header-logo header-logo

Hidden cost of legal aid cuts

12 January 2012
Issue: 7496 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-detail

Knock-on expenses will undermine government targets

Cutting legal aid will cost the public purse at least an extra £139m in unbudgeted knock-on expenses, an independent report by King’s College London has found.

The proposed cuts to civil legal aid in the areas of family law, clinical negligence and social welfare law aim to save the government £240m.However, a report published this week, Unintended Consequences: the cost of the Government’s Legal Aid Reforms, shows those cuts will shift the burden onto other taxpayer-funded bodies, such as the NHS, leading to unbudgeted costs of £139m.

This would wipe out nearly 60% of all predicted savings. The report notes that numerous costs could not be estimated and so this figure “is likely to be a substantial underestimate of the true costs”.

Dr Graham Cookson, who was commissioned by the Law Society to produce the report, found that removing legal aid for clinical negligence victims would cost the NHS nearly three times more than it saved the Ministry of Justice (MoJ)—£28.5m each year against projected budget savings of £10.5m.

The removal of legal aid from private family law would create knock-on costs of £100m each year against projected savings of £170m, while scrapping legal aid for social welfare law would have knock-on costs of £35.2m against savings of £58m.

Peter Walsh, chief executive of Action Against Medical Accidents, says: “The government has failed to prove two of the key assumptions supporting its proposals, these being that the new regime will result in significant savings or that the potential savings alone justify the proposed changes.”

Emma Scott, director of the campaigning organisation Rights of Women, says legal aid is “key” to enabling women to protect themselves and their children from violence and abusive relationships.

Desmond Hudson, CEO of the Law Society, accused the MoJ of “kamikaze accounting” that “will do little to tackle the deficit while sacrificing access to justice”.

However, an MoJ spokesperson claimed that the government had been clear that the costs and benefits detailed in the impact assessment were the best estimate of the potential effects of the reforms.

“Considered alongside our wider reforms the department of health has confirmed that costs to the NHS are expected to reduce,” they said.

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Bill is currently before the House of Lords.

Issue: 7496 / Categories: Legal News
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Hugh James—Phil Edwards

Serious injury teambolstered by high-profile partner hire

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Freeths—Melanie Stancliffe

Firm strengthens employment team with partner hire

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

DAC Beachcroft—Tim Barr

Lawyers’ liability practice strengthened with partner appointment in London

NEWS
Ceri Morgan, knowledge counsel at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP, analyses the Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Johnson v FirstRand Bank Ltd, which reshapes the law of fiduciary relationships and common law bribery
The boundaries of media access in family law are scrutinised by Nicholas Dobson in NLJ this week
Reflecting on personal experience, Professor Graham Zellick KC, Senior Master of the Bench and former Reader of the Middle Temple, questions the unchecked power of parliamentary privilege
Geoff Dover, managing director at Heirloom Fair Legal, sets out a blueprint for ethical litigation funding in the wake of high-profile law firm collapses
James Grice, head of innovation and AI at Lawfront, explores how artificial intelligence is transforming the legal sector
back-to-top-scroll