header-logo header-logo

30 March 2022
Issue: 7973 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal aid focus
printer mail-detail

15% legal aid offer is actually 9%

The government’s placatory offer of an extra 15% funding―meeting the minimum recommendation of the Independent Review of Criminal Legal Aid, led by Sir Christopher Bellamy―appears to have fallen apart under examination

The Law Society said the Justice Secretary’s claim last week to have matched Sir Christopher’s recommendation of at least 15% extra funds for criminal legal aid practitioners was nothing but ‘spin’.

Justice secretary Dominic Raab told the House of Commons on 22 March that ‘we matched the Bellamy recommendations on the quantum of investment and on the… uplift for fees’.

In fact, the Law Society claims, the proposals fall substantially short of what they first appeared to be. The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) impact assessment (table 3, p12) shows the total increase for solicitors is 9% (not 15% as promised), a figure confirmed during subsequent meetings between Law Society and ministry officials.

Law Society president I Stephanie Boyce said: ‘Now we know that, for solicitors, the reality is different. We can no longer support the government’s proposals. The government has botched its response.’

Boyce said, unless the government changes tack, the Law Society no longer believes there is a viable economic future in criminal legal aid.

She appealed to criminal justice practitioners to make their views heard by responding to the MoJ consultation before 7 June. Click here for more information.

Boyce urged the MoJ to amend its proposals immediately to bring the funding for solicitors up to the full 15% to make the system economically viable. She suggested this could be done by: increasing payments for police station and magistrates’ court work still further; increasing the basic fee for Crown Court work; and guaranteeing additional funding on restructuring the Litigators’ Graduated Fee Scheme (LGFS).

An MoJ spokesperson said: ‘We have accepted Sir Christopher’s recommendation for an uplift in fees and our proposals will deliver an extra £135m a year in criminal legal aid―the biggest increase in a decade.

‘This is alongside our ambitious proposals to ensure professionals are better paid for the work they carry out, boosting pay for lawyers representing suspects in police stations, magistrates’ court and youth court by 15% and funding the training and accreditation of solicitors and solicitor advocates.’ 

Issue: 7973 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Legal aid focus
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

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

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

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