*/
GOVERNMENT Ministers have acknowledged that controversial plans to impose fixed fees for legal representation for vulnerable families and children cannot proceed without “further analysis”. Justice Minister Lord Bach has told Parliament that further analysis would be required before it could publish final fee schemes for family legal aid and that more work would be undertaken over the summer to allow for the introduction of the new scheme in April 2010. Recent research by economic consultants Oxera and a report from the House of Commons Justice Committee have provided a stinging critique of the Legal Services Commission’s (‘LSC’) approach to reforming family legal aid, in particular, highlighting the fact that the proposals have been made on “incomplete data, [and] a superficial understanding of the supply of legal services in this area”. The Justice Committee condemned the LSC not only for its “flawed, weak and inflexible” approach but also for its “conclusions first, evidence after” approach to policy-making.
Commenting today, Lucy Theis QC, Chairman of Family Law Bar Association, said:
‘What is so concerning about these proposals is the lack of reliable evidence to support them, in particular regarding their impact on effective access to justice to the most vulnerable families and children. It is a matter of great concern that an increasing number of independent reports make clear that the LSC’s family legal aid plans would hit the most vulnerable hardest, and that they lack any robust evidential base.
Today’s announcement concedes the need for complexity to be recognized in any revised fee structure. While making clear that the Government seems set on continuing to pursue its plans this is the first recognition that there is still some way to go before there is a properly graduated fee scheme that protects the interest of the vulnerable children and families, retains expertise within this important area and has the confidence and support of the practitioner groups.’
Commenting today, Lucy Theis QC, Chairman of Family Law Bar Association, said:
‘What is so concerning about these proposals is the lack of reliable evidence to support them, in particular regarding their impact on effective access to justice to the most vulnerable families and children. It is a matter of great concern that an increasing number of independent reports make clear that the LSC’s family legal aid plans would hit the most vulnerable hardest, and that they lack any robust evidential base.
Today’s announcement concedes the need for complexity to be recognized in any revised fee structure. While making clear that the Government seems set on continuing to pursue its plans this is the first recognition that there is still some way to go before there is a properly graduated fee scheme that protects the interest of the vulnerable children and families, retains expertise within this important area and has the confidence and support of the practitioner groups.’
GOVERNMENT Ministers have acknowledged that controversial plans to impose fixed fees for legal representation for vulnerable families and children cannot proceed without “further analysis”. Justice Minister Lord Bach has told Parliament that further analysis would be required before it could publish final fee schemes for family legal aid and that more work would be undertaken over the summer to allow for the introduction of the new scheme in April 2010. Recent research by economic consultants Oxera and a report from the House of Commons Justice Committee have provided a stinging critique of the Legal Services Commission’s (‘LSC’) approach to reforming family legal aid, in particular, highlighting the fact that the proposals have been made on “incomplete data, [and] a superficial understanding of the supply of legal services in this area”. The Justice Committee condemned the LSC not only for its “flawed, weak and inflexible” approach but also for its “conclusions first, evidence after” approach to policy-making.
Our call for sufficient resources for the justice system and for the Bar to scrutinise the BSB’s latest consultation
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses alcohol testing for the Family Court
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth explains how to make sure you are investing suitably, and in your long-term interests
In conversation with Matthew Bland, Lincoln’s Inn Library
Millicent Wild of 5 Essex Chambers describes her pupillage experience
Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth explores some key steps to take when starting out as a barrister in order to secure your financial future
From a traumatic formative education to exceptional criminal silk – Laurie-Anne Power KC talks about her path to the Bar, pursuit of equality and speaking out against discrimination (not just during Black History Month)
James Onalaja concludes his two-part opinion series
Expectations, experiences and survival tips – some of the things I wished I had known (or applied) when I was starting pupillage. By Chelsea Brooke-Ward
If you are in/about to start pupillage, you will soon be facing the pupillage stage assessment in professional ethics. Jane Hutton and Patrick Ryan outline exam format and tactics
In a two-part opinion series, James Onalaja considers the International Criminal Court Prosecutor’s requests for arrest warrants in the controversial Israel-Palestine situation