header-logo header-logo

06 March 2008
Issue: 7311 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-detail

Best value bidding will harm quality, Bar group warns

News

An independent group of lawyers and other professionals has criticised the “paucity” of detail in the Legal Services Commission’s proposals for Best Value Tendering (BVT) for criminal legal aid.

The Bar Council’s working group on BVT, responding this week to the LSC’s consultation paper in December, warns the proposals are likely to damage quality of provision, reduce choice and harm diversity. BVT introduces a market-driven approach to legal aid procurement and would see firms bidding for the right to provide the work. However the working group— made up of senior barristers, a former president of the General Medical Council, a former Court of Appeal Judge, a former Law Society president, and a leading professor of economics—slates the LSC for providing too little detail. Desmond Browne QC, chair of the group, says: “The paucity of detail provided by the LSC has made it impossible for the working group to comment on the proposals in a meaningful way.” The group supports the view of the House of Commons’ constitutional affairs select committee, which described the proposals for BVT as “a breathtaking risk”. It expresses concern about the absence of a robust mechanism for ensuring quality, and cite a report in 2000, which shows that BVT drove down quality and lowered the quality of representation when it was introduced in the US. Tim Dutton QC, chair of the Bar Council, says: “‘The Bar Council is surprised that the LSC has not published any details of the proposed scheme, nor conducted any analysis of the potential impact on quality or on ethnic minority clients. This is remarkable since the LSC’s own experts MDA, as well as the constitutional affairs select committee, advised them that a full impact assessment was vital before any proposals were developed.

“If the proposals are implemented and extended to the Crown Court, they will damage access to justice for BME clients, as well as the diversity of the Bar and, by extension, the judiciary. Such a development would clearly not be in the public interest, and is something I am determined to resist.” An LSC spokesperson says: “Subject to the outcome of the current consultation we will undertake a further consultation later in 2008.

“We believe that moving to a competitive market for most legal aid work is the best way to deliver quality services at the best possible price. Stringent quality standards are at the centre of the proposals and firms will have to meet these before being allowed to bid for legal aid work.”

More than two-thirds of solicitors say they are “strongly against” the LSC’s proposals, in a recent Law Society survey.

Issue: 7311 / Categories: Legal News , Public , Legal services , Profession
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Weightmans—Elborne Mitchell & Myton Law

Firm expands in London and Leeds with dual merger

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Boodle Hatfield—Clare Pooley & Michael Duffy

Private wealth and real estate firmpromotes two to partner and five to senior associate

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Constantine Law—James Baker & Julie Goodway

Agile firm expands employment team with two partner hires

NEWS

From blockbuster judgments to procedural shake-ups, the courts are busy reshaping litigation practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School hails the Court of Appeal's 'exquisite judgment’ in Mazur restoring the role of supervised non-qualified staff, and highlights a ‘mammoth’ damages ruling likened to War and Peace, alongside guidance on medical reporting fees, where a pragmatic 25% uplift was imposed

Momentum is building behind proposals to restrict children’s access to social media—but the legal and practical challenges are formidable. In NLJ this week, Nick Smallwood of Mills & Reeve examines global moves, including Australia’s under-16 ban and the UK's consultation
Reforms designed to rebalance landlord-tenant relations may instead penalise leaseholders themselves. In this week's NLJ, Mike Somekh of The Freehold Collective warns that the Leasehold and Freehold Reform Act 2024 risks creating an ‘underclass’ of resident-controlled freehold companies
Timing is everything—and the Court of Appeal has delivered clarity on when proceedings are ‘brought’. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ, Stephen Gold explains that a claim is issued for limitation purposes when the claim form is delivered to the court, even if fees are underpaid
The traditional ‘single, intensive day’ of financial dispute resolution (FDR) may be due for a rethink. Writing in NLJ this week, Rachel Frost-Smith and Lauren Guiler of Birketts propose a ‘split FDR’ model, separating judicial evaluation from negotiation
back-to-top-scroll