This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/09/legal-aid-in-jeopardy-chris-grayling

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Legal aid is still in jeopardy Legal aid is still in jeopardy
(8 days later)
When an entire forest is being burned to the ground by committed arsonists, it is easy to be grateful that one or two small saplings survive. The speed and the destructive force of the current government's policies have left anti-austerity protesters of all kinds on the back foot, desperately trying to save the last remnants of foliage while flames rage all around. Such is the case with the latest stage of the Ministry of Justice's consultation paper on legal aid reform: in the face of serious and widespread opposition from lawyers and the public, the proposed tendering of legal aid contracts to the lowest bidder has been scrapped, yet much of the equally unpopular plan remains.When an entire forest is being burned to the ground by committed arsonists, it is easy to be grateful that one or two small saplings survive. The speed and the destructive force of the current government's policies have left anti-austerity protesters of all kinds on the back foot, desperately trying to save the last remnants of foliage while flames rage all around. Such is the case with the latest stage of the Ministry of Justice's consultation paper on legal aid reform: in the face of serious and widespread opposition from lawyers and the public, the proposed tendering of legal aid contracts to the lowest bidder has been scrapped, yet much of the equally unpopular plan remains.
The partial U-turn is nevertheless good news – the frightening scenario in which you are "represented", transported and imprisoned by the same international security firm may be on hold for now, and smaller, specialist law firms can breathe a momentary sigh of relief, but the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, is intent on cutting £220m, citing "unavoidable spending restraint".The partial U-turn is nevertheless good news – the frightening scenario in which you are "represented", transported and imprisoned by the same international security firm may be on hold for now, and smaller, specialist law firms can breathe a momentary sigh of relief, but the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, is intent on cutting £220m, citing "unavoidable spending restraint".
To do this, he intends to continue with much of the original plan – to withdraw legal aid from prisoners (which could include those on remand), to cut fees to legal aid lawyers by 17.5% (and up to 30% in the most serious criminal cases) and to introduce a financial eligibility threshold test. Perhaps most worrying of all, the "residence test", that would see only those "lawfully resident" for a continuous period of 12 months eligible for legal aid, including children, remains in place, albeit with a few minor adjustments.To do this, he intends to continue with much of the original plan – to withdraw legal aid from prisoners (which could include those on remand), to cut fees to legal aid lawyers by 17.5% (and up to 30% in the most serious criminal cases) and to introduce a financial eligibility threshold test. Perhaps most worrying of all, the "residence test", that would see only those "lawfully resident" for a continuous period of 12 months eligible for legal aid, including children, remains in place, albeit with a few minor adjustments.
But are Grayling's messy and unpopular reforms really about saving money? While £220m is a great deal, it pales in comparison to the £1.4tn spent bailing out the banks or the £1.2bn spent on the military operation in Libya, and is only just over double the cost of MPs expenses, which last year cost almost £90m.But are Grayling's messy and unpopular reforms really about saving money? While £220m is a great deal, it pales in comparison to the £1.4tn spent bailing out the banks or the £1.2bn spent on the military operation in Libya, and is only just over double the cost of MPs expenses, which last year cost almost £90m.
But there are many for whom justice cannot be quantified or streamlined in the name of saving a bit of cash: being accused of a crime is a terrifying and confusing scenario for anyone, and seeking asylum after fleeing friends and family is a situation no one could envy. Being forced to go through these experiences without adequate professional representation would come uncomfortably close to infringing one of the hallmarks of a fair and equal justice system – the right to a fair trial.But there are many for whom justice cannot be quantified or streamlined in the name of saving a bit of cash: being accused of a crime is a terrifying and confusing scenario for anyone, and seeking asylum after fleeing friends and family is a situation no one could envy. Being forced to go through these experiences without adequate professional representation would come uncomfortably close to infringing one of the hallmarks of a fair and equal justice system – the right to a fair trial.
Grayling's attempt to further commercialise and privatise law does a massive disservice not only to legal aid lawyers, but also to the public, who have a far stronger notion of justice than Grayling appears to.Grayling's attempt to further commercialise and privatise law does a massive disservice not only to legal aid lawyers, but also to the public, who have a far stronger notion of justice than Grayling appears to.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.