This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/01/justice-system-turned-into-profit-plc

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Our justice system is being turned into Profit & Growth plc Our justice system is being turned into Profit & Growth plc
(6 months later)
In Chris Grayling, we have a lord chancellor so uniquely unqualified for his position that even that great legal also-ran Jack Straw glitters by comparison. But neither naivety nor cheery optimism accounts for his plan to put the work of the entire independent criminal bar and most criminal solicitors into the hands of companies whose inexperience of conducting criminal cases rivals his own. Grayling sees in the legal aid budget, which is slashed again today, the opportunity to divert public funds into the hands of giant, party-donor-sized corporations, thereby reducing the quality of service provided by the criminal justice system to the point of meaninglessness.In Chris Grayling, we have a lord chancellor so uniquely unqualified for his position that even that great legal also-ran Jack Straw glitters by comparison. But neither naivety nor cheery optimism accounts for his plan to put the work of the entire independent criminal bar and most criminal solicitors into the hands of companies whose inexperience of conducting criminal cases rivals his own. Grayling sees in the legal aid budget, which is slashed again today, the opportunity to divert public funds into the hands of giant, party-donor-sized corporations, thereby reducing the quality of service provided by the criminal justice system to the point of meaninglessness.
Been accused of a crime? You'll need someone to represent you. Why not go to the Co-op? Too provincial and northern for you? How about someone a little more international, like G4S? Or, for the rugged individualist, Eddie Stobart? This, my friend, is Chris Grayling's vision for the future of publicly funded legal representation.Been accused of a crime? You'll need someone to represent you. Why not go to the Co-op? Too provincial and northern for you? How about someone a little more international, like G4S? Or, for the rugged individualist, Eddie Stobart? This, my friend, is Chris Grayling's vision for the future of publicly funded legal representation.
It goes by the bitter misnomer of best value tendering. Naturally, this won't lend itself to sustaining the current system of small, high-quality, specialist solicitors, and the high-quality, specialist barristers to whom they refer much of their court work. Ministry of Justice contracts will be awarded on the basis of price, not relevant experience. Criminal barristers will be driven from self-employment to work in-house. Lawyers will become unit-shifters, with no more investment in justice than the server at Costa Coffee has in your flat white.It goes by the bitter misnomer of best value tendering. Naturally, this won't lend itself to sustaining the current system of small, high-quality, specialist solicitors, and the high-quality, specialist barristers to whom they refer much of their court work. Ministry of Justice contracts will be awarded on the basis of price, not relevant experience. Criminal barristers will be driven from self-employment to work in-house. Lawyers will become unit-shifters, with no more investment in justice than the server at Costa Coffee has in your flat white.
Under the current system, if you need representation but cannot afford it, you are entitled to be represented both by a solicitor and an advocate (generally, but not invariably, a barrister). Your advocate will be paid a standard fee, determined by the category of your case. Overwhelmingly, this will not be by the hour. I repeat, advocates are not paid by the hour.Nonetheless, you can expect to put in whatever hours it takes to do justice to your case. Overwhelmingly, independent barristers do precisely that, motivated by an emulsion of professional pride and insomniac horror at the prospect of contributing, even by momentary omission, to a miscarriage of justice. So what happens when you have no choice but to seek representation at Profit & Growth plc? Your advocate is now employed on contractual terms. Her clock stops at six. If your case demands more than that, tough.Under the current system, if you need representation but cannot afford it, you are entitled to be represented both by a solicitor and an advocate (generally, but not invariably, a barrister). Your advocate will be paid a standard fee, determined by the category of your case. Overwhelmingly, this will not be by the hour. I repeat, advocates are not paid by the hour.Nonetheless, you can expect to put in whatever hours it takes to do justice to your case. Overwhelmingly, independent barristers do precisely that, motivated by an emulsion of professional pride and insomniac horror at the prospect of contributing, even by momentary omission, to a miscarriage of justice. So what happens when you have no choice but to seek representation at Profit & Growth plc? Your advocate is now employed on contractual terms. Her clock stops at six. If your case demands more than that, tough.
But Grayling can't have "best value tendering" without something called Qasa (Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates). While the Human Rights Act remains, he must appear to honour the obligation to provide you with an appropriately qualified advocate.But Grayling can't have "best value tendering" without something called Qasa (Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates). While the Human Rights Act remains, he must appear to honour the obligation to provide you with an appropriately qualified advocate.
At first glance, Qasa seems unobjectionable, grading advocates as suitable for work from level 1 in the magistrates' court to level 4 in cases requiring the greatest skill. Resistance to it will be characterised as a fear of scrutiny; a compelling argument if we didn't conduct our work in public.At first glance, Qasa seems unobjectionable, grading advocates as suitable for work from level 1 in the magistrates' court to level 4 in cases requiring the greatest skill. Resistance to it will be characterised as a fear of scrutiny; a compelling argument if we didn't conduct our work in public.
Our resistance is to the incorporation of mechanisms designed to damage a client's best interests. An ungraded category of "plea only" advocates will mean that you can be advised on whether to plead guilty or not by someone who can only conduct your case if you plead guilty. Think, just for a moment, of the implications of that.Our resistance is to the incorporation of mechanisms designed to damage a client's best interests. An ungraded category of "plea only" advocates will mean that you can be advised on whether to plead guilty or not by someone who can only conduct your case if you plead guilty. Think, just for a moment, of the implications of that.
Cases will be assigned a Qasa grade by the solicitor, but this will be negotiable between the solicitor and the advocate. How prominent will your interests be in your solicitor's choice between downgrading the category of your case to keep the advocate's fees in-house, or instructing someone of the appropriate grade and losing those fees?Cases will be assigned a Qasa grade by the solicitor, but this will be negotiable between the solicitor and the advocate. How prominent will your interests be in your solicitor's choice between downgrading the category of your case to keep the advocate's fees in-house, or instructing someone of the appropriate grade and losing those fees?
Do not be misled by claims that Grayling is concerned with either cost or public confidence; the legal aid budget is, relatively, tiny; cuts are not necessary, nor would they be achieved by his plans – lawyers and judges agree that any projected savings will be illusory, offset by the costs of implementing the proposals; and public confidence could be easily rebuilt by even the briefest moment of uncharacteristic honesty, courage or integrity on the part of the Ministry of Justice about our legal system.Do not be misled by claims that Grayling is concerned with either cost or public confidence; the legal aid budget is, relatively, tiny; cuts are not necessary, nor would they be achieved by his plans – lawyers and judges agree that any projected savings will be illusory, offset by the costs of implementing the proposals; and public confidence could be easily rebuilt by even the briefest moment of uncharacteristic honesty, courage or integrity on the part of the Ministry of Justice about our legal system.
Qasa is ready to roll out in September. All concerned know the reality – that it provides a fig leaf for Grayling's priapic intentions towards the criminal justice system. If you don't sign up to Qasa, you can't practise as an advocate. You are, effectively, locked out. And barristers are, en masse, refusing. Even if all the criminal solicitors practising as advocates sign up, there will simply not be enough at the upper end to cover all the work. The system will shudder to a halt. Tory "attack dog" Grayling has refused, thus far, to speak to Michael Turner QC, the head of the Criminal Bar Association. He may yet be forced to.Qasa is ready to roll out in September. All concerned know the reality – that it provides a fig leaf for Grayling's priapic intentions towards the criminal justice system. If you don't sign up to Qasa, you can't practise as an advocate. You are, effectively, locked out. And barristers are, en masse, refusing. Even if all the criminal solicitors practising as advocates sign up, there will simply not be enough at the upper end to cover all the work. The system will shudder to a halt. Tory "attack dog" Grayling has refused, thus far, to speak to Michael Turner QC, the head of the Criminal Bar Association. He may yet be forced to.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.