LASPO has failed, the Bar Council tells the government

The Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) has achieved the opposite of what it was meant to when it was introduced five years ago, creating an unfair system that impedes the public’s access to justice and increases costs for both the justice system and other government departments, the Bar Council has said.

The Bar Council’s conclusion is part of the new research that it has submitted to the government as the latter prepares for its review of LASPO. The paper draws on the direct experiences of barristers and paints a picture of the post-LASPO justice system as both unfair and inefficient. The research includes the following findings:

• over 91% of respondents reported the number of individuals struggling to get access to legal advice and representation had increased or risen significantly;

• the same number of respondents reported a significant increase in the number of litigants in person (members of the public attempting to represent themselves in court) in family cases; and 77% of respondents reported a significant increase in the number of litigants in person in civil cases;

• Some 77% saw a significant delay in family court cases because of the increase in litigants in person;

• almost 25% of respondents have stopped doing legal aid work; and

• almost half (48%( of barristers surveyed do less legal aid work than before.

The Bar Council has also expressed grave concerns over whether the Ministry of Justice has gathered the necessary evidence to review the impact of LASPO effectively, including its knock-on effects in increasing costs for other government departments.

Andrew Walker QC, Chair of the Bar, said: “LASPO has failed. Whilst savings have been made to the Ministry of Justice’s budget spreadsheets, the government is still unable to show that those savings have not been diminished or extinguished, or even outweighed, by knock-on costs to other government departments, local authorities, the NHS and other publicly funded organisations.

“Nor do we accept that the reforms have discouraged unnecessary or adversarial litigation, or ensured that legal aid is targeted at those who need it, both of which the act was billed as seeking to achieve. If anything, LASPO has had the opposite effect, and has denied access to the justice system for individuals and families with genuine claims, just when they need it the most.”