header-logo header-logo

Time to move on?

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

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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll