header-logo header-logo

15% legal aid offer is actually 9%

30 March 2022
Issue: 7973 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail
The government’s placatory offer of an extra 15% funding―meeting the minimum recommendation of the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid, led by Sir Christopher Bellamy―appears to have fallen apart under examination

The Law Society said the Justice Secretary’s claim last week to have matched Sir Christopher’s recommendation of at least 15% extra funds for criminal legal aid practitioners was nothing but ‘spin’.

Justice secretary Dominic Raab told the House of Commons on 22 March that ‘we matched the Bellamy recommendations on the quantum of investment and on the… uplift for fees’.

In fact, the Law Society claims, the proposals fall substantially short of what they first appeared to be. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) impact assessment (table 3, p12) shows the total increase for solicitors is 9% (not 15% as promised), a figure confirmed during subsequent meetings between Law Society and ministry officials.

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘Now we know that, for solicitors, the reality is different. We can no longer support the government’s proposals. The government has botched its response.’

Boyce said, unless the government changes tack, the Law Society no longer believes there is a viable economic future in criminal legal aid.

She appealed to criminal justice practitioners to make their views heard by responding to the MoJ consultation before 7 June. Click here for more information.

Boyce urged the MoJ to amend its proposals immediately to bring the funding for solicitors up to the full 15% to make the system economically viable. She suggested this could be done by: increasing payments for police station and magistrates’ court work still further; increasing the basic fee for Crown Court work; and guaranteeing additional funding on restructuring the Litigators’ Graduated Fee Scheme (LGFS).

An MoJ spokesperson said: ‘We have accepted Sir Christopher’s recommendation for an uplift in fees and our proposals will deliver an extra £135m a year in criminal legal aid―the biggest increase in a decade.

‘This is alongside our ambitious proposals to ensure professionals are better paid for the work they carry out, boosting pay for lawyers representing suspects in police stations, magistrates’ court and youth court by 15% and funding the training and accreditation of solicitors and solicitor advocates.’ 

Issue: 7973 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal aid focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll