Draconian legal aid cut
14/02/2011
By Elfyn Llwyd, MP
The UK government is currently consulting on proposals to slash £350 million from the £2billion legal aid budget – a decision which would leave some of the most vulnerable people in our communities without free access to legal advice. The proposed cut will also mean many smaller legal firms that get most of their workload from legal aid cases will close. This is a draconian cut which truly exposes how little the UK coalition cares for those suffering real financial hardship.
Legal aid is currently available for people who would not otherwise be able to afford legal advice. It is available for a range of civil legal problems, for example cases involving debt, benefits, housing and relationships. Under the proposals, legal aid will be removed from nearly all family law cases except those involving domestic violence and forced marriage.
It will also be removed from most child contact and residence cases, appeals against benefits decisions, employment tribunals, debt or housing cases that do not involve homelessness, and immigration issues. In many situations, the UK government will expect people to come to agreements outside of court – an insult to the notion that all should be treated as equals before the law.
Effectively, the implementation of these proposals will result in a situation where only the wealthiest in society will be able to afford quality legal advice. It is disgraceful that the UK government is trying to force this through as part of their programme of so-called ‘efficiency savings’.
In a debate in the House of Commons last week, I voiced these concerns and I will do so again in a written response to the consultation.
As it seems to me, the proposals totally ignore the subtleties that can surround family law cases involving children, the plight of those in danger of losing their benefits, or those under tremendous stress dealing with debt. If the proposals come into effect, legal aid will only be retained for the most destitute cases, and will leave many who teeter on the brink of destitution without legal advice.
What is more, legal firms which rely heavily on legal aid cases will be forced to take on unqualified staff in order to make up the cost, which will mean the quality of service available will be lowered. The legal aid ‘market’, if we can call it that, will be driven by cost, and not the needs of the clients.
Many firms, especially smaller firms, will close, which in rural areas would be catastrophic, since there is already a shortage of supply available.
All in all, if the proposed cuts come into play, they will have a disproportionate impact on rural areas and those areas where there is currently the greatest need for legal aid. Some of the most vulnerable people in our communities will be left without access to free legal advice, making these reforms totally unethical.
It is bitingly ironic that the UK government’s consultation paper on this issue claims that “access to justice is a hallmark of any civilised society.” I believe this claim to be true – which is precisely why I will be doing all I can to prevent the UK government from pushing these reforms through.