*/
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) still does not know whether its £300m cuts to civil legal aid represent “value for money”, according to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
The PAC report, Implementing reforms to civil legal aid, was published on 4 February. The MoJ was found to be “on track” with its cost savings, but the PAC roundly criticized the implementation of its reforms and the failure to provide robust evidence of their effects, despite a commitment to do so in its 2012 impact assessment.
“[The MoJ] does not know whether those still eligible to access legal aid are able to do so; and does not understand the link between the price it pays for legal aid and the quality of advice given... the [Legal Aid] Agency’s own quality assurance processes indicated that the quality of face-to-face legal advice is unacceptably low, with almost one in four providers failing to meet the quality threshold,” the report said.
Further, the Ministry had “failed to foresee that removing legal aid funding for solicitors would reduce the number of referrals to family mediation”.
“Perhaps most worryingly of all, it does not understand, and has shown little interest in, the knock-on costs of its reforms across the public sector,” the Committee concluded.
Amongst the many recommendations was that the MoJ should identify the wider costs to the public sector as a part of a full evaluation of the impact of the reforms.
An MoJ spokesperson said: “We are pleased the Committee has acknowledged our reforms have been successful in making the significant savings we had no choice but to find given the financial crisis this Government inherited.”
“[The MoJ] does not know whether those still eligible to access legal aid are able to do so; and does not understand the link between the price it pays for legal aid and the quality of advice given... the [Legal Aid] Agency’s own quality assurance processes indicated that the quality of face-to-face legal advice is unacceptably low, with almost one in four providers failing to meet the quality threshold,” the report said.
Further, the Ministry had “failed to foresee that removing legal aid funding for solicitors would reduce the number of referrals to family mediation”.
“Perhaps most worryingly of all, it does not understand, and has shown little interest in, the knock-on costs of its reforms across the public sector,” the Committee concluded.
Amongst the many recommendations was that the MoJ should identify the wider costs to the public sector as a part of a full evaluation of the impact of the reforms.
An MoJ spokesperson said: “We are pleased the Committee has acknowledged our reforms have been successful in making the significant savings we had no choice but to find given the financial crisis this Government inherited.”
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) still does not know whether its £300m cuts to civil legal aid represent “value for money”, according to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
The PAC report, Implementing reforms to civil legal aid, was published on 4 February. The MoJ was found to be “on track” with its cost savings, but the PAC roundly criticized the implementation of its reforms and the failure to provide robust evidence of their effects, despite a commitment to do so in its 2012 impact assessment.
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
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
Kindness Ambassadors – coming to a courtroom near you! Valerie Charbit, Nicola Shannon KC and Professor Robin Banerjee update readers on the second phase of the project examining, and promoting, the impact of kindness and how it can fit into an adversarial system
