[{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"43435","proposer":"10436","edm":"2347","session":"2010-12","title":"Provision Of Legal Services","text":"That this House considers that any attempt to economise on our arcane, high fee, high cost and adversarial justice systemby cutting legal aid must deprive the poor and people of modest means of access to justice; suggests that the inquisitional systems used in Europe provide justice at a fraction of the cost of the British system and lead to smaller prison populations; regrets that delivery of publicly-funded defence services by subsidy to private sector lawyers is characterised by excessively high fees for some lawyers, inadequate fees for others and creates a situation in which costs cannot be controlled without injustice, so that only a salaried public defender service can provide real value; further regrets that Max Weber's view that `the advantages of at least some aspects of the French and German systems are so marked that it seems ... almost inexplicable that the possibility of adapting items from them has been solittle explored in Britain' still rings true; therefore welcomes the greater use of salaried services and the cost savings introduced in Scotland; and calls on the Government to introduce along with these reforms, rights for victims and witnesses and to reduce the cost of the criminal justice system, using the savings to support drug treatment, education and training in prison and guarantee access to justice in civil cases.","date":"2011-11-01","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"43422","proposer":"10147","edm":"2334","session":"2010-12","title":"Provision Of Legal Aid","text":"That this House notes with concern that proposed legal aid cuts will lead to a loss of face-to-face advice for debt, employment, housing and welfare benefits that could make the funding stream unworkable for charities; furthernotes with alarm that the legal aid funding that will be left in placewould not be enough for not-for-profit organisations to employ one full-time caseworker in 30 per cent. of areas; further notes that the removal oflegal aid for advice on immigration, family law, clinical negligence and education and other changes means that over 650,000 people will lose out overall; further notes with alarm that immigration advice will only be available in the future under legal aid for people who are detained; further notes that Coventry Law Centre has a contract to help 380 clients with immigration issues; recognises that the current provision for legal aid for debt, housing, welfare, benefits, community care and employment allows Coventry Law Centre to assist 1,830 people in the city; notes with concern that after the proposed cuts and the effects of the introduction of the mandatory telephone gateway, that this figure will reduce to just 138 people; believes that current policies are unfair, unnecessary and unsustainable; and calls on the Government to reconsider its proposals before it damages legal aid provision irrevocably.","date":"2011-10-31","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"42952","proposer":"24892","edm":"1885","session":"2010-12","title":"Legal Aid: Clinical Negligence","text":"That this House notes with great concern the Secretary of State for Justice's statement that, as part of the Government's proposed cuts to access to legal aid, `No win, no fee is a perfectly suitable way of proceeding in clinical negligence cases', Official Report,column 667 of 15 November 2010; recognises that these will include a wide range of extremely serious cases some of which will involve children who have suffered brain damage as a result of clinical negligence; believes the negative impact this will have on vulnerable families and individuals will make them less inclined to seek legal redress; further recognises that access to justice irrespective of financial circumstance is a vital component of any democratic system; and therefore calls on the Government to rethink these reforms and consult on a fairer option which will allow all citizens full access to justice and legal representation in such difficult situations.","date":"2011-06-08","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"42531","proposer":"10428","edm":"1492","session":"2010-12","title":"Proposed Reductions In Spending On Legal Aid","text":"That this House is alarmed by the Government's proposed changes to citizens' access to legal aid which, if introduced, will dramatically change the shape and scope of such important services for ordinary people so much so that the subject areas likely to be excluded from access to legal support will include such fundamental social welfare issues as housing, debts, benefits, employment and immigration; notes the Government's candid acknowledgement that these changes, if they occur, would have a disproportionate impact upon the most vulnerable in our society, notably the disabled, poor, those from ethnic minorities and especially women; and calls on the Government to desist from such an undemocratic journey and instead for them to widely consult on how to maintain a sustainable legal aid system which ensures that each and every citizen has access to both legal representation and justice.","date":"2011-02-28","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"42333","proposer":"10383","edm":"1314","session":"2010-12","title":"Carter Ruck","text":"That this House notes with concern the report in The Guardian of 19 January 2011 that the solicitors Carter Ruck threatened the Soil Association with libel proceedings in order to bully the Association into withdrawing its objection to a planning application and considers that this presents a seriousthreat to the operation of the planning process in a free and democratic society; and therefore calls on the Government to investigate the role of the firm Carter Ruck with a view to preventing any further interventions of this nature by this firm.","date":"2011-01-19","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"42220","proposer":"24919","edm":"1207","session":"2010-12","title":"Gateshead Advice Centre And Cuts To Legal Aid","text":"That this House recognises the economic and social importance of the work of the citizens advice bureaux, including the Gateshead Advice Centre, whose legally-aided advice and representation on welfare benefits, debt, community care, housing, family and employment are vital for many constituents; further recognises that in 2009 the Gateshead service advised 14,000 people on 34,000 issues, obtained 14 million of financial benefit for clients, contributed over 10 million through its debt work and secured 9 million worth of benefits; believes that without legal aid the Centre could only reach a fraction of the community and not take on full casework; is concerned that this will drive people towards unscrupulous private organisations that claim they can help people but which often fleece them; and endorses the Centre's view that proposals to cut legal aid represent a sharp break from the long-standing bipartisan consensus that effective access to justice is essential to underpin the rule of law.","date":"2010-12-15","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"42206","proposer":"24805","edm":"1194","session":"2010-12","title":"Justice For All Campaign","text":"That this House welcomes the Justice for All campaign launched in the House of Commons on 12 January 2011; supports the aims of the campaign which are to raise awareness of the vital importance of advice and representation on legal matters for the most vulnerable in our society and to ensure that everyone is treated fairly under the law, no matter who they are, how much money they have or where they live; recognises that the strength of feeling is reflected in the fact that the campaign is a broad coalition of legal and advice agencies, trades unions, charities, community groups and members of the public; regrets that the reduction in spending on legal aid, through restrictions in scope and eligibility and the blanket 10 per cent. cut in the lower fee paid to providers of legal services, is having a detrimental effect on access to justice and on the wellbeing of the most vulnerable people; questions the real cost savings to the public purse that this budget reduction will achieve, given that early advice on legal matters saves money by keeping families together in their homes, and in work and education; believes that free, independent advice and representation on legal matters is essential to achieve justice for all; and calls on the Government to rethink the provision of legal services for the poorest in society.","date":"2010-12-14","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"42024","proposer":"24956","edm":"1035","session":"2010-12","title":"Withdrawal Of Legal Aid For Epilepsy Drug Court Case","text":"That this House notes with regret the decision of the Legal Services Commission to withdraw funding from the claimants in the Fetal Anti-Convulsant Litigation; further notes that the Legal Services Commission first tried to withdraw funding in 2008 but that the decision was reversed when faced with a judicial review; further notes that the withdrawal of this funding is likely to lead to the abandonment of the current action with the result that the claims will then fall outside the 10 year limitation rule; regrets that key evidence around this issue will then remain confidential; strongly regrets the lost opportunity for the parents and children to have the facts and responsibilities in the case decided in open court; and calls on the Government to urge the Legal Services Commission to reconsider its decision to withdraw legal aid funding.","date":"2010-11-17","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"41698","proposer":"11093","edm":"737","session":"2010-12","title":"Legal Services (S.i., 2010, No. 2089)","text":"That an humble Address be presented to Her Majesty, praying that the Legal Services Act 2007 (Commencement No. 8, Transitory and Transitional Provisions) Order 2010 (S.I., 2010, No. 2089), dated 17 August 2010, a copy of which was laid before this House on 20 August, be annulled.","date":"2010-09-14","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"41654","proposer":"24754","edm":"694","session":"2010-12","title":"Legal Aid","text":"That this House supports an effective legal aid system, meeting the needs of the most vulnerable in society; recognises the need for provision of services by a wide range of legal providers across the entire country, rural and urban; considers that the tendering process to deliver social welfare and family services undertaken by the Legal Services Commission this year does not meet that objective as it reduces choice in a particularly challenging area in providing access to justice; and calls on the Government to reconsider this tendering process before it damages the family service legal provision irrevocably.","date":"2010-09-08","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"41615","proposer":"11707","edm":"658","session":"2010-12","title":"Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit","text":"That this House is concerned at the decision by the Legal Services Commission (LSC) to cut the legal aid contract of the Greater Manchester Immigration Aid Unit (GMIAU) from October; notes that this cut amounts toa 70 per cent. reduction in legal aid that the GMIAU canprovide; further notes that the GMIAU is a fully independent voluntary organisation; recognises the invaluable service the GMIAU has provided, and continues to provide, to individuals involved in numerous asylum and immigration cases; further notes that thisservice has been provided for free to those qualifying under the Legal Help scheme; expresses concern that the GMIAU may not be able to continue assisting in as many cases as it currently does; is furtherconcerned about the future welfare of those who could face possible deportation without the legal assistance provided by the GMIAU; and calls on the Secretary of State for Justice to intervene and urgently review the decision by the LSC.","date":"2010-07-27","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"41391","proposer":"24819","edm":"448","session":"2010-12","title":"Refugee And Migrant Justice (No. 2)","text":"That this House recognises the outstanding service provided byRefugee and Migrant Justice (RMJ)and expresses regret at its recent closure; notes that the Legal Services Commission (LSC)is ensuring that existing clients of the organisation continue to have proper advice and representation; expresses concern that the LSC may experience delays in finding providers to take onRMJ's 10,000 cases; and calls on the Home Office to prevent any planned removals of people who have been unable to access legal advice following the closure of RMJ.","date":"2010-07-08","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"41318","proposer":"24818","edm":"378","session":"2010-12","title":"Refugee And Migrant Justice","text":"That this House notes with concern that the entering into administration of refugee and migrant justice has left many of the charity's vulnerable clients without adequate legal representation; and calls on the Secretary of State for the Home Department not to reject any asylum applications or conduct any deportations of such individuals until alternative representation has been secured.","date":"2010-07-01","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"41114","proposer":"24910","edm":"191","session":"2010-12","title":"Refugee And Migrant Justice Charity","text":"That this House notes that the legal advice charity Refugee and Migrant Justice (RMJ) is in danger of closing because it is facing a cash crisis because a large proportion of legal aid work is now paid upon completion, meaning payment can take anything up to two years; further notes that as a result the charity has a \u00a31.8 million backlog of payments; further notes that senior legal and human rights experts, faith leaders including the Archbishop of Canterbury, Citizens Advice, Liberty and Mind all back the campaign to rescue the legal advice charity from the cash crisis that is not of their own making; is aware that RMJ is not asking for new money but simply prompt payment of legal aid by the Legal Services Commission, or failing that, interest-free loans by the Government to cover the gap; and calls for the legal aid payment system to be changed to ensure charities are paid promptly for their work.","date":"2010-06-09","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"38683","proposer":"10288","edm":"1513","session":"2008-09","title":"Legal Services Commission","text":"That this House notes that the proposed restructuring of the Legal Services Commission (LSC) will lead to approximately 600 redundancies in England and Wales; is concerned that the level of redundancies is far too high given the current economic climate; and expresses serious concern about the negative impact this may have on the service delivery for the most vulnerable people in England and Wales requiring the services of the LSC, especially in a time of recession when the demand for legal aid services the LSC provides is increasing.","date":"2009-05-18","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"37726","proposer":"10436","edm":"675","session":"2008-09","title":"Access To Local Legal Advice","text":"That this House welcomes the Local Legal Advice Review undertaken for the Ministry of Justice; notes that the economic recession has triggered a significant rise in the demand for legal aid and legal advice at the very time when the future of local advice agencies has been put in doubt by the Legal Service Commission's decision to proceed with plans to commission community legal advice centres and networks through a competitive tender process; further notes the very real concerns voiced by Citizens Advice and others that the procurement model adopted by the Legal Service Commission will result in services which do not best meet the needs of clients and communities and do not protect those multiple points of access that are so vital in making certain that help and advice is available where it is most needed; and calls on the Ministry of Justice to ensure that the existing community legal advice centres are evaluated for their effectiveness in meeting advice needs in communities, particularly the needs of vulnerable groups, those in debt, and those living in less accessible parts of the community, before any further tenders are rolled out.","date":"2009-02-03","status":"o"},{"topic":"Legal aid","id":"34723","proposer":"11719","edm":"578","session":"2007-08","title":"LEGAL AID TO SERVICEMEN'S FAMILIES","text":"That this House notes that legal aid has been made readily available to a vast number of people and groups in the United Kingdom; recalls that legal aid has been given to allow for, amongst other things, a schoolgirl's father to sue a headteacher over a school's uniform policy, for a murderer to repeatedly protest his right to have a baby by IVF, and for a terrorist associate to resist extradition and punishment; understands from the Legal Services Commission's website that the Commission helps over two million people a year; expresses surprise and dismay that the families of nine RAF servicemen who were shot down and killed in Iraq in 2005 will not qualify for automatic legal aid to help them work through the legal complexities of the case; further notes that the family of an Australian serviceman killed in the same attack has been granted legal aid by their home country; and therefore calls on the Legal Services Commission to reconsider this case as a matter of urgency and allow these families of British soldiers access to legal aid as soon as possible.","date":"2007-12-13","status":"c"}]