At the present time practitioners of benefits law under legal aid contracts can feel rather battered and bruised. We are told that our work is not sufficiently complicated to warrant public funding and that the work we undertake is not strictly necessary: Proposals for the reform of Legal Aid. The presumption being that the DWP and voluntary organisations are able to help those in need adequately. My colleagues and I would beg to differ:
“Representatives of organisations in this field have made it clear they do not believe it will be possible for their organisations to meet all the unmet demand which will be created by the proposed changes to legal aid”
A welcome ray of sunshine for us embattled practitioners today as we read the findings of the Ministry of Justice Select Committee report on legal aid reforms.
The committee reports that poor decision making by the DWP is leading to more and more cases being heard at tribunal.
“The volume of appeals is expected to increase, rising to an estimated 370,000 in 2010–11 and 436,000 in 2011–12. 60 of the 67,600 cases cleared at hearing in the latest quarter for which figures are available (Quarter 2, 2010–11), a decision in favour of the appellant was made in 23,100 (34%) of cases”
The committee suggests a solution to this problem is to bring in a ‘polluter pays’ principle. Under this principle, poor decision making by Government and Local Authority decision makers, leads to a surcharge which would help fund the cost of legal aid practitioners and tribunals. This is an option that would be welcomed by anyone who has had experience of reviewing DWP and Local Authority decisions and as a result longs for some form of accountability in the system.
“It has been put to us that the removal from scope of many areas of social welfare law will lead to significant costs to the public purse as a result of increased burdens on, for example, health and housing services. We are surprised that the government is proposing to make such changes without assessing their likely impact on spending from the public purse and we call on them to do so before taking a final decision on implementation”
The proposed changes to legal aid for social welfare will actually result in increased costs for the MOJ. Judges will have to undertake more fact finding exercises, cases will not be adequately screened before reaching the tribunal and the vulnerable will not be adequately prepared to defend themselves and get the correct points across.
“Vulnerable groups rely more on legal aid services than do the less vulnerable, and so there is the potential for them to be disproportionately hit by the changes. If this were to happen it would sit uneasily with the government’s commitment to protect the most vulnerable in society”
It is to be hoped that the Government heeds the warnings of the committee and practitioners and undertakes a root and branch review of the full impact of their proposed reforms on the vulnerable in society and taxpayers pockets.
Click here to view the report in full.
To contact your local M.P to register concern about changes to legal aid click here.
By social welfare specialist, Ryan Bradshaw