*/
The Legal Services Commission (“LSC”) has come under fire over its criminal legal aid reforms in a devastating National Audit Office (“NAO”) report.
The report, into the procurement of criminal legal aid, warns that reforms to criminal legal aid threaten value for money and the provision of an essential public service. It criticises the LSC for relying on “inaccurate and incomplete” data.
“The cost of criminal legal aid provision is driven by a number of factors, including the complexities of the criminal justice system, and the level of crime, both of which are beyond the control of the Commission,” it says.
The report also claims the LSC does not understand the market in which it operates, stating:
“In particular, we consider that the Commission has not marshalled the knowledge of its local managers well enough to develop a good understanding of the market for criminal legal aid, such as the cost structures of different types of firms and their profit margins.”
It concludes that no further reforms should proceed without having been properly piloted using guidance from the Office of Government Commerce. Paul Mendelle QC, Chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, said: “This report confirms what [we have] told the government time and again: that cuts to legal aid are unjustified and unprincipled, as legal aid expenditure is controlled and falling in real terms. The drivers of legal aid expenditure are the government’s own policies, not the actions of barristers.”
Carolyn Regan, LSC chief executive, said: “Work is already underway to implement their proposals.”
“The cost of criminal legal aid provision is driven by a number of factors, including the complexities of the criminal justice system, and the level of crime, both of which are beyond the control of the Commission,” it says.
The report also claims the LSC does not understand the market in which it operates, stating:
“In particular, we consider that the Commission has not marshalled the knowledge of its local managers well enough to develop a good understanding of the market for criminal legal aid, such as the cost structures of different types of firms and their profit margins.”
It concludes that no further reforms should proceed without having been properly piloted using guidance from the Office of Government Commerce. Paul Mendelle QC, Chairman of the Criminal Bar Association, said: “This report confirms what [we have] told the government time and again: that cuts to legal aid are unjustified and unprincipled, as legal aid expenditure is controlled and falling in real terms. The drivers of legal aid expenditure are the government’s own policies, not the actions of barristers.”
Carolyn Regan, LSC chief executive, said: “Work is already underway to implement their proposals.”
The Legal Services Commission (“LSC”) has come under fire over its criminal legal aid reforms in a devastating National Audit Office (“NAO”) report.
The report, into the procurement of criminal legal aid, warns that reforms to criminal legal aid threaten value for money and the provision of an essential public service. It criticises the LSC for relying on “inaccurate and incomplete” data.
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
With gender earnings inequality at the Bar getting worse, not better, Judith Ayling KC discusses concrete solutions and collective action – including steps taken by the Personal Injuries Bar Association
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
