Some of you may have heard something about changes to Legal Aid.
Many people may think it won't affect them - that they have either never needed a solicitor, or never have qualified financially.
Usually people qualify for legal aid advice as a one-off transaction, eg a dviorce, clinical negligence, etc case. No one can predict the need to get legal advice, particularly for family problems. But the incidence of family breakdown is I assume evident to most who look at this board and those who post on it.
No one can predict whether they will be in a position to afford a solicitor should the need arise.
The majority of clients claoming legal aid are women.
It is a little known fact that much of what the Legal Services Comission pays out for resolving financial disputes ends up being repaid to the state by the client out of the assets they recover through having legal aid. In these instances the cost to the state is zero, yet the government still want to do away with that.
Various proposals are being put to the government suggesting ways in which costs savings can be made, whilst preserving the important principle that everyone who cannot afford legal advice should, in this increasingly complicated world, get it.
Those who can still afford legal advice will still get it. In the future, the government proposes that those who cannot afford it will not get it provided by the state. The government suggest that where therre has been domestic violence then they will still fund the case with legal aid. However, these proposals will effectively see an end to family legal aid, and who can honestly argue that the victim of domestic violence should have their case funded but that someone in an identical situation but without DV issues does not need advice?
The WI, amongst others, has a websitesoundoffforjustice.co.uk/
Please visit it if you are at all concerned about access to justice. Please also contribute to the consultation process, which ends on 14 February.
Thank you.