header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
11 November 2011 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7489 / Categories: Opinion , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

Rolling back justice (5)

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.

Jon Robins reflects on the controversial Legal Aid Bill as it makes its way to the House of Lords

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill has had its final reading in the House of Commons. Frankly, there was no shortage of opportunities for MPs to play on the fact that the debate on this “Bill of Horrors” kicked off on All Hallow’s Eve, of all days. However, the Labour MP for Tooting, Sadiq Khan, began with a somewhat prematurely festive image calling the legislation “a Christmas tree Bill” with baubles “being added all the time”.

Festive farce?

The sprawling Legal Aid Bill has 120 clauses and 18 schedules. At the 11th hour—as the Christmas tree was “being cut down to be taken to the other place”, ie the House of Lords—Khan noted that yet “more baubles” were being hung upon its overstretched branches: 17 government new clauses, five new schedules and 84 amendments.

How would MPs do justice to all those huge concerns in the limited time set

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

Read All
Sponsored by
NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: When post-breach events rewrite damages claims
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
NLJ this week: Supreme Court redraws unfair prejudice rules
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
NLJ this week: ‘Joe Donor’ ruling exposes dangers of unregulated conception
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
NLJ this week: CILEX warns Mazur ruling must spark reform
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
NLJ this week: Conditional job offers carry hidden risks for employers
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll