In the first of an exclusive NLJ online series on legal aid post-LASPO, Jon Robins considers the Low alternatives to “indiscriminate” cost cutting
Where’s the alternative? That was the recent challenge posed by Des Hudson to defence lawyers when they accused him of “appeasement” over the Law Society’s legal aid negotiations with the Ministry of Justice. While lawyers appeared “admirably united” in opposing the government’s plans to foist price competitive tendering on the profession, Hudson argued that they failed to deliver “any positive alternative agenda” to counter Chris Grayling’s plans.
In no mood to talk
It was a fair point. However, defence lawyers were not—and still aren’t—in the mood for talking alternatives. Instead, the prevailing view is that any further cost-cutting reforms are likely to be ruinous, potentially fatal to a significant number of defence firms.
Moving across to “the other legal aid crisis”, Armageddon came and went last April when £350m of LASPO (Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012) cuts were delivered and the vast part of the social welfare law scheme was excised from publicly-funded law. Of
.tmb-mov69x69.jpg?sfvrsn=7806223b_1)
