*/
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.”
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
Giovanni D’Avola explores the issue of over-citation of unreported cases and the ‘added value’ elements of a law report
Louise Crush explores the key points and opportunities for tax efficiency
Westgate Wealth Management Ltd is a Partner Practice of FTSE 100 company St. James’s Place – one of the top UK Wealth Management firms. We offer a holistic service of distinct quality, integrity, and excellence with the aim to build a professional and valuable relationship with our clients, helping to provide them with security now, prosperity in the future and the highest standard of service in all of our dealings.
Is now the time to review your financial position, having reached a career milestone? asks Louise Crush
If you were to host a dinner party with 10 guests, and you asked them to explain what financial planning is and how it differs to financial advice, you’d receive 10 different answers. The variety of answers highlights the ongoing need to clarify and promote the value of financial planning.
Most of us like to think we would risk our career in order to meet our ethical obligations, so why have so many lawyers failed to hold the line? asks Flora Page
If your current practice environment is bringing you down, seek a new one. However daunting the change, it will be worth it, says Anon Barrister
Creating advocacy opportunities for juniors is now the expectation but not always easy to put into effect. Tom Mitcheson KC distils developing best practice from the Patents Court initiative already bearing fruit
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
The long-running fee-paid judicial pensions saga continues. The current cut-off date for giving notice of election to join FPJPS is 31 March 2024, and that date now gives rise to a serious problem, warns HH John Platt