header-logo header-logo

03 January 2008
Issue: 7302 / Categories: Legal News , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

Questions raised over tendering plans

Legal Services

A consultation on the principles of best value tendering (BVT) for criminal defence services, and a policy paper—Assuring and Improving Quality in the Reformed Legal Aid System—have been published by the Legal Services Commission (LSC).

The paper considers three options for the provision of criminal legal aid services: to continue to set prices administratively; switch to a national public defender system; or move to BVT—the option the LSC favours. Tendering would take place from January 2009 in Avon and Greater Manchester, followed by a further three phases from January 2010 to  January 2011, the latter two of which would include crown court work.

Contracting in the first phase would cover police station and magistrates’ court work. The two would be linked, possibly by having a single fee for any case of either type, or by asking firms to bid against a matrix. The LSC proposes to consult on a single fee for crown court cases this year.

Carolyn Regan, LSC chief executive, says that moving to a competitive market for the majority of services is the right way forward.

“BVT would set sustainable prices and achieve the best possible value for the legal aid budget while ensuring quality advice for legal aid clients. This will benefit clients, reassure taxpayers and ensure that the market sets the price for providers’ services,” she says.

However, Law Society president Andrew Holroyd says several questions about how BVT could operate in the legal aid world remain unanswered in this consultation.

“The LSC must tell us, for example: how firms can tender when volume cannot be guaranteed; how solicitors can tender for multiple contracts to businesses that will be competing against each other; how the LSC will ensure that BME [black and minority ethnic] firms are treated equally and in a non-discriminatory manner; and, fundamentally, how firms can offer a rational bid when the government keeps changing the criminal justice system,” he says. “If the LSC cannot answer these questions but presses on with BVT, the society is concerned that the firms they need to provide the service will be driven out of legal aid and it will be impossible to rebuild the supplier base,” he adds.

The BVT consultation runs until 3 March 2008.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

NLJ Career Profile: John McElroy, London Solicitors Litigation Association

From first-generation student to trailblazing president of the London Solicitors Litigation Association, John McElroy of Fieldfisher reflects on resilience, identity and the power of bringing your whole self to the law

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Clarke Willmott—Elaine Field

Planning and environment team expands with partner hire in Manchester

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Birketts—Barbara Hamilton-Bruce

Firm appoints chief operating officer to strengthen leadership team

NEWS
A landmark Supreme Court ruling has underscored the sweeping reach of UK sanctions. In NLJ this week, Brónagh Adams and Harriet Campbell of Penningtons Manches Cooper say the regime is a ‘blunt instrument’ requiring only a factual, not causal, link to restricted goods
Fraud claims are surging, with England and Wales increasingly the forum of choice for global disputes. Writing in NLJ this week, Jon Felce of Cooke, Young & Keidan reports claims have risen sharply, with fraud now a major share of litigation and costing billions worldwide
Litigators digesting Mazur are being urged to tighten oversight and compliance. In his latest 'Insider' column for NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School provides a cut out and keep guide to the ruling’s core test: whether an unauthorised individual is ‘in truth acting on behalf of the authorised individual’
Conflicting county court rulings have left landlords uncertain over whether they can force entry after tenants refuse access. In this week's NLJ, Edward Blakeney and Ashpen Rajah of Falcon Chambers outline a split: some judges permit it under CPR 70.2A, others insist only Parliament can authorise such powers
A wave of scandals has reignited debate over misconduct in public office, criticised as unclear and inconsistently applied. Writing in NLJ this week, Alice Lepeuple of WilmerHale says the offence’s ‘vagueness, overbreadth & inconsistent deployment’ have undermined confidence
back-to-top-scroll