Posts Tagged ‘public legal education’
Seeking legal help online: the challenge of design
In December 2020 Roger Smith, who runs the excellent Law, Technology and Access to Justice website (at https://law-tech-a2j.org/,) posted an item about an important report from Australia.
Written by Jo Szczepanska and Emma Blomkamp, and published by Justice Connect (a not-for-profit Law Charity, see https://justiceconnect.org.au/) their recently published report Seeking Legal Help Online –
Understanding the ‘missing majority’ offers a range of practical ideas on how to design self-help resources that can actually be used by those seeking help. In Smith’s words: “It puts Australian experience front and centre of global discussion of a key topic.”
The phrase ‘missing majority’ in the title refers to the fact that the majority of people will not or cannot afford to use the services of legal practitioners to assist in the resolution of disputes or other problems. However, in the words of the report “as the missing majority progressively adopts technology, there are increasing opportunities to find new models of providing cost-efficient and effective free legal assistance at scale”. The report aims to find a better understanding of the opportunities to assist the missing majority through online resources, recognising their limits as well as their potential.
The report sought to answer the following 5 questions:
- How do people search for legal help online? The first set of insights describes the variety and mixed results of searching techniques used by participants in this research.
- What is the self-help journey like? This looks at the difficulties of trying to solve problems on your own. For example legal jargon is confusing for most people who haven’t studied law; the rules and procedures of the legal system can be opaque; and the process to understand and resolve an issue can be incredibly time-consuming. Indeed the whole process can be highly stressful.
- How can different resources help and how are resources used? The report draws on participants’ own analyses and explanations of why they would select certain tools, when they would use them, and what combinations of resources would work best for them and their issue. Where self-help became overwhelming, participants would start looking for a professional to help them.
- How can resources be improved? This considered the shortcomings of existing legal resources and the behaviour exhibited by people as they try to decipher and then apply new knowledge. These insights highlight issues of access, trust, accessibility, appropriateness and usefulness.
Unfortunately, many online legal resources remain limited in their design, simply putting online existing forms and leaflets. Some people with disabilities cannot access or use online legal resources at all because the resources have not been designed with their needs in mind. Resources often also contain overly technical and complex language. - How do help-seekers define a legal problem? This part of the study draws attention to the question of how a diverse range of people who find themselves in need of legal information or assistance try to find that information. Overall, the stories from participants and examples from live searches and testing of resources highlight the differences and commonalities of searching for legal help and information online.
In the light of the findings from the empirical part of the study, the final section of the report presents a series of recommendations and design principles, offering guidelines for improving online legal self-help resources. The recommendations focus on how to involve people with lived experience of trying to use existing resources together with relevant professionals in funding, researching, designing, testing, implementing, promoting, and evaluating online self-help resources.
Suggestions in the report are tailored for a range of different target audiences: users, funders, service providers, and resource makers. They are grouped under five main headings:
- Invest in information design and user experience;
- Involve people with lived experience in making online resources
- Break down silos between sectors, organisations, communities, and self-help
- Establish communities of practice to support makers of online self-help resources
- Invest in consumer outreach, search engine optimisation, communications, and marketing.
This blog does not reflect the detailed ideas contained in the report. Anyone wanting to develop new online resources should read this report for its ideas about how this might be done in ways that would actually help. The scope for innovations seems almost limitless. Policy on access to justice needs to take self-help seriously.
(This entry has been adapted from the report’s Executive Summary.)
It can be downloaded at https://justiceconnect.org.au/about/digital-innovation/missing-majority-report/
Covid 19 and the English Legal System (11): Civil Justice – results of the Civil Justice Council rapid survey
As I have already noted here, Covid 19 has had a major impact on the ways in the courts are delivering their services. In particular, much attention has been directed towards the use of virtual or remote hearings – online paper hearings, hearings by phone and hearings by video.
The Civil Justice Council commissioned a rapid preliminary survey of how these new processes were working. The results of that survey were published in early June 2020. It was based on responses to a survey drawn from the experience of those involved in cases in a two-week period in early May 2020. The study was carried out by Dr Natalie Byrom of the Legal Education Foundation.
Obviously, such a survey can be no more than an initial glance at what is happening on the ground. Many of these preliminary findings are what might be expected:
- many judges and practitioners were finding that they were getting on better with using new technologies than they might have anticipated;
- they were coping despite a lack of advance training in the use of technologies;
- the technologies themselves were often not as reliable as participants would like;
- some types of hearing were more suited to remote hearings than others.
These are the sorts of issue that should be mitigated as all those involved in delivering new services become better trained and more used to dealing with cases using the new technologies.
From a rather detailed report, four important points for the way ahead may be noted:.
- At present HMCTS does not have an effective way of capturing information details about what types of case are brought to court. For example, data is published on the numbers of possession proceedings brought by mortgage companies or landlords against residential occupiers (mostly for failure to meet payment obligations). But it is impossible to get any detailed information about the use of courts for other potential housing law issues. The report makes a strong plea that much greater effort should be made by HMCTS to identify the ‘data points’ which would provide a much more detailed picture of how the civil court system is functioning. Effective planning of future services cannot be provided without more detailed management information.
- There was a strong impression that video hearings were better suited for remote hearings that telephone hearings.
- There were inevitable concerns that litigants in person might be in difficulty using the new technologies unless adequate support was available.
- The survey was unable to capture what lay users of the system, in particular litigants in person, thought of these new developments. It was essential to fill this knowledge gap if the objective of HMCTS’ reforms – to provide services that users want and need – was to be met.
The survey report and related press release can be accessed at https://www.judiciary.uk/announcements/civil-justice-council-report-on-the-impact-of-covid-19-on-civil-court-users-published/
Further information about the Legal Education Foundation is at https://www.thelegaleducationfoundation.org/
Public legal education: news from Law for Life
While the importance of public legal education is widely accepted in principle, it is left to the work of a pretty small charity, Law for life: foundation for public legal education, to continue to fly the flag for this important project.
The aims of the charity are to increase access to justice by providing everyone with an awareness of their legal rights together with the confidence and skills to assert them.
Most people struggle to cope with legal issues, and often don’t know where to go for help. Being able to cope with family and housing issues, sorting out employment and benefit matters or difficulties with goods and services is crucial. These issues are the cornerstones of everyday life that can become drivers of poverty and inequality if left unresolved.
To address these challenges Law for Life
- publishes the online Advice Now information service that draws together the best up-to-date information about the law and rights available on the internet;
- creates effective materials (leaflets, videos) that provide practical help on how to manage and resolve life’s legal problems;
- delivers community-based education and training projects focussing on housing, welfare, consumer, and employment issues with an emphasis on skills;
- offers consultancy to other organisations.
Updates on the work of Law for Life are provided in regular newsletters, the most recent of which was published on 30 June 2020.
For further details about Law for Life, see https://lawforlife.org.uk/
Advice Now is at https://www.advicenow.org.uk/
The Law for Life Newsletter is at https://mailchi.mp/42bebf74018a/8wt2tlhi1o-3120242?e=f65948d0ee
This has links to the full archive of Law for Life Newsletters.
Legal support – the way ahead? How much vision?
I have already noted the outcome of the Post-Implementation Review of changes to the Legal Aid scheme contained in Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) 2012. While the Government clearly does not want to make major changes to the scheme, the review did reveal issues to which the Government clearly feels it must respond. In February 2019 it published Legal Support: The Way Ahead – An action plan to deliver better support to people experiencing legal problems.
As a paper, it lacks the ambition or vision of other recent reports, in particular the Report of the Low Commission report on the future of legal services. But buried in the detail is a number of straws in the wind which are worth noting, even if they don’t make the heart race.
The Paper starts by repeating the point that the Government already provides ‘£1.6 billion to the most vulnerable in society to ensure that they can access legal aid’. It seems to accept, however, that there are some who – at least in some circumstances – should receive legal aid who currently do not get it. The Paper states that the Government ‘will conduct a review into the thresholds for legal aid entitlement, and their interaction with … wider criteria’. This review will be completed by summer 2020.
In the interim there will be changes to eligibility for some public family law cases, to be introduced in summer 2019.
And, whilst the review is ongoing, the Government will continue with current arrangements to passport all recipients of universal credit through the legal aid means test.
Addressing the problem that people do not know about their entitlement to legal aid, the Government states that it ‘will ensure that more people are aware of their entitlement to legal support – and will advertise its availability’. The stated aim is to launch the awareness programme by autumn 2019 – dealing not just with legal aid, but legal support more generally.
The Government plans to make some changes to protect the most vulnerable. It will expand the scope of legal aid to include separated migrant children in Spring 2019. It also plans to bring forward proposals to expand the scope of legal aid to cover special guardianship orders in private family law by Autumn 2019.
As regards Exceptional Case Funding, the Government plans to consider, by the end of 2019, whether the process for applying for Exceptional Case Funding can be simplified, and whether decisions can be reached more quickly. It will also consider whether it is necessary to introduce a new emergency procedure for urgent matters to access Exceptional Case Funding.
By Spring 2020, the Government will amend the rules relating to the ‘mandatory telephone gateway’ so that there can be immediate access to face-to-face advice in discrimination, debt and special educational needs cases. (The telephone option is retained.)
The new Paper accepts that ensuring people can access the right legal support at the right time may help people resolve problems more efficiently and effectively. There is research evidence demonstrating how problems, if left undiagnosed and unresolved, can escalate, cluster, and lead to damaging cycles that are hard to break. However, the Government states that there is limited comprehensive research as to what works best, when, and for whom. Further, whilst it is often suggested that early intervention leads to cost savings, the financial and economic benefits of early advice are difficult to quantify with accuracy. The Government’s response to this challenge is that it wants to pilot and evaluate several different forms of early legal support.
Thus,
- it will work collaboratively with providers to develop web-based products which bring a range of legal support tools together in one place;
- it will improve the signposting advice and support available from the existing specialist telephone service and test enhancements to this service;
- it will use funding to encourage the delivery of legal support through technology;
- recognising that a comprehensive service may offer people an opportunity to support themselves, the Government will work collaboratively with the legal and advice sector to evaluate the impact of legal support hubs;
- it will pilot face-to-face early legal advice in a specific area of social welfare law and will evaluate this against technological solutions, bearing in mind costs; and
- it will enhance the support offered to litigants in person.
All these interventions will be researched to assess what is the best way to help and support those who need it, and whom should be assisted in the provision of legal support. The intention is that there should be outcomes from these initiatives by the end of 2019.
The Government states that it will continue to work across departments to help to improve the quality of decision-making on legal rights. It has been noted on numerous occasions that if decisions are ‘right first time’ this should reduce the need to take cases on appeal.
Key to the modernisation of the justice system is the need to ensure that forms and systems are as simple and straightforward to use as possible, and that the courts and tribunals service enables people to resolve their conflicts as quickly and early as possible. The Government wants to generate momentum in this area, but acknowledges that this is a first step.
It will be important for the Government to continue open and collaborative working with experts over the coming years, identifying and evaluating new ideas. One specific commitment is that the Government plans to set up a Legal Support Advisory Network to make use of external expertise, shape research and evaluation proposals, and potentially explore new research opportunities and collaborations.
As a nod to the problem of whether or not there will be sufficient numbers of people entering this sector of the legal services market, the Government states it will ‘support practitioners to join the legal profession and continue to deliver high quality legal support to people across England and Wales long into the future’.
Specifically there will be a comprehensive review of the criminal legal aid fee schemes and structures, to be completed by Summer 2020.
The full paper can be accessed at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/777036/legal-support-the-way-ahead.pdf
See also Press Release at https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-sets-out-new-vision-for-legal-support
Public Legal Education: the Solicitor General’s vision
In the past, the Attorney-General tried to promote the cause of Public Legal Education. This role seems now to have been delegated to the Solicitor-General.
In October 2018, the current post-holder, Robert Buckland MP launched a new ‘vision’ to which he hoped interested organisations would sign up.
The Press Release stated:
The statement creates a shared vision for the PLE community to aspire to which will help drive forward legal education initiatives. The statement reveals 7 goals for where PLE might be in 10 years’ time.
The goals are:
-
PLE will be supported by a robust evidence base, showing what the need is and what works best.
-
PLE will be of high quality, maintained to ensure that it remains accurate and accessible and useful for the people who need it.
-
PLE will be universal and reach across all demographics, prioritising children, young adults and vulnerable groups
-
PLE will be scaled up through delivery by the legal community
-
PLE will harness technology and be delivered through innovative methods, both on and offline
-
PLE will be embeded into public services and government departments
-
PLE will be understood as beneficial and utlised by other sectors
Whether much can be achieved without additional investment in the development of PLE must be a moot point, but I suppose that a statement such as this is better than nothing. The statement was launched at an event organised by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Public Legal Education and Pro Bono legal work.
See https://www.gov.uk/government/news/our-vision-for-legal-education
Preventing digital exclusion
A great deal of effort is currently being put into finding ways of using IT to deliver legal services, whether in the form of: providing legal advice and assistance to those who need it; conducting various types of legal activity/process on-line; dealing with disputes online.
In general, the modernisation of the practice and procedure of the law through IT is to be welcomed. At the same time, there are concerns that some of the most vulnerable in society may be excluded from this brave new world. They may not have easy access to computers, or the ability to use them. In rightly encouraging digital solutions, at the same time policy makers need to ensure that the most vulnerable are not left behind.
In a recent policy paper, the human Rights group JUSTICE has drawn attention to the importance of ensuring that people are not excluded from the rapidly developing digital legal world.
In their report Preventing digital exclusion from online justice (published in June 2018), they analysed the potential issues that those engaged in the reform of legal procedures need to bear in mind.
The report makes a number of recommendations, directed primarily at HM Courts and Tribunals Service. They include:
- Greater investment in “trusted faces” in “trusted places” i.e. services already providing digital support and internet access.
- Considering the specific challenges of providing support to the digitally excluded, especially hard to reach cohorts – including testing Assisted Digital services in regions where the internet may be difficult to access. (Assisted Digital envisages a flexible mix of telephone, webchat, face-to-face, and paper-based support services. HMCTS is commissioning a programme of work to evaluate what types of support and in what combinations works best.)
- Paying specific attention to highly digitally excluded groups, like homeless people and detainees.
- Designing online justice services with an independent “look and feel” to reflect the constitutional independence of the courts.
- Maximising the benefits of the “multi-channel” approach – helping people move with ease between digital access, phone assistance, face-to-face assistance, and paper.
- Ensuring online justice services cater for the most affordable and ubiquitous mode of digital interaction: mobile technology.
- Conducting end-to-end pilots of online justice services, learning from hearing and enforcement stages what is required at earlier stages.
- Researching how people behave in an online environment and choices between Assisted Digital channels.
- Collecting and making available the widest range of data possible to support research by external experts.
Internationally, there is a great deal of experiment going on with different forms of communicating advice and assistance. There are being kept under review by Professor Roger Smith who, with funding from the Legal Education Foundation, provides – among other things – an annual review of development in the use of IT to increase access to justice. He also writes a blog which looks in mor detail at specific initiatives relating to trying to improve access to justice – not just through the use of new technologies but also new ways of funding them such as crowd funding.
For those interested in how the application of new technologies might change ways in which the delivery of legal services are undertaken, this is an outstanding resource – full of links to detailed initiatives. At the same time, the need for realism in potential impacts is also stressed. It is important not always to believe the hype surrounding new applications.
The JUSTICE report is at https://justice.org.uk/new-justice-report-on-preventing-digital-exclusion/.
The Annual Reviews of digital delivery of legal services can be found at https://www.thelegaleducationfoundation.org/digital/digital-report.
Roger Smith’s blog on developments in Law, technology and Access to Justice is at https://law-tech-a2j.org/publications/
Also relevant is the report, published in July 2018, from the Centre for Justice Innovation, which also looks at public attitudes towards the greater use of IT in the justice system.
The Right to Justice: Final Report of the Bach Commission
In September 2017, the Bach Commission (chaired by Lord Willy Bach) published its report on the Right to Justice. The Commission was established at the end of 2015 to find solutions that will restore access to justice as a fundamental public entitlement.
The commission found that the justice system is in crisis. Most immediately, people are being denied access to justice because the scope of legal aid has been dramatically reduced and eligibility requirements made excessively stringent. But problems extend very widely through the justice system, from insufficient public legal education and a shrinking information and advice sector to unwieldy and creaking bureaucratic systems and uncertainty about the future viability of the practice of legal aid practitioners.
Covering many of the same issues as the Low Commission (which reported in 2014) this report makes the following specific recommendations.
The commission has concluded that the problems in the justice system are so wide-spread that there is a need for a new legally enforceable right to justice, as part of a new Right to Justice Act. This Act would:
- codify existing rights to justice and establish a new right for individuals to receive reasonable legal assistance without costs they cannot afford;
- establish a set of principles to guide interpretation of this new right covering the full spectrum of legal support, from information and advice through to legal representation;
- establish a new body – the Justice Commission – to monitor and enforce this new right.
The purpose of the Right to Justice Act is to create a new legal framework that will, over time, transform access to justice.
In addition, early government action is also required.
- Legal aid eligibility rules must be reformed, so that the people currently unable either to access legal aid or to pay for private legal help can exercise their right to justice.
- The scope of civil legal aid, which has been radically reduced, must be reviewed and extended. In particular, all matters concerning children should be brought back into the scope of legal aid.
- An independent body that operates the legal aid system at arm’s length from government should replace the Legal Aid Agency and action must be taken to address the administrative burdens that plague both the public and providers.
- Public legal capability must be improved through a national public legal education and advice strategy that improves the provision of information, education and advice in schools and in the community.
My own view is that there is a growing consensus that the cuts to legal aid have gone too far. I have doubts whether there will be a wholesale return to the legal aid system that existed before the programme of cuts that has been going on for the best part of a decade.
This is potentially an important area of policy making. However, when considering new policies:
- more attention should be given to new ways of delivering legal services, embracing new technologies that would allow more to be provided for less;
- greater consideration of alternative sources of funding for the provision of legal advice and assistance, especially through different forms of insurance;
- the legal needs of small and medium size business should be treated as seriously as the legal needs of individuals, and
- there should be a recognition that there is scope for ‘do-it-yourself’ lawyering.
The Bach report may be downloaded from http://www.fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Bach-Commission_Right-to-Justice-Report-WEB.pdf
The Report of the Low Commission is at https://www.lowcommission.org.uk/dyn/1389221772932/Low-Commission-Report-FINAL-VERSION.pdf together with a follow up report, published in 2015 at https://www.lowcommission.org.uk/dyn/1435772523695/Getting_it_Right_Report_web.pdf
Legal advice by not-for-profit agencies
The impact of cuts to legal aid to the availability of legal advice from advice agencies is the subject of a new study commissioned and published by the Ministry of Justice. Interestingly, the study notes that this is the first time such a survey has been carried out – so it cannot actually answer the question of how many not-for-profit agencies have closed down.
What the researchers were able to do was gather information from over 700 agencies that are still in business, actively offering legal advice to individual clients.
Among the findings are the following which I think are worth noting here:
- The majority of responding organisations (76%) provided advice on specific subjects, to specific client groups or in specific locations. Only 22% provided a wider range of ‘general’ advice services.
- Most organisations were well established; 83% reported that they had been providing legal advice for more than ten years. There was also evidence of new organisations emerging as nine percent had entered the sector within the last five years (however this is likely to also include some formed through mergers of pre-existing organisations).
- The use of digital services over and above email was limited, with only 10% offering online services such as Skype or live chat and just 8% reported offering web-based automated programmes with no advisor input.
- The categories of law in which advice provision was most commonly offered by responding organisations – welfare benefits, debt and housing – are areas that have largely or partly been removed from legal aid scope under LASPO.
- Forty-five percent of organisations reported offering a ‘client-specific’ advice service, of these, the most common client groups were women and older people.
- Just over half of the responding organisations (51%) reported there were some client or problem types they had been unable to help with in the current financial year.
- Of these, 62% reported that this was due to a lack of resource, 49% reported that problems fell outside of their remit, and 47% reported not having the appropriate expertise within the organisation.
Delivering legal services to the public in an age of austerity
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/
New ways of funding legal services – responding to cuts in legal aid. The Low Commission
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
Martin Partington: Introduction to the English Legal System 15th ed 2021
Oxford University Press Learning Link Resources
Martin Partington: Spotlight on the Justice System 