Labour: engaging with lawyers

Stop the unconstitutional attack on the rights of the British people, says Jonathan Black

In the run up to the May general election, SJ will run a series of articles featuring legal practitioners in support of their chosen party.

Let's get one stereotype out the way from the start: all publicly funded legal aid lawyers are 'lefties', while those in private and commercial firms are naturally 'rightwingers'.

Right? Well, no. Many commercial lawyers went
to law school with idealistic
notions that they still retain, notwithstanding their private practice. I know many staunch Labourites who practise in
the commercial sector. I also encounter many diehard Tories practising criminal defence work. It is important to banish stereotypes in light of the recent statistic that 82 per cent of lawyers surveyed would not vote Tory while Chris Grayling is Lord Chancellor.

When I was invited to write this piece, Sadiq Khan MP had yet to announce that Labour would review the second round of cuts proposed (8.75 per cent) to criminal legal aid. The shadow justice secretary had not yet pledged to scrap the disastrous new two-tier legal aid solicitor contracts, which, at the time of writing, are still subject to judicial review.

A number of commentators have opined that this impasse, combined with Labour's recent promise, is an overriding reason for lawyers to say they will vote for a Labour government. However, once again breaking away from assumptions, growing support for Labour in legal circles is not only restricted to high street criminal defence firms, who are witnessing a casual erosion of access to justice and whose future would have been blighted by these proposals. Support is also gathering in City firms, which are shouldering the brunt of civil legal aid cuts as their pro bono units are inundated beyond capacity. Litigators, too, may well be swayed as they watch their privately funded clients priced out of the courts, thanks to fee hikes of 600 per cent.

Let us move away from the lazy popular image that lawyers are simply interested in self-preservation. The fact is simple: lawyers in so many different areas are just plain offended to their core by the creeping denial of access to justice, access to courts and the rule of law.

Of course, the previous Labour government's record on legal aid and civil liberties isn't unblemished. After all, Labour laid the foundation for the current illiberal (sorry, no play on words intended) attack on fairness and access to justice. Remember their introduction
of anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs)? Remember the legislation to admit evidence of bad character and hearsay to 'rebalance the scales of justice'? David Blunkett and Jack Straw were seen as unforgiving home secretaries who were critical of lawyers.

So, what of the main players
in Labour's current justice team? Khan and Andy Slaughter MP have demonstrated a willingness to engage with the profession. Hence, in the months leading
up to Labour's recent announcement, we've been engaging regularly with the shadow team. We would like to build on this engagement beyond the election as part of a proper review into both civil and criminal legal aid. Thus far, Mr Grayling has refused to engage with solicitors. It is this wilful determination to ignore informed advice and warnings that led to the latest cross-party parliamentary Public Accounts Committee condemnation of the Ministry
of Justice's attitude, which is characterised by a reckless desire to cut without considering the collateral damage further down the line.

Despite a nagging concern about Labour's 'bad character', it is unlikely that lawyers who have experienced Grayling's policies first-hand will vote for more of the same. Some conveyancers will be deterred by Labour's mansion tax proposal. Equally, there will be plenty of commercial, property and media lawyers who will be offended by the Conservatives' attempts
to water down human rights legislation, coupled with the insidious attempts to curb judicial review - the ultimate mechanism for ordinary people to challenge decisions of the state. The Lord Chancellor chooses to demonise the European courts as un-British, just as he chooses to misrepresent the role of judicial review. Political expedience aside, we all know stereotypes in politics are not helpful.

And finally, in that vein, let us not underestimate non-lawyers. Of course there will be many who do not see access to justice as a deciding factor in the voting booth. But there will be plenty outside the legal profession who do understand that access to justice and the rule of law are essential for an inclusive, civilised society. Plenty of non-lawyers, in the same way as most lawyers, will want to stop this terrible, unconstitutional assault on the rights of the British people. SJ

Jonathan Black is president of the London Criminal Courts' Solicitors Association (LCCSA). He is also a partner at BSB Solicitors 

@jonblackbsb