More unequal than others

Lawyers behind the Commission of Inquiry into Legal Aid were well aware of the accusations of bias likely to be levied against them. As leftfield organisations opposing the legal aid budget cuts the Young Legal Aid Lawyers and the Haldane Society expected to be criticised for trying to pass off their inquiry as a piece of independent research.

What has come out of their series of hearings held in the Commons earlier this year undoubtedly reflects their existing wider social concerns: that the cuts will reduce access to justice for the vulnerable and that this, in itself, is bad for our definition of an effective justice system in a democratic society.

But their findings, published this week by Solicitors Journal in the Justice Gap series under the title Unequal before the law?, also evidence a unique, genuine attempt at bringing together in a non-political setting all interested parties holding differing views.

It is perhaps unfortunate that organisations in favour turned down the opportunity to send representatives to appear in person, preferring instead to send their comments in writing, refer the panel to previous position papers, or just not respond to the invitation.

Still, the findings shed new light on how legal aid has helped real people facing real difficulties, who would otherwise have been unable to bring or defend a case.

Two of the witnesses were at the launch event of the report last week. S, whose son had trouble at school and had been expelled several times, was only able to have him assessed following assistance by a legal aid lawyer. The result was that she was later able to secure a place in a SEN school.

The other witness, P, threatened with eviction after 47 years in the same property, was only able to stay in her home after two rounds of court proceedings. The first instance judge ruled in favour of her landlord but his decision was reversed on appeal. Importantly, her case showed that it was not only about the money and her ability to fund the case, but that without a lawyer able to take her case to appeal it would not have been possible to reveal that the first instance judge had made an error in applying the law.

Neither S nor P would be able to obtain legal aid if the proposed reforms go through, leaving S in a precarious financial situation, and P moving to a different neighbourhood where she doesn't know anybody. Which raises a wider issue highlighted by several original witnesses and parliamentarians who joined in the debate held for the launch of the report. Legal aid, said Conservative Peer Lord Newton, cannot be looked at in isolation from other elements of the social concerns. The former social security minister said the proposed cuts would not give vulnerable people adequate protection. If a reform is to take place, he said, it must be in the context of broader parallel proposals. The availability of legal aid for welfare problems, for instance, should be considered in with the proposed welfare reform bill and localism bill. And Lord Bach, who hosted the event, said the proposed cuts were 'economically illiterate'.