Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Thomas of Gresford (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 10 January 2012. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill.


Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

I wish to add further concerns, having heard the Minister’s reply. I understand that the director would have to follow directions and guidance given on matters of merits and eligibility. Standards would have to be set as to what has to be satisfied, and eligibility in relation to finance is something that the Lord Chancellor would be concerned with. But I have some concerns about the emphasis on individual cases as opposed to a category of cases. We sought in Amendment 16 to take one category of case—namely, cases against the Government or government agencies, or whatever. The Lord Chancellor ought not to be able to interfere in any category of case that is within the scope of Part 1 of the Bill. He should not be able to say that there are too many of these cases and we have to cut down, and the wording leaves that open. Another matter that concerns me is exactly what is intended. The Minister used once the expression ““an executive agency””. What is that? Is it a body within the Ministry of Justice or is it to be set up separately? Is it to be staffed only by civil servants or is it to be able to recruit its own people to it? What is the relationship of the executive agency headed by the director to the Ministry of Justice? We are very familiar with the concept of the Director of Public Prosecutions and the sometimes rather fraught relationship between the DPP and the Attorney-General, who is responsible for the director’s decisions in a parliamentary sense but not necessarily able to give him directions or control him in any way. So the independence of the DPP is a very interesting model which I would have thought the director of legal aid casework ought to follow. That means having an executive agency recruiting its own people and a constructive tension between the director and the Lord Chancellor, or whoever the Minister of Justice happens to be at the time. I would like to probe the concept a little further at this stage. What is this executive agency? How will it be staffed? What is the relationship between its director and the Minister of Justice? It may be that I am posing these questions at the wrong stage in this debate. If my noble friend is not able to answer these questions at the moment, I am sure he will explain them to me at a later stage.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c95-6 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Children Criminal proceedings Appeals Disadvantaged Administration of justice Civil proceedings Legal profession Women Equality Health services Fees and charges Legal aid scheme Expenditure Domestic abuse Legal Services Commission Family law Family proceedings NHS Low incomes Ministerial powers Public appointments Negligence Social security Sentencing Standards Voluntary organisations Young people Witnesses Remand in custody Ministry of Justice Expert evidence Citizens' advice bureaux Law centres Impact assessments Public Defender Service Lord Chancellor Mediation
Legislation
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk