*/
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plunged into £300m of civil legal aid cuts without considering evidence of the consequences, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has heard.
Dame Ursula Brennan, Permanent Secretary of State at the MoJ, admitted to MPs on 4 December that the Ministry had been unable to assess the impact of the cuts because of the speed with which they were required: “Government was absolutely explicit that it needed to make these changes swiftly. Therefore, it was not possible to do research about the current regime before moving to the cuts.”
“The most critical piece of evidence that was relevant to the decision that was made was the size of the spend,” Brennan said. “It was very clear that we would launch research... after the event,” she added.
Committee Chair Margaret Hodge MP rounded on the MoJ for its “endemic failure” in implementing non-evidence-based policy. “Our criticism is that the way you have set about this with so little evidence has had unintended consequences that mean that you do not meet the objectives of the policy.”
“There are plenty of areas of public and social policy which are even more complex than this where economists do make assessments. It does not mean they are right, but it means you are able to make more informed decisions,” Hodge added.
The Committee drew evidence from the National Audit Office’s report Implementing reforms to civil legal aid, which found that the MoJ did not think through early enough the impact of the changes on the wider system, and still does not know whether people who are eligible for legal aid are able to get it.
“Without this understanding, the Ministry’s implementation of the reforms to civil legal aid cannot be said to have delivered better overall value for money for the taxpayer,” the NAO concluded.
“The most critical piece of evidence that was relevant to the decision that was made was the size of the spend,” Brennan said. “It was very clear that we would launch research... after the event,” she added.
Committee Chair Margaret Hodge MP rounded on the MoJ for its “endemic failure” in implementing non-evidence-based policy. “Our criticism is that the way you have set about this with so little evidence has had unintended consequences that mean that you do not meet the objectives of the policy.”
“There are plenty of areas of public and social policy which are even more complex than this where economists do make assessments. It does not mean they are right, but it means you are able to make more informed decisions,” Hodge added.
The Committee drew evidence from the National Audit Office’s report Implementing reforms to civil legal aid, which found that the MoJ did not think through early enough the impact of the changes on the wider system, and still does not know whether people who are eligible for legal aid are able to get it.
“Without this understanding, the Ministry’s implementation of the reforms to civil legal aid cannot be said to have delivered better overall value for money for the taxpayer,” the NAO concluded.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) plunged into £300m of civil legal aid cuts without considering evidence of the consequences, the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee has heard.
Dame Ursula Brennan, Permanent Secretary of State at the MoJ, admitted to MPs on 4 December that the Ministry had been unable to assess the impact of the cuts because of the speed with which they were required: “Government was absolutely explicit that it needed to make these changes swiftly. Therefore, it was not possible to do research about the current regime before moving to the cuts.”
Chair of the Bar finds common ground on legal services between our two jurisdictions, plus an update on jury trials
A £500 donation from AlphaBiolabs has been made to the leading UK charity tackling international parental child abduction and the movement of children across international borders
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, outlines the drug and alcohol testing options available for family law professionals, and how a new, free guide can help identify the most appropriate testing method for each specific case
By Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Director of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, examines the latest ONS data on drug misuse and its implications for toxicology testing in family law cases
An interview with Rob Wagg, CEO of New Park Court Chambers
With at least 31 reports of AI hallucinations in UK legal cases – over 800 worldwide – and judges using AI to assist in judicial decision-making, the risks and benefits are impossible to ignore. Matthew Lee examines how different jurisdictions are responding
What has changed, and why? Paul Secher unpacks the new standards aligning the recruiting, training and appraising of judges – the first major change to the system for ten years
The deprivation of liberty is the most significant power the state can exercise. Drawing on frontline experience, Chris Henley KC explains why replacing trial by jury with judge-only trials risks undermining justice
Ever wondered what a pupillage is like at the CPS? This Q and A provides an insight into the training, experience and next steps
The appointments of 96 new King’s Counsel (also known as silk) are announced today