*/
The Government has failed to target legal aid to those who need it most, a Justice Committee inquiry into the impact of the civil legal aid reforms has concluded.
The final report of the cross-party committee of MPs, Impact of changes to civil legal aid under Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, found that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) had failed to achieve three out of its four stated objectives for the reforms.
Whilst the Government had achieved its aim of substantially reducing the civil legal aid budget, access to justice had been harmed, unnecessary litigation at public expense had not been discouraged, and better value for the taxpayer not shown.
Announcing the conclusions, Committee Chair, Sir Alan Beith MP, acknowledged that making £2bn of savings from a budget of £9.8bn was clearly a “challenging target”.
“But this has limited access to justice for some of those who need legal aid the most and in some instances has failed to prevent cases becoming more serious and creating further claims on the legal aid budget.
“Many of the problems which we have identified could have been avoided with better research, a better evidence base to work from, and better public information about the reforms.
“It is vitally important that the MoJ works to remedy this from now on,” he warned.
The report identified a “significant underspend” in the civil legal aid budget since the reforms and “wrongful refusal of exceptional case funding applications [that] may have resulted in miscarriages of justice”.
“All agencies involved must closely examine their actions and take immediate steps to ensure the exceptional cases funding scheme is the robust safety net envisaged by Parliament,” it concluded.
Responding to the report, Alistair MacDonald QC, Chairman of the Bar said that the findings “came as no surprise” to any professional giving legal advice to vulnerable people; and that recent reports by the Public Accounts Committee and National Audit Office had come to much the same conclusions. “We need a commitment from all parties to approach justice differently,” he said.
Whilst the Government had achieved its aim of substantially reducing the civil legal aid budget, access to justice had been harmed, unnecessary litigation at public expense had not been discouraged, and better value for the taxpayer not shown.
Announcing the conclusions, Committee Chair, Sir Alan Beith MP, acknowledged that making £2bn of savings from a budget of £9.8bn was clearly a “challenging target”.
“But this has limited access to justice for some of those who need legal aid the most and in some instances has failed to prevent cases becoming more serious and creating further claims on the legal aid budget.
“Many of the problems which we have identified could have been avoided with better research, a better evidence base to work from, and better public information about the reforms.
“It is vitally important that the MoJ works to remedy this from now on,” he warned.
The report identified a “significant underspend” in the civil legal aid budget since the reforms and “wrongful refusal of exceptional case funding applications [that] may have resulted in miscarriages of justice”.
“All agencies involved must closely examine their actions and take immediate steps to ensure the exceptional cases funding scheme is the robust safety net envisaged by Parliament,” it concluded.
Responding to the report, Alistair MacDonald QC, Chairman of the Bar said that the findings “came as no surprise” to any professional giving legal advice to vulnerable people; and that recent reports by the Public Accounts Committee and National Audit Office had come to much the same conclusions. “We need a commitment from all parties to approach justice differently,” he said.
The Government has failed to target legal aid to those who need it most, a Justice Committee inquiry into the impact of the civil legal aid reforms has concluded.
The final report of the cross-party committee of MPs, Impact of changes to civil legal aid under Part 1 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, found that the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) had failed to achieve three out of its four stated objectives for the reforms.
Justice system requires urgent attention and next steps on the Harman Review
Q&A with Tim Lynch of Jordan Lynch Private Finance
By Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Why Virtual Assistants Can Meet the Legal Profession’s Exacting Standards
Six months of court observation at the Old Bailey: APPEAL’s Dr Nisha Waller and Tehreem Sultan report their findings on prosecution practices under joint enterprise
The Amazonian artist’s first international solo exhibition is wholly relevant to current issues in social and environmental justice, says Stephen Cragg KC
Despite its prevalence, autism spectrum disorder remains poorly understood in the criminal justice system. Does Alex Henry’s joint enterprise conviction expose the need to audit prisons? asks Dr Felicity Gerry KC
Until reforms are instituted and a programme of training is introduced, expert opinion on intimate partner abuse remains vital to realigning the tilted scales of law and justice, writes Professor Susan Edwards
It’s been five years since the groundbreaking QC competition in which six Black women barristers, including the 2025 Chair of the Bar, took silk. Yet today, the number of Black KCs remains ‘critically low’. Desirée Artesi talks to Baroness Scotland KC, Allison Munroe KC and Melanie Simpson KC about the critical success factors, barriers and ideas for embedding change
