Martin Partington: Spotlight on the Justice System

Keeping the English Legal System under review

Posts Tagged ‘legal aid

Criminal legal aid changes – recent decisions

leave a comment »

It is, to me, one of the curiosities of public life that U-turns are usually portrayed in the mass media as a sign of official/political incompetence. To me the idea that someone might change their mind because they had had second thoughts is a sign of maturity and intelligence.

Whether you regard the Secretary of State for Justice as incompetent or intelligent and mature, there is no doubt that his recent written statement to the House of Commons on the change of direction on Criminal Legal Aid reform is important.

The issues are:

1 Reductions in fees paid to legal aid applicants. They had been reduced in March 2014 by 8.5%. A similar sized reduction was planned for July 2015, but this was put on hold while the MoJ did not work to ensure that such a cut would be unlikely to reduce the quality of criminal advocacy. In his January 2016, Michael Gove has announced that there will be a further postponement of the proposed cut. “I have also decided to suspend, for a period of 12 months from 1 April 2016, the second fee cut which was introduced in July last year.” Whether or not that fee cut will be brought back into effect in April 2017 will depend on how the market for the provision of criminal legal aid services has developed in the meantime.

2 Consolidation of provision of criminal legal aid. There has long been a view in Government that there are too many soicitors’ firms offering criminal legal aid services. Various proposals have been made to reduce their number. The most draconian proposal was that existing criminal legal aid contract should be replaced by new contracts that would be awarded, following a tendering process, in which contracts would be awarded to those firms who submitted the lowest bids for legal aid work.

Unsurprisingly this was fiercely resisted by solicitors on the basis that, if implemented, this would be a ‘race to the bottom’ – standards would fall because services would only be offered by those charging the least.

Mr Gove’s predecessor, Chris Grayling, came up with an alternative plan, known as ‘dual contracting’. Under the dual contracting system, two types of contract were to be awarded to criminal legal aid firms.

  • An unlimited number of contracts for ‘own client’ work based on basic financial and fitness to practise checks – in others words continued payment for representing existing and known clients.
  • And a total of 527 ‘duty’ contracts awarded by competition, giving firms the right to be on the duty legal aid rota in 85 geographical procurement areas around the country, with between 4 and 17 contracts awarded in each. In other words, these contracts would allow a limited number of firms the chance to represent new entrants to the criminal justice system.

The dual contracting model was  designed to meet concerns expressed by the legal profession about price competition.

A tender process under this proposed scheme did go ahead, but ended very badly with a lot of adverse publicity about both process and outcome.

The primary arguments against these alternative proposals were

  • Many solicitors firms feared that the award of a limited number of “dual” contracts – with a restriction therefore on who could participate in the duty legal aid rota would lead to a less diverse and competitive market.
  • Many barristers feared that the commercial model being designed by some solicitors’ firms would lead to a diminution in choice and potentially quality.
  • And, possibly the most compelling argument, many also pointed out that a process of natural consolidation was taking place in the criminal legal aid market, as crime reduced and natural competition took place.

In the face of considerable potential litigation (99 cases in the pipeline, plus a judicial review challenging the whole process), the Government has announced that this exercise will also be set aside. There will be a further review of the process towards consolidation early in 2017.

3 Quality of criminal advocacy. In the midst of all this, the report from Sir William Jeffrey on how to enhance the quality of criminal advocay has not been forgotten. Mr Gove stated:

I will also bring forward proposals to ensure the Legal Aid Agency can better support high quality advocacy. Furthermore, I intend to appoint an advisory council of solicitors and barristers to help me explore how we can reduce unnecessary bureaucratic costs, eliminate waste and end continuing abuses within the current legal aid system. More details will follow in due course.

I don’t think that criminal legal aid practitioners are completely off the hook as regards potential changes to how they work. But for the immediate future, things are clearer.

For Mr Gove’s written statement, go to https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/changes-to-criminal-legal-aid-contracting.

For further information on the Jeffrey Review, see this blog at https://martinpartington.com/2015/11/05/enhancing-the-quality-of-criminal-advocacy/

 

Written by lwtmp

February 10, 2016 at 6:45 pm

Who is doing legal aid? The statistical evidence

leave a comment »

On 15 June 2015, I wrote a short note on the then recently published Annual Report of the Legal Aid Agency. I deplored the fact that, by comparison with its predecessor – the Legal Services Commission (whose Annual Reports not only reported on how the organisation was doing but also on the work undertaken by legal aid providers, the innovations it was seeking to introduce and the concerns it felt about the overall robustness of the scheme for delivering legal aid services), the Legal Aid Agency’s report was very narrowly focussed on corporate concerns.There was no information about the services being delivered to the public.

What information is provided is now contained in quarterly statistical reports, the most recent of which was published at the end of June 2015. These relate to the period January 2015-March 2015 (inclusive)

The headline findings were:

Criminal legal aid
1.The gradual decline of recent years in crime lower workloads has continued in the context of falling overall crime rates, and the latest quarter saw a 7% fall compared to the same period in the previous year.
2. Expenditure on crime lower has declined more than workloads, down 14% compared to the same period of the previous year.. This reflects the introduction in March 2014 of a reduction of 8.75% to the fees paid for most crime lower legal aid work.
3.In crime higher, the trend in new work entering the system has dipped in the last few quarters. The number of representation orders granted in the crown court in the last quarter was down 13% compared to the same period of 2014. Part of this reduction was due to fewer cases being in the criminal justice system.
Civil legal aid
1.The implementation of the LASPO Act in April 2013 resulted in large reductions in legal help workload and expenditure but trends have since levelled out at around one-third of pre-LASPO levels. In the last quarter new matter starts were 6% lower than in the same period of 2014
2.
Workloads in civil representation fell by a smaller proportion than legal help following the implementation of LASPO, and now appear to be stabilising at around two-thirds of pre-LASPO levels. The number of certificates granted in the last quarter was down 7% compared to the same period of the previous year.
3. After sharp falls following LASPO, the number of mediation assessments in the latest quarter was 19% up compared to the same period in 2014 and the number of starts was up by 33% over the same period.
Exceptional Case Funding
1.This quarter, the proportion of applications being granted was 18%, which is 8 percentage points lower than the previous quarter, but 11 percentage points higher than the same quarter of 2014.
The downward trends revealed here are the clear consequence of the cuts that the Government has made to the scope of the legal aid scheme.
Providers of legal aid
What this quarter’s statistical report also shows are annual figures relating to the numbers of providers of legal aid services.
These show that  in the three years from April 2012 to April 2015, there has been a significant fall in the number of provider offices for both crime and civil work. The fall has been greater for civil (down 20%) than for crime (down 11%) over this period. In the last year there was a 13% fall in civil providers and 4% reduction in crime providers.
Such figures would have led the former Legal Services Commission to ask itself whether there were enough providers in the system to provide a nationally based service, and it not what might be done to arrest the decline. Such sentiments are not aired by the Legal Aid Agency.
Indeed, it is possible for the Agency to argue that as there are still good numbers of providers applying for the various tenders for work that the Agency offers, there are still providers willing to do the work and that therefore there is no problem.
It is also possible to argue that, by comparison with most other countries, per capita spending on legal aid services remains relatively generous.
What is missing from this analysis, however, is any consideration of the age profile of legal aid providers. It may plausibly be hypothesised that many legal aid providers have been doing the work for many years, remain committed to it, and will continue to do it as long as they can. But if no or only very little new blood is coming into the legal aid sector of the legal profession, then the medium to long-term future of the sector must be in some doubt. Such doubts will be reinforced by the continued cutting of the legal aid budget – which are clearly irreversible in the foreseeable future.
I agree with Ruth Wayte, who in her podcast with me (January 2015), made the point that providing legal aid services was an interesting and very worthwhile thing to do, However, if the existing model of providing legal aid services through private practice law firms is not sustainable, perhaps these trends hide the need for a rather more profound policy debate about who should provide legal aid services. Should we be thinking about the development of other provider models?
The statistical report is at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/438013/legal-aid-statistics-bulletin-jan-to-mar-2015.pdf

Written by lwtmp

August 4, 2015 at 11:23 am

Legal Aid – Exceptional Cases Funding – recent developments

leave a comment »

Following enactment of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012,(LASPO) the scope of civil legal aid was significantly reduced. Civil legal services could only be funded under the new legal aid scheme which fell within statutorily prescribed classes of case. (See LASPO section 9 and schedule 1).

However, section 10 of the Act did provide that, in exceptional circumstances, civil legal services could be provided where

(a) … it is necessary to make the services available to the individual … because failure to do so would be a breach of –

(i) the individual’s Convention rights (within the meaning of the Human Rights Act 1998), or

(ii) any rights of the individual to the provision of legal services that are enforceable EU rights, or

(b) … it is appropriate to do so, in the particular circumstances of the case, having regard to any risk that failure to do so would be such a breach.

The Director of Case Work has the statutory responsibility for making such decisions. In reality, the decisions are taken by case workers working within the Legal Aid Agency.

In coming to their decisions, case workers are required to take into account Guidance issued by the Lord Chancellor. (LASPO section 4.)

The Lord Chancellor was clearly anxious that, unless he was careful, the existence of exceptional funding might create a means for getting round the limitations he sought to impose on the Legal Aid scheme, which would have the effect of undermining the Government’s desire to reduce public expenditure on legal aid. Thus, in his guidance on exceptional case funding, which was published in 2013, it was stressed that, in reaching their decisions, case workers should understand that this funding ‘is to be used for rare cases’ only; ‘limited resources’ should be focussed ‘on the highest priority cases’. In relation to cases that might involve breach of Article 6 of the ECHR (right to a fair trial) the guidance stated: The overarching question to consider is whether the withholding of legal aid would make the assertion of the claim practically impossible or lead to an obvious unfairness in proceedings. This is a very high threshold” (original emphasis).

Shortly before Christmas 2014, the Court of Appeal handed down its decision in the case of Gudanaviciene . The case actually involved 6 cases which had been brought together because they raised in essence the same question – was the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance lawful? It was argued, in effect, that the terms in which the guidance had been drafted  imposed too high a threshold on applicants for exceptional funding, and that therefore the guidance went beyond the words of the Act, and were in consequence unlawful.

The Court of Appeal agreed with this argument. In the course of a long judgement, they held, in part, that

The fact that section 10 is headed “exceptional cases” and that it provides for an “exceptional case determination” says nothing about whether there are likely to be few or many such determinations. Exceptionality is not a test. The criteria for deciding whether an ECF determination should or may be made are set out in section 10(3) by reference to the requirements of the Convention and the Charter. In our view, there is nothing in the language of section 10(3) to suggest that exceptional case determinations will only rarely be made.

They therefore concluded that the Lord Chancellor’s Guidance was unlawful.

The question for Government was: how to respond to this judgement? There were two options: take a further appeal to the Supreme Court; or reissue the guidance and hope that the revised guidance would comply with the Court of Appeal’s interpretation of LASPO.

In the event, the Government decided on the latter course. On 9th June 2015, the Lord Chancellor published revised guidance on how exceptional case funding decisions are to be made in future. While those who drafted the revised guidance are still concerned that the provision of exceptional case funding should be kept under controi, the ‘tone’ of the document seems to have softened. Indeed the emphasis, for case workers taking decisions on these matters is whether – as the Act says, the provision of such funding is necessary.

The recent election of the new Conservative Government has clearly scotched any lingering hopes in the legal profession that there would be any major softening of policy on civil legal aid. But the revised guidance on exceptional case funding for civil legal services does represent a change in emphasis which practitioners must note and apply.

To read the judgement of the Court of Appeal in the Gudanaviciene case go to https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/gudanavicience-ors-v-dir-of-legal-aid.pdf

To read the revised guidance on emergency case funding (non-inquest) go to https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-aid-exceptional-case-funding-form-and-guidance. This page also gives a link to the guidance relating to inquest cases.

Written by lwtmp

June 16, 2015 at 2:30 pm

What is happening to Legal Aid? Reports from the Legal Aid Agency June 2015

leave a comment »

Publication of the second Annual Report of the Legal Aid Agency might be thought to be an opportunity to find out in a bit more detail about what is happening to Legal Aid, following implementation of the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. Those expecting such information will be very disappointed. The bulk of the Annual Report details how various business targets have or have not been met during the year under review. The report is thus about administrative and operational outcomes, rather than giving a view of how citizens are (or are not) being assisted by legal aid.

The Annual Report appeared on the same day as a much shorter summary by the Director of Legal Aid of issues that had come up during the same reporting year. This is also very general in tone – though it does mention a couple of cases that went to the Court of Appeal – and is more about the process of dealing with cases than anything else.

All the details on the current operation of the legal aid scheme is now put into quarterly statistical reports. The next is due at the end of June 2015. I will report on these in due course. But I very much regret that the reporting strategy of the former Legal Services Commission – which used to run legal aid – which included the key statistical headlines and provided a commentary on how the scheme was working for the public has not been continued.

To see the 2nd Annual Report go to https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-aid-agency-annual-report-and-accounts-2014-to-2015

The Director of Legal Aid Case Work’s Report is at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/director-of-legal-aid-casework-annual-report-2014-to-2015

Written by lwtmp

June 15, 2015 at 9:33 am

Civil legal aid – review of the ‘mandatory gateway’

leave a comment »

Legal practitioners have long argued that the only way to deliver proper legal advice and assistance is by face to face interviews with clients. With the development of new technologies, this view has come under increasing attack. It has been argued that remote contact via phone or email can often be just as effective and will often be more economical. An important research report on the issue by Alan Paterson and Roger Smith was published in 2014: see http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/face-face-legal-services-and-their-alternatives-global-lessons

One of the fundamental changes made to the legal aid scheme as the result of the passing of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012 is that, from April 1, 2013, in a number of matters that are still within the scope of the legal aid scheme, potential users of the legal aid scheme can only access the civil legal aid scheme through a ‘gateway’. Clients cannot get assistance by going direct to, for example, a solicitor.

(There are three exceptions, for those who are:

  • in detention (including prison, a detention centre, or secure hospital);
  • children (defined as being under 18); or,
  • where the matter for which they need assistance is one where the user has previously been assessed as requiring face-to-face provision, has accessed face-to-face within the last twelve months, and is seeking further help to resolve linked problems from the same face-to-face provider.)

The Gateway is delivered by the Civil Legal Advice (‘CLA’) advice helpline for England and Wales, paid for by legal aid. It provides, for people who qualify for civil legal aid, specialist legal advice, primarily by telephone, online, and by post, in relation to

  • debt,
  • discrimination,
  • Special Educational Needs,
  • housing, and
  • family issues.

It is available Monday to Friday 9am to 8pm and Saturday 9am to 12.30pm. Outside these times users can leave a message and CLA will call back within one working day.

Clients who qualify for legal aid in the first 3 Gateway categories listed above must usually receive any advice remotely. Clients who qualify in the other 2 categories of law have a choice about whether to receive any advice remotely or via a face-to-face provider.

The gateway provides  a two-tier system. At tier one, the operator will determine whether the matter is within the scope of legal aid and will also determine the financial eligibility of the client to legal aid. If both these tests are satisfied, the client is  referred to a specialist second tier advice provider. In cases that fall outside the scope, operators are training to inform people about possible alternative advice providers, e.g. in the charitable advice or third sectors.

Where a case is found to be within the scope of CLA, the client is referred to a second tier provider – a specialist who will normally provide advice remotely without a face-to-face meeting with the client.

The one exception to this is that where a client needs legal representation, arrangements will be made for a face-to-face meeting.

Because the compulsory element of the scheme was new, the Government undertook to review how the scheme was working within the first two years of its operation. In December 2014, it published the outcome of this review (and four separate research reports that were commissioned by the Government).

The broad conclusion was that, while there were matters that needed tweaking, the basic operation of the gateway was working satisfactorily,

My prediction is that, as policy evolves, there will be more use of these modes of accessing legal advice and assistance.

The Government’s view is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-legal-advice-mandatory-gateway-review. Annex A gives more detail about the issues within scope. Annex B gives details about the agencies currently providing the gateway service.

The related research reports are at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-legal-advice-mandatory-gateway-research-findings

Written by lwtmp

January 17, 2015 at 1:56 pm

Mediation in Family Disputes

leave a comment »

Mediation is the Government’s preferred option for resolving family disputes. The Government has recently announced that, from 3 November 2014, the first mediation meeting will be free to both parties, so long as at least one of the parties to the dispute is in receipt of legal aid.

In addition, from January 1 2015 there will be a third stage in the government’s work to improve mediation and encourage separating couples to use it to resolve disputes. From the beginning of the New Year, the Family Mediation Council (FMC) is introducing a compulsory accreditation scheme and new professional standards which all mediators must work toward. All mediators and those working towards becoming a family mediator will be required to be registered with the FMC. The Ministry of Justice (MOJ) is funding the preparation work and costs of implementing the new standards.

These announcements follow recommendations from the Family Mediation Taskforce.

See https://www.gov.uk/government/news/free-mediation-for-more-separating-couples-begins

The report of the Family Mediation Taskforce report, published in June 2014, can be found by googling Family Mediation Taskforce.

Written by lwtmp

November 4, 2014 at 10:19 am

Posted in chapter 7

Tagged with ,

What has happened to Legal Aid?

leave a comment »

The big changes to the legal aid scheme, designed to cut public expenditure on legal aid, were introduced in April 2013, following enactment of LASPO 2012.
The first Annual Report of the Legal Aid Agency has now been published. This provides more information on the direct impact this has had on the amount of legally aided work that has been undertaken in the first 12 months since the Act came into effect.

In summary:

• Total acts of assistance and spend – The LAA continued to fund advice, assistance and representation for eligible individuals across England and Wales by funding 1.8 million acts of assistance overall (Civil Legal Aid and Criminal Legal Aid). [2012-13: 2.3 million]. Total net expenditure was £1,709.5 million. [2012-13: £1,916.7 million].
• Number of providers – As at 31 March 2014 the LAA held 1,435 civil and 1,519 crime contracts [March 2013:1,899 civil and 1,599 crime contracts].
• Civil Legal Aid – The LAA funded 0.50 million Civil Legal Aid acts of assistance overall [2012-13: 0.93 million, a 46% decrease in the year]. Civil Legal Aid net expenditure was £800.9 million [2012-13: £941.6 million].
• Criminal Legal Aid – The LAA funded 1.32 million Criminal Legal Aid acts of assistance [2012-13: 1.36 million, a 3% decrease in the year]. Criminal Legal Aid spend was £908.6 million [2012-13: £975.1 million].

What these figures show is the dramatic impact the cuts in Legal Aid have had on civil legally aided matters. There have been huge falls, both in the numbers of acts of assistance, and in the numbers of those with civil legal aid contracts with the Legal Aid Agency. By comparison, criminal legal aid has suffered less, though well publicised actions in particular by the Bar indicate that the fees payable for legally aided work in crime have been subject to considerable constraint.

Lawyers will of course deplore these trends. But it has to be said that there is no indication of any political will to restore funding to the legal aid scheme. This appears to be the start of a new reality, a context in which rather different forms of service delivery to the public will have to be devised.

The LAA Annual report is available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/legal-aid-agency-annual-report-and-accounts-2013-to-2014

Written by lwtmp

July 31, 2014 at 10:09 am

Delivering legal services to the public in an age of austerity

leave a comment »

Like it or not, there is widespread acknowledgement that the funding of legal aid is not going to be restored to pre-Government cut levels. But knowing how to respond to this gloomy prediction is not easy. The Nuffield Foundation has recently published (February 2014) a really interesting research report which, drawing from international examples, offers many ideas for how we might deliver services effectively in this country as well. It deserves widespread attention.

The report concluded that websites, telephones, video communication and other means of digital communication can, if properly used, assist in maintaining access to justice in a time of austerity.

In their report, the researchers (Prof Alan Paterson and Roger Smith) emphasise the need to devise models of delivery that take account of the fact that not everyone can use websites and telephones. They also highlight the example of NHS Direct, an integrated telephone and internet project, unfortunately abolished just as it seemed to producing results.

However the report says that much could be done through:

  • Leadership from the Ministry of Justice in maintaining access to justice despite austerity cuts – a positive commitment to helping citizens to help themselves where they can and continued free access to legislation and cases.
  • The fostering of innovation through awards, recognition and, as in the US Legal Services Corporation’s Technical Innovation Grants programme, funds for strategic projects.
  • Rigorous testing of channels of delivery including the use of dummy clients.
  • Integrated ‘digital first’ but not ‘digital only’ delivery as happens in jurisdictions like New South Wales and New Zealand where internet advice is linked with telephones and face to face provision if required.
  • Dynamic digital systems that assist a person through a process such as obtaining a divorce, for example, the rechtwijzer.nl site in The Netherlands.

These are findings that fit well with the conclusions of the Low Commission, also published in early 2014.

The text of the Paterson-Smith report is at http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/face-face-legal-services-and-their-alternatives-global-lessons

The final report of the Low Commission is at http://www.lowcommission.org.uk/

Written by lwtmp

March 3, 2014 at 11:00 am

New ways of funding legal services – responding to cuts in legal aid. The Low Commission

with one comment

Government cuts to the legal aid budget are making people who want to deliver legal services to the poorest in society think hard about how this can be done into the future. I have already noted that one law firm has created an Alternative Business Structure to enable it to use its profits from private client work to fund its social welfare advice work. See https://martinpartington.com/2013/08/

To get more general thinking going on this, the Legal Action Group has established a Commission under the chairmanship of Lord Low to develop a new strategic approach. It has recently published an important Consultation Document on which it is consulting until the end of September 2013.

As background, the Commission states: “For many people, having access to advice and legal support on Social Welfare Law issues is central to ensuring that they receive fair treatment at the hands of the state, when in dispute with an employer or when struggling with debt. This type of advice and support is currently provided by both the not for profit sector (for example, by organisations such as Law Centres or Citizens Advice Bureaux), through the private sector (solicitors) and occasionally via welfare rights units run by Local Authorities.

“These services are currently funded by both central and local government as well as by charitable trusts and the private sector. However, changes to the scope of legal aid as a result of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 combined with other reductions in central and local government funding due to the period of austerity are threatening the provision of these services as never before.

“These cuts come at a time when advice agencies are seeing an increase in demand due to a combination of welfare reform, other austerity measures and the financial downturn.”

The aim of the Commission is “to develop a strategy for the future provision of Social Welfare Law services, which:

  • meets the need for the public, particularly the poor and marginalised, to have access to good quality independent legal advice;
  • is informed by an analysis of the impact of funding changes and by an assessment of what can realistically be delivered and supported in the future;
  • influences the thinking and manifestos of the political parties in the run up to the 2015 election.”

In its Consultation Paper summary, the main components of the Commission’s strategy are::

  • Legal aid should be viewed as part of a continuum including information, general advice, specialist advice, legal help and legal representation, rather than as a stand alone funding mechanism; the more we can do at the beginning of this spectrum, the less we should have to do at the end.
  • By reducing demand, taking early action and simplifying the legal system it will be possible to reduce some of the need for advice and legal support.
  • For those who can afford to pay, affordable advice and legal support should be more accessible and the routes into it much better communicated and understood.
  •  People with pressing problems need a simple and effective way of accessing good advice, without hurdles or confusion. Much basic provision can be developed using a combination of public legal education, national telephone helplines and websites, local advice networks and specialist support for front line advice agencies.
  •  More in-depth and intense support should be targeted at those most in need.
  • Ensuring the quality of all levels of service provision must be a high priority
  •  We would like to see a more open and collaborative advice sector. There is considerable scope for local advice agencies to work more closely together and in some cases even to merge. We would also like to see the national advice services umbrella bodies work more closely together and share their resources and experience more widely
  • The importance of advice and legal support on social welfare law to people’s lives, coupled with challenges to its continued provision and additional costs to government that are likely to result if no action is taken, makes it imperative that the next UK Government develops a National Strategy for Advice and Legal Support in England for 2015-20 and that the Welsh Government develops a similar strategy for Wales
  •  Local authorities should co-produce or commission local advice and legal support plans in conjunction with local not-for-profit and commercial advice agencies; these plans should review the services available, including helplines and websites, whilst targeting face to face provision to ensure that it reaches the most vulnerable and ensuring some resources are available for legal representation where it is most needed, to supplement the reduced scope of legal aid
  • We estimate that currently, post the implementation of the 2012 Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO), there is about £400m per year available to fund advice and legal support services- mainly coming from local authorities, the Money Advice Service and the legal aid that remains for social welfare law.
  •  We estimate at least a further £100m pa is required in order to ensure a basic level of provision
  •  We are calling on the next UK Government to provide half this extra funding by establishing a 10 year National Advice and Legal Support Fund of £50m pa, to be administered by the Big Lottery Fund (BIG), to help develop provision
  • We propose this Fund should be financed by the Ministry of Justice, the Cabinet Office and the DWP, as the main creator of the need for advice and legal support (on the polluter pays principle)
  • 90% of the Fund should be used to fund local provision, with 10% for national initiative.
  • BIG should allocate the 90% share of the National Fund to local authorities, based on indicators of need, to help implement local advice and legal support plans, which should be prepared in conjunction with the local advice sector.
  • We are also calling on other national and local statutory, voluntary and commercial funders to contribute a further £50m pa to help develop provision. These should include NHS clinical commissioning groups, housing associations, additional Money
    Advice Service funding, charities, trusts and foundations and lawyer fund generation schemes, such as the interest on money held for clients and dormant accounts.
  • Most of our recommendations apply equally to Wales, but it will be important to build on the momentum resulting from the Welsh Government’s Advice Services Review published in May 2013.

A final report is due to be published at the end of 2013. it makes clear that legal aid budgets, as such, are unlikely to be restored so that alternative funding models must be developed.

Links to the full consultation report are at http://www.lowcommission.org.uk/Can-you-help

Written by lwtmp

September 5, 2013 at 9:16 am

Legal aid – updating the book

leave a comment »

When I was preparing the last edition of the book, in October 2012, the full details of how the legal aid scheme would work once the Legal Aid Agency had started its work, were not available. As a result of the changes that are now fully effective there is a number of points in the book that are now out of date.

1 The Funding Code (see p 273), under which the former Legal Services Commission operated, has been abolished. The new Legal Aid Agency works under the regulations that have been made under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. These include most importantly the Civil Legal Aid (Procedure) Regulations 2012/3098, see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2012/3098/contents/made; and the Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2013, see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/104/contents/made.

2 The Lord Chancellor’s priorities (p 273) are repealed and do not apply to the Legal Aid Agency.

3 Similarly the statement of Objectives for the Legal Services Commission (p 275) has been abolished and does not apply to the Legal Aid Agency

Written by lwtmp

September 5, 2013 at 8:12 am