‘going to look at again’ was the application of the residence test to children under 12 months; nevertheless, the Justice Secretary made it clear that he supported the ‘overall principle’ of the test.
LAG understands that while the Law Society has accepted that it cannot save all the firms that provide criminal legal aid currently, it is determined to resist any attempt by the MoJ to introduce competitive tendering for criminal defence services. ‘While LAG welcomes the concession on client choice, the government seems to be standing firm on the other potentially damaging and unjust proposals in the paper. It is a shame that the Justice Committee has, for now, ducked the opportunity to comment on these,’ said Steve Hynes, LAG’s director.