Clause 1 - Grant of rights to representation
Criminal Defence Service Bill [Lords]
10:30 am
Jonathan Djanogly (Shadow Solicitor General (Also Shadow Minister for Trade and Industry), Law Officers (Assist the Home Affairs Team); Huntingdon, Conservative)
I declare any interest that I might have as a practising solicitor.
This brief Bill—I use the word brief in the context of our position on Second Reading, where we made it clear that it will do little to alleviate the hard times that have befallen legal aid practitioners—will allow the power to grant rights for representations to be transferred from the courts to the Legal Services Commission, introduce a means test for the granting of such funding and, where the test is met, advise for contribution orders based on means.
Several amendments were made in the other place, and I pay tribute to their lordships for the work done on the Bill. The Conservative Opposition feel that access to justice is an important matter that requires full and serious consideration. Through the determined efforts of our noble Friends and others in the other place such detailed consideration has been possible. As the Minister said, today is not the time or place to go over every single argument that has already been made.
We welcome the restoration by amendment in the other place of responsibility for legal aid matters to the Lord Chancellor, as we welcome the amendments made on appeals. I will emphasise that point later, but suffice it to say for the moment that we believe it important that the court should be able to hear appeals on the interests of justice tests as well as on the eligibility tests, and they should be able to consider such matters afresh. We were, therefore, somewhat disappointed with the Government's decision to overturn measured, considered and expert amendments supported by their noble lordships. I point out immediately that the Conservative party has long been in favour of many of the measures contained in the Bill, particularly the concept of means-testing for those who can afford it, which was abolished by the Government in 2001.
We have problems with amendment No. 1 and with the Government's general position. This ground has, of course, been extensively covered by in the other place, where Lord Goodhart—