header-logo header-logo

31 October 2012 / Dr Jon Robins
Issue: 7536 / Categories: Opinion , Legal services
printer mail-detail

Time to move on?

Is it really possible to move on from the LASPO debate, asks Jon Robins

There comes a time after any traumatic event—the breakup of a relationship, the passing of a loved one—when it’s simply time to move on, and so it is with the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (LASPO).

Well, at least that seemed to be Lord McNally’s message in his first speech as legal aid minister post-reshuffle this month. “LASPO was bruising for everyone concerned, but I hope—whatever the disagreements of the past—we can all agree that the priority now is to look to the future,” the Lib Dem peer told delegates at the Legal Aid Practitioners Group (LAPG) annual conference at the School of Oriental and African Studies in London earlier this month. Later, McNally warned campaigners in slightly more brusque fashion: “If you think you can re-run the LASPO-debate, I think you are going to go down a cul-de-sac.”

Life after LASPO

But not everyone is quite so happy to move on.

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

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Employment law is shifting at the margins. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ this week, Ian Smith of Norwich Law School examines a Court of Appeal ruling confirming that volunteers are not a special legal species and may qualify as ‘workers’
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
back-to-top-scroll