Post by nickd on Sept 8, 2011 16:29:57 GMT 1
Labour’s legal aid bill amendments fail
After intense debate into the late night, legal aid minister Jonathon Djanogly sums it all up:
"The amendments are contrary to the basis of our whole programme of reform and would increase the cost of legal aid dramatically at a time when we are seeking to focus it on the highest priority cases."
Oh I think we can counter those words Jonathon when this sorry battle goes on to the other place.
Here's the article...
Thursday 08 September 2011 by John Hyde
[b]Opposition amendments to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill have been rejected by a committee of MPs.[/b][/u]
The Legal Aid Committee has voted to turn down a series of changes put forward by Labour to the bill.
Opponents wanted to return into the scope of legal aid the large areas of law that the government has sought to exclude, including welfare benefits, clinical negligence, disability, education and housing law.
Justice minister Jonathan Djanogly told members there had been ‘difficult decisions’ to make about legal aid cuts, but assured them it was the right course of action. He said: ‘The amendments are contrary to the basis of our whole programme of reform and would increase the cost of legal aid dramatically at a time when we are seeking to focus it on the highest priority cases.’
Labour strategists had hoped to gain support from the two Liberal Democrat members of the committee, but failed to convince them to vote against the government.
They had wanted to ensure that all cases brought on behalf of children were eligible for legal aid, suggesting that the move would only cost £10m.
Shadow justice minister Andy Slaughter told the Commons committee the bill would place a ‘huge additional onus on users of legal services to find their own remedies’, while Labour MP Kate Green said there was ‘not only a moral, fairness reason but an economic reason’ for voting in favour of amendments.
Slaughter, speaking outside the committee, later added: 'It's becoming increasingly clear to us that the government is both unwilling and unable to answer the justified criticism of their policies offered by opposition parties.
'Reading out pre-prepared scripts in response to every amendment and failing to answer questions undermines the ability of the committee to properly scrutinise this legislation and insults lawyers, advisors and volunteers in the sector that are watching us and hoping their voices are heard.'
The third reading of the bill is expected next month before it is passed on for debate in the House of Lords.
www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/labour-s-legal-aid-bill-amendments-fail