Barristers and solicitors protest at CBA’s acceptance of legal aid deal
updated on 31 March 2014
The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) has struck a highly controversial deal with the government to suspend the planned legal aid cuts to Graduated Fee cases until after next year’s general election. The move has outraged many barristers and solicitors, who have accused the CBA of selfishly allowing the government to "divide and rule" the legal profession by accepting this temporary respite, which will ultimately not stop the destruction of the UK justice system in terms of its ability to carry out the purpose for which it was established -the public’s access to justice and fairness.
The CBA claims that the deal will safeguard the interests of 89% of criminal barristers for another year, particularly the work that has traditionally sustained junior barristers. However, many barristers have openly disagreed with the deal on which they were not originally consulted, including Brenda Campbell of Garden Court Chambers, who pointed out in a letter to the CBA's chair, Nigel Lithman QC, that the deal "serves only as a temporary reprieve to the bank balances of some amongst us". In response to the deluge of protest, Lithman has now confirmed that the CBA will call a full ballot of its members in due course, on the question, "Do you wish to continue no returns and days of action until all the cuts and reduction in contracts are abandoned?"
As reported by Legal Futures, the Criminal Law Solicitors Association accused the CBA of exploiting the "the unity of the profession to pursue self-interest in a separate secret negotiation". Meanwhile, Ian West, a member of the CBA's executive committee, resigned his position, saying that, "In my view it was entirely the wrong decision, short-sighted and unnecessary, and one I cannot stand, or defend. We have allowed [the justice secretary] Mr [Chris] Grayling, who was 'on the ropes', to divide and rule us…we will be throwing to the wolves our last remaining defence customers - the small high street firms for whom it is not economically viable to employ in-house advocates".
Charter Chambers, based in London, was one of the many sets to voice protest at the deal, stating: "While the concessions drawn from the ministry so far are welcome, the principle of the action - that of fair access to justice for all - cannot be safeguarded while solicitors are expected to litigate the most serious of criminal allegations in the face of unsustainable and dangerous cuts."
Defending the CBA's decision, Lithman said: "The response from solicitors tweeting has been understandably angry (in my case personally abusive) with some now threatening not to instruct the Bar in future. This is unfortunate. I hope many will be honest enough to acknowledge that had they been offered a deferral of their fee cuts until at least summer 2015, they would have taken the offer even if the Bar’s fee cuts remained. We have not abandoned the solicitors, we recognise their plight and will continue to support their campaign in all the practical ways that we can, for example we will not undertake their work during their days of action - but how can we deliver the outcome they want while they are not all fighting for it themselves?"
