Proceeding contribution from Nick Ainger (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 13 December 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Defence Service Bill [HL].
Criminal Defence Service Bill [Lords]
Nice try. However, it is clear from the debates in 1999 that the issue was not perceived as controversial. The abolition was accepted for the reasons that the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs gave. There were clearly serious problems, which the hon. Member for Enfield, Southgate (Mr. Burrowes) identified, in that the processes involved in the means test added significant delays to the justice system. A judgment was made at the time that abolishing it was a way of saving money, but more important, of speeding up access to justice. Hon. Members should be careful and, instead of crowing, accept that, at the time, the measure was perceived as a step in the right direction. However, our experience in the past four years or so and the various individual cases that have clearly abused the system show that something has to be done. The hon. Member for Huntingdon mentioned certain other factors that drive the rising costs of legal aid. The reasons for the growth in expenditure are complex, and require an integrated approach if they are to be tackled successfully. ““A Fairer Deal for Legal Aid””, which was launched in July 2005, sets out a strategic vision for how this can be achieved. While the reintroduction of means-testing has a key role to play in that regard, it is by no means the sole focus of the strategy. For example, major steps are being taken to address the budgetary concerns posed by very high-cost criminal cases. However, it is important to recognise that the savings that will flow from the Bill are significant, with at least £35 million of savings resulting from the implementation of means tests in magistrates courts alone. For that reason, it is right and proper that we continue to give proportionate emphasis to means-testing as a major element in the strategy. The hon. Member for Somerton and Frome said that the number of criminal practitioners—solicitors in particular—in his area was causing concern, and that sometimes only one solicitor would be available. We are aware of problems in certain rural areas, which are often less well provided for than urban areas. However, the Legal Services Commission is providing training grants to tackle that problem. In my experience, the number of students seeking to enter law school is continuing to rise considerably, and we need to ensure that a package is available to encourage those students to go into criminal representation.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 440 c1270-1
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Access Criminal proceedings Courts Applications Administration Assets Criminal Defence Service Finance Legal aid scheme Eligibility Income Legal representation Legal Services Commission Legal costs Powers Means-tested benefits Solicitors
- Legislation
- Criminal Defence Service Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 13:42:53 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286080
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286080
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286080