*/
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.”
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
