*/
The Director of Public Prosecutions (“DPP”) has defended the CPS policy of bringing advocacy in-house, following Bar Council allegations of “Alice in Wonderland” figures.
A Bar Council-commissioned report, Crown Prosecution Service: the choice between in-house and self-employed advocates – a critique of the CPS’s analysis, by independent consultants, Europe Economics, published in July, found the CPS’s calculations that it saved £17.1m in 2007-08 by using in-house advocates to be flawed and claimed the CPS figures for in-house advocates under-estimated their overheads.
“The CPS ... compares the short-run marginal costs of deploying in-house advocates with the fees of self-employed barristers. This is plainly wrong, both economically and as a basis for policy-making.”
The Bar Chairman Desmond Browne QC said: “To claim that taking advocacy in-house will save money without taking account of the full cost smacks of Alice in Wonderland accounting.”
However, Keir Starmer DPP, said: “Our method was verified by the independent prosecution inspectorate. In the last four years, the CPS spent over £500m on counsel fees and less than £40m prosecuting cases in-house. It is evident where we should be looking to secure better value for money.” He said accommodation and other costs would not increase as a consequence of employing more CPS advocates.
In August, the House of Commons Justice Select Committee published a report, The Crown Prosecution Service: Gatekeeper of the Criminal Justice System, which stressed that the implications for the criminal justice system as a whole of the increased use of in-house advocacy must be taken into account, not just the organisational interests of the CPS.
According to the Committee, “the development of CPS advocacy cannot simply be seen as the next logical step in how the CPS should develop” and “the consequences of CPS advocacy on the future provision and quality of legal services as a whole require attention”.
Peter Lodder QC, Chairman of the CBA, said: “We welcome this report and its recommendation to the CPS to reflect upon the future provision of advocacy services. The self-employed Bar must continue to play a significant role in the prosecution of cases at all levels.” (See also Bar News p i.)
A Bar Council-commissioned report, Crown Prosecution Service: the choice between in-house and self-employed advocates – a critique of the CPS’s analysis, by independent consultants, Europe Economics, published in July, found the CPS’s calculations that it saved £17.1m in 2007-08 by using in-house advocates to be flawed and claimed the CPS figures for in-house advocates under-estimated their overheads.
“The CPS ... compares the short-run marginal costs of deploying in-house advocates with the fees of self-employed barristers. This is plainly wrong, both economically and as a basis for policy-making.”
The Bar Chairman Desmond Browne QC said: “To claim that taking advocacy in-house will save money without taking account of the full cost smacks of Alice in Wonderland accounting.”
However, Keir Starmer DPP, said: “Our method was verified by the independent prosecution inspectorate. In the last four years, the CPS spent over £500m on counsel fees and less than £40m prosecuting cases in-house. It is evident where we should be looking to secure better value for money.” He said accommodation and other costs would not increase as a consequence of employing more CPS advocates.
In August, the House of Commons Justice Select Committee published a report, The Crown Prosecution Service: Gatekeeper of the Criminal Justice System, which stressed that the implications for the criminal justice system as a whole of the increased use of in-house advocacy must be taken into account, not just the organisational interests of the CPS.
According to the Committee, “the development of CPS advocacy cannot simply be seen as the next logical step in how the CPS should develop” and “the consequences of CPS advocacy on the future provision and quality of legal services as a whole require attention”.
Peter Lodder QC, Chairman of the CBA, said: “We welcome this report and its recommendation to the CPS to reflect upon the future provision of advocacy services. The self-employed Bar must continue to play a significant role in the prosecution of cases at all levels.” (See also Bar News p i.)
The Director of Public Prosecutions (“DPP”) has defended the CPS policy of bringing advocacy in-house, following Bar Council allegations of “Alice in Wonderland” figures.
On both fronts – representing the Bar’s interests and protecting the rule of law
Kate West discusses how best to interpret a drug test report, and the common misconceptions about what can be learnt from a drug test
Ashley Hodgkinson looks at drug testing methods and some of the most common ways people try to cheat a drug test
Clerksroom Chambers has recruited Matthew Wildish from 3 Paper Buildings (3PB) to a newly created position of Director of Clerking. Matthew joined the team at Clerksroom on 1 June
... have you seen through yours? asks Julian Morgan
Opportunity for female sopranos/contraltos in secondary education, or who have recently finished secondary education but have not yet begun tertiary education. Eligibility includes children of members of the Bar
Clerksroom Chambers has recruited Matthew Wildish from 3 Paper Buildings (3PB) to a newly created position of Director of Clerking. Matthew joined the team at Clerksroom on 1 June
In this tale of hope, success really has been the best revenge! A difficult journey teaches Rehana Azib QC invaluable lessons along the way
This article is not designed to offend the Judiciary but the quiet word has only taken us so far it is time concerns were recorded formally, says the first set to introduce an external bullying policy By Eleanor Laws QC, Oliver Mosley and Kyan Pucks
The Chief Inspector of the CPS knows first-hand the difficulties prosecutors face but is no pushover. He talks to Anthony Inglese CB about Operation Soteria, putting victims and cooperation at the heart of criminal justice reform, and his unique and life-changing career prosecuting the crime of all crimes, genocide
Having represented many Davids against many Goliaths over a 30+year career at the publicly funded Bar, renowned silk Professor Leslie Thomas QC critically assesses what the Human Rights Act currently under challenge has done for coronial law and equality of arms
