*/
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plunged into £300m of civil legal aid cuts without considering evidence of the consequences, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has heard.
Dame Ursula Brennan, Permanent Secretary of State at the MoJ, admitted to MPs on 4 December that the Ministry had been unable to assess the impact of the cuts because of the speed with which they were required: “Government was absolutely explicit that it needed to make these changes swiftly. Therefore, it was not possible to do research about the current regime before moving to the cuts.”
“The most critical piece of evidence that was relevant to the decision that was made was the size of the spend,” Brennan said. “It was very clear that we would launch research... after the event,” she added.
Committee Chair Margaret Hodge MP rounded on the MoJ for its “endemic failure” in implementing non-evidence-based policy. “Our criticism is that the way you have set about this with so little evidence has had unintended consequences that mean that you do not meet the objectives of the policy.”
“There are plenty of areas of public and social policy which are even more complex than this where economists do make assessments. It does not mean they are right, but it means you are able to make more informed decisions,” Hodge added.
The Committee drew evidence from the National Audit Office’s report Implementing reforms to civil legal aid, which found that the MoJ did not think through early enough the impact of the changes on the wider system, and still does not know whether people who are eligible for legal aid are able to get it.
“Without this understanding, the Ministry’s implementation of the reforms to civil legal aid cannot be said to have delivered better overall value for money for the taxpayer,” the NAO concluded.
“The most critical piece of evidence that was relevant to the decision that was made was the size of the spend,” Brennan said. “It was very clear that we would launch research... after the event,” she added.
Committee Chair Margaret Hodge MP rounded on the MoJ for its “endemic failure” in implementing non-evidence-based policy. “Our criticism is that the way you have set about this with so little evidence has had unintended consequences that mean that you do not meet the objectives of the policy.”
“There are plenty of areas of public and social policy which are even more complex than this where economists do make assessments. It does not mean they are right, but it means you are able to make more informed decisions,” Hodge added.
The Committee drew evidence from the National Audit Office’s report Implementing reforms to civil legal aid, which found that the MoJ did not think through early enough the impact of the changes on the wider system, and still does not know whether people who are eligible for legal aid are able to get it.
“Without this understanding, the Ministry’s implementation of the reforms to civil legal aid cannot be said to have delivered better overall value for money for the taxpayer,” the NAO concluded.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plunged into £300m of civil legal aid cuts without considering evidence of the consequences, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has heard.
Dame Ursula Brennan, Permanent Secretary of State at the MoJ, admitted to MPs on 4 December that the Ministry had been unable to assess the impact of the cuts because of the speed with which they were required: “Government was absolutely explicit that it needed to make these changes swiftly. Therefore, it was not possible to do research about the current regime before moving to the cuts.”
Chair of the Bar reports back
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
A career shaped by advocacy beyond her practice, and the realities of living with an invisible disability – Dr Natasha Shotunde, Black Barristers’ Network Co-Founder and its Chair for seven years, reflects on a decade at the Bar
The odds of success are as unforgiving as ever, but ambition clearly isn’t in short supply. David Wurtzel’s annual deep‑dive into the competition cohort shows who’s entering, who’s thriving and the trends that will define the next wave
Where to start and where to find help? Monisha Shah, Chair of the King’s Counsel Selection Panel, provides an overview of the silk selection process, debunking some myths along the way
Do chatbot providers owe a duty of care for negligent misstatements? Jasper Wong suggests that the principles applicable to humans should apply equally to machines
There is no typical day in the life as a Supreme Court judicial assistant, says Josephine Gillingwater, and that’s what makes the role so enjoyably diverse
