Lord Bach: LASPO is ‘outrageous legislation’
Industry News : 9 May 2012
Only days before the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders bill receives royal assent to become an act, Lord Bach, the peer who led Labour’s opposition to the in the House of Lords has stepped down as shadow legal aid minister.
Bach has referred to the act as ‘outrageous legislation’ which will harm the ‘disabled, poor and vulnerable, and those least able to defend themselves’.
The act, which seeks to save £350m a year, removes legal aid for many areas of law, including most private family work, welfare benefits, housing, debt, employment and clinical negligence. Bach has condemned the act, calling the cuts ‘ludicrous’, ‘counter-productive’, ‘immoral’ and ‘wicked’.
Using social media site Twitter, Bach has voiced his opinions on the way in which the cuts have been made, saying: ‘If it was done at a time of plenty it would be bad enough, but to be done at a time of austerity is absolutely shocking.’ He states that the cuts benefit government, leaving people unable to get the help they need to challenge decisions made by the state.
Bach states that the British justice system, admired throughout the world, will have lost something ‘very precious’ when the act has passed, by denying its open citizens access to justice.
Some important changes were made to the bill, including powers to add areas of civil law back into legal aid, to retain legal aid for obstetric clinical negligence cases and to exempt mesothelioma victims from the reforms to conditional fee agreements.
In the House of Lords, the government lost 14 votes, making it the second biggest rebellion in parliamentary history. Bach commends every individual who fought to oppose the bill, in particular his colleague Lady Scotland, for her efforts to secure legal aid for more victims of domestic violence than the bill had originally covered.
Bach has also focused on a category of Liberal Democrats, who despite expressing concern at measures in the bill, voted with their coalition partners to push the act through. Frustrated by this, Bach stated that, ‘Crucial parts of this bill would not have gone through if the Lib Dems had voted as they talked. That’s not a bad definition of hypocrisy, is it?’ he said.
With the act bringing in removal of funding for social welfare law, Bach expresses concern about the future of law centres and Citizens Advice, saying, ‘Many will close down or take on different forms than they have now’, and has pledged his personal support to the non-profit sector, which he says is ‘entitled to do all it can to survive the next few years, until hopefully happier times come again’.
Similarly, Bach has recognised the work carried out by legal aid solicitors in private practice and acknowledges that the bill will make it a struggle for some to continue. ‘It’ll be a crying shame if they find themselves unable to do this work. They too must find ways to survive by cross subsidy or whatever.’
In office, Bach was consistent in his policy to protect legal aid for social welfare law. Whilst other funding was being reduced, funding for social welfare legal aid was increased under his tenure, which is an achievement he is very proud of. Bach states that he had a ‘sympathetic secretary of state’ in Jack Straw, who understood that it is essential to look after the legal rights of those at the bottom end of society even moreso during economic difficulty.
Bachs intention to leave the front bench began some time ago, he says, but he was adamant that he would not go before this bill made its way through parliament. Bach hopes that from now on, he can play some part in working with the not for profit sector and with legal aid solicitors, to see how they can survive for the next few years, as well as helping his party build up an enduring social welfare law policy.
Despite Bach confessing that he feels depressed by the post-LASPO situation, he remains hopeful for the future, stating ‘The time will come when we will restore social welfare law to the leading position it should be in our system of legal aid,’ he says, showing confidence in the ability of the Labour justice team. ‘It we have anything to do with it, social welfare law will come back and come back in a strong way.’