header-logo header-logo

12 July 2007 / Michael Zander KC
Issue: 7281 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

Full speed ahead?

Professor Michael Zander QC reports on the government’s dusty response to the Constitutional Affairs Committee report on the Carter reforms

The Constitutional Affairs Committee’s report on the Carter reforms of legal aid, Implementation of the Carter Review of Legal Aid, HC 223, was probably the committee’s sharpest ever critique of government policy (See NLJ, 22 June 2007, pp 872–74 and NLJ, 29 June 2007, pp 912–14).

Despite this, the government’s 50-page response, published on 22 June, rejected all the criticisms and promised that the reforms would go ahead as planned (see Implementing Legal Aid Reform: Government Response to the Constitutional Affairs Select Committee Report, Cm 7158).

The response asserted that controlling costs is not, in and of itself, the goal of the reform programme and that “the aim of improved efficiency and better control over spending is, ultimately, to ensure that more people can be helped by legal aid within the resources available, without any reduction in quality, and in a way that contributes to, and benefits from, improved efficiency in the wider justice

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

HFW—Simon Petch

HFW—Simon Petch

Global shipping practice expands with experienced ship finance partner hire

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Freeths—Richard Lockhart

Infrastructure specialist joins as partner in Glasgow office

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll