---

Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill

I thank the noble Baroness, Lady Northover, for her response and all other noble Lords who have contributed this evening. In my opening speech I did not mention clinical negligence because the issue had been eloquently argued in the previous Motion by the noble Lord, Lord Cormack, and the noble Baroness, Lady Finlay. The noble Earl, Lord Listowel, raised the important issue of children in care and children leaving care. However, this will raise more issues about where the costs will move to. The hope that local authorities will pick up the pieces concerning this group of children in care or leaving care is naive. Local authorities are already under huge amounts of pressure, and pushing the costs—and potentially greater costs—on them will not help the children who we want to see receive this help. I am also deeply uncomfortable about the role of the litigation friend and the ability of children to access an appropriate person who is able to help them through very difficult times. I am afraid that I am still not convinced by the arguments on exceptional funding. When we debated the percentages of cases, we learnt that 13 per cent of children's cases will be out of scope. However, information provided by JustRights shows that, contrary to misleading government claims, the 5,000 to 6,000 children covered by this amendment will not be protected by the exceptional funding scheme. The Ministry of Justice has confirmed to JustRights that its figures on the number of children affected already account for those who would receive exceptional funding. If children were automatically entitled to legal aid, the Government would avoid the cost of administering children's applications to the scheme, as well as possible delays that would be detrimental to children's welfare. I am conscious of the late hour. This issue has been extensively debated in many sessions, but we should ask the other place to think again about the thousands of children who will be seriously and negatively affected if the amendment does not go through. I beg to move. Division on Motion J1. Contents 100; Not-Contents 154. Motion J1 disagreed. Motion J agreed.