More than a year ago I signed the 'scrap carter' epetition. Today 10 Downing Street issued the following reply:
"The Government believes that legal aid is a fundamental underpinning of the justice system, enabling access to justice for those who cannot afford to pay for legal advice and representation. This is reflected in the fact that the legal aid system in England and Wales is the best funded in the world. We spend £38 per head of population compared to between £3 and £4 in France and Germany. Even countries with a legal system more like ours spend less; for example, both New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland spend around £8 per head.
The Government was concerned that earlier payment structures for legal aid work are not representing best value either for users of legal aid services or for taxpayers. Moreover, the rise in spending on criminal legal aid has, in the past, prevented us focusing more legal aid resources on people with social welfare or family problems. We have therefore introduced standard fees for a wide range of legal help and representation as part of our duty to provide taxpayers with value for money.
No money is being taken out of civil and family legal aid. The current reforms are about getting best value for money from the legal aid system so that the Government can help as many people as possible within the resources available - so they will result in more, and not fewer, people being able to get help."
All of which sounds wonderful, until you realise that none of the solicitors in your area provide a legal aid service, because it is no longer economic for them to do the work.
John, thanks for posting this. It is with a sense of weary deja vu that I have to point out what dissembling nonsense this is.
ReplyDelete'The rise in criminal legal aid has prevented us from...' Perhaps, but there is no extra money for civil legal aid resulting from the reforms, so no difference at all as a result. Result, this is a non-argument.
'No money is being taken out of civil and family...'. No new money has been put in for at least the last 5 years, so a real terms cut. No new money is being put in now, so a real terms cut. Ah, but more people will be helped, they argue. Will they? Add in the actual cut that most private and NfPs are facing from fixed fee and it is clear that any 'increased acts of assistance' will not be by skilled and independent practitioners. Draw your own conclusions.
'More rather than fewer...get help'. That depends entirely on what you count as help. Something that actually improves their situation? No, that doesn't count any higher as help than some unqualified call centre paralegal answering a phone and saying 'tell me about your problem'.
I am almost too weary to swear, almost. This PR bullshitting obfuscation, and those putting it out know it is. What makes it even more ridiculous is that most of the recipients of this crap will know full well that this press officer is squeaking out of his/her derriere and the officer concerned surely knows this, as do whatever ministers authorised this crap.
So, they lie to us, knowing that we know that they are fibbing. Always nice to be respected..
Oops. Sorry for the typos and repetition, John. Long and difficult - but finally successful - day and I'm v tired. Still I stand by the meaning if not the exact phrasing of my last comment.
ReplyDeleteNo need to apologise - you've put it far better and far more forcefully than I could have done.
ReplyDeleteI met up with some legal aid lawyers on a course last week and they told me they were making money - if they cover all 3 aspects of relationship breakdown on legal help - they were doing better than under the old system. Do you think they were lying to me?
ReplyDeleteHi Lynne,
ReplyDeleteThat's interesting, and certainly doesn't tie up with what I've read of firms giving up, or intending to give up, legal aid, because of the lack of reward. Thankfully, I can't speak from personal experience...