Schedule 1 - Civil legal services

Part of Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 11:45 pm on 6 September 2011.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Jonathan Djanogly Jonathan Djanogly The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice 11:45, 6 September 2011

The amendments are contrary to the basis of our whole programme of reform and would increase the cost of legal aid dramatically at a time when we are seeking to focus it on the highest priority cases. As members of the Committee will be aware, we have had to make some difficult choices about legal aid, and we set out our rationale for changes to the scope of the scheme in the consultation paper published last November.

Amendment 139 seeks to bring into scope advocacy for appeals in the first-tier tribunal against public authorities for a wide range of matters. It seeks to extend legal aid for advocacy to areas where it is not currently provided, such as for first-tier tribunal appeals concerning welfare benefits, special educational needs, asylum support and information rights. In practice, the amendment would provide advocacy only for matters falling within the scope of part 1 of schedule 1, but its intention is clearly wider than that.

We maintain the view that legal representation will generally not be necessary in these cases, given the user-friendly and accessible nature of the tribunal. Furthermore, while legal aid is no doubt useful in appeals concerning areas such as information rights, we consider that such cases are not of high importance when compared, for example, with issues of safety or homelessness. By way of example, the amendment would make advocacy available for an individual in proceedings against a public authority in various immigration cases. While we appreciate the importance of such matters to the individuals concerned, immigration tribunals are designed to be user-friendly, and interpreters are provided free of charge.

Amendments 140 and 141 make consequential changes as a result of the amendments that I have already discussed. Those amendments not only seek to retain existing provision, but also seek to extend legal aid for advocacy to hundreds of thousands of new cases. Legal aid for advocacy has never been available for appeals in  the first-tier tribunal on welfare benefits, asylum support, information rights, Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority or special educational needs cases. In 2009-10, there were 339,000 social security and child support appeals to the first-tier tribunal. Extending legal aid for advocacy for these appeals alone could cost up to £500 million a year. I therefore urge the right hon. Gentleman to withdraw his amendments.