Now is the time for manifestos. Not to be outdone, the Law Society has issued its own. Strictly non-party political of course, but nevertheless aimed fairly and squarely at the current hustings. The Society recognises that: “The party in government following the general election will face a hostile and difficult environment. In facing that challenge, it must not forget the basic needs for justice and the rule of law. The Law Society calls on all political parties to publicly support…four principles in their campaigning, policy development and – if elected – their actions over the next Parliament”.

The four principles are that Government will: uphold the rule of law by ensuring meaningful access to justice for all; will properly defend the rights of the people; will work for good governance and better law-making; and will support and encourage a strong and independent legal services sector for the benefit of all. There is no shortage of specifics. The Law Society calls on all parties to commit to maintaining legal aid eligibility at current levels; supporting the principles enshrined in the Human Rights Act; and the maintenance of the right to trial by jury. Among other matters it calls for support of the pivotal role of the defence solicitor in protecting the rights of the defendant and ensuring that the criminal justice process actually works on the ground; a review of the current focus on ‘out of court disposals’; and support for an open coroners system in which all inquests are held in public. In related matters the Law Society calls for the tax year to operate on a calendar basis (1 January – 31 December), with a self-assessment deadline of 30 September; applying fixed dates for the Pre-Budget Report and the Budget; and a debate about the future of Home Information Packs.

The manifesto states that: “In recent years, the UK criminal justice system has been subject to a constant barrage of new legislation and offences. A more cautious and structured approach to extending and reforming criminal law is required to prevent the criminal justice system being overwhelmed and police forces becoming overstretched by a constantly changing criminal code”. Such laws and initiatives have included limiting the costs recovered by acquitted defendants to the equivalent legal aid rates; means testing for legal aid funding in the crown court; the growth in the use of control orders in terrorism cases; and virtual courts, where defendants may not have face to face access to a defence lawyer.

In their joint introduction to the manifesto, Robert Heslett, President, and Desmond Hudson, Chief Executive, state that: “It is important that, in the rough and tumble of an election campaign, such principles are not forgotten. The Law Society, as the voice of the largest part of the legal sector, has a unique perspective on the issues affecting justice and the fabric of society. The Society presents this manifesto as its contribution to the public policy debate in the lead up to the general election of 2010”. The full text of the manifesto can be found at:

 http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/new/documents/2010/manifesto2010.pdf

Up to 75% of criminal legal aid firms will be removed from the market under far-reaching reforms set to be implemented from summer 2011. The Ministry of Justice has announced new proposals for the tendering of criminal legal aid services with the aim of delivering significant savings to taxpayers and a more sustainable future for the legal aid budget It is claimed that the proposed new tendering process would also lead to greater efficiencies for suppliers enabling them to be profitable and sustainable, whilst ensuring that legal aid is available to those most in need.

The proposals would see the criminal legal aid market restructured so that there are a smaller number of large contracts contracted across a Criminal Justice Area, with multiple contracts let in each CJS area. In future there are likely to be no more than eight to ten contracts per CJS area. Arguments are advanced for moving quickly towards a consolidated market that will enable firms to remain viable through access to greater volumes of work. Individuals would continue to have a choice of legal representatives from among the pool of providers who hold contracts. Under the proposed model, contracts would be let for the full range of criminal defence work from the police station through to the Crown Court, with cases followed through to their conclusion. All contracts would include a share of police station and magistrates’ court duty work. The claim is that contract holders would therefore have greater access to the higher value, more profitable work, including the ability to undertake Very High Cost Cases.

In an interview with the ‘Law Gazette’, legal aid minister Lord Bach said: “These proposals are likely to affect a large number of small and medium-sized firms, but the current arrangements are unsustainable. Solicitors have been telling us for some time that the amount they get from legal aid is not enough to keep them profitable. These plans will generate greater efficiencies for suppliers, help people access good advice, and get a better deal for the taxpayer.” He estimated that no more than 500 firms will get contracts, which would mean that up to 75% of the 1,700 firms doing criminal legal aid work face an exit from the market. At the launch of the proposals Jack Straw said: “We have a duty to ensure that the legal aid budget is used effectively and efficiently on behalf of the taxpayer. Even with the necessary savings and reforms, our system of legal aid – civil and criminal – will still be far and away the best funded in the world.”

Responding to the new proposals, Law Society President Robert Heslett said: “We have long argued that the current situation is not sustainable in the medium to long term. We agree with the Ministry that reform is needed”. But he added: “The model proposed by the Ministry bears little resemblance to the market as it is currently structured, and it is not clear how, nor how quickly any move to such a model could be implemented without causing serious disruption to service provision. We do not have an economic environment in which firms will find it easy to make the necessary investment to expand as much as would be required.”

The full text of the MoJ report “Restructuring the delivery of criminal defence services” can be found at:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/docs/restructuring-delivery-criminal-defence-services.pdf