LGFS Consultation Response

The Ministry of Justice is consulting on proposed changes to the Litigators Graduated Fee Scheme, which solicitors conducting legally aided criminal work.  The proposals amount to massive and unsustainable cuts and are firmly opposed by the Haldane Society.

The Haldane Society has provided a detailed response to the consultation. 

Download our response here, or read it below.

AGFS Consultation Response

The Ministry of Justice is consulting on proposed changes to the Advocates Graduated Fee Scheme, which pays barristers and solicitor-advocates to conduct legal aid work in the Crown Court.

The Haldane Society has provided a detailed response to the consultation.  We oppose the proposed scheme which we believe, despite the Ministry of Justice's claim, represents a significant cut to fees.

Download our response here, or read it below.

Submission to the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women

The UN Special Rapporteur on Violence Against Women recently sought submissions from bodies across the globe dealing with the need for a separate legally binding treaty on violence against women with its separate monitoring body. 

The Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers and the Haldane Feminist Lawyers made detailed submissions which should assist the Special Rapporteur in determining how to proceed.

Download the submission.

Labour Legal Aid Review

The Labour Party is currently undertaking the Bach Review into legal aid.  The submission below was prepared by the Haldane Society in response to a request for submissions.

The submission advocates for the restoration of the areas of the funding affected by years of cuts, notes the terrible impact on individuals of the removal of legal aid, and highlights the position of those at the junior end of the profession who are no longer able to make ends meet because of the cuts.

Click here to download the submission.



Haldane Response to Delivering Civil Justice in an Age of Austerity

The Haldane Society has responded to Justice's consultation on "Delivering Civil Justice in an Age of Austerity".

Whilst we understand that the purpose of the working party’s consultation is to find cheaper ways of delivering justice, we do not agree with the current prevailing economic philosophy that severe cuts in public services need to be made. We continue to argue that legal aid should be expanded, not cut. When the legal aid scheme was first introduced, in 1949, around 80% of the population was financially eligible for legal aid in comparison with less than a third today. We believe that financial eligibility should return to the levels that it was in 1949. The costs of this could be recouped through taxation.

Download the response (pdf).

Read More

NEW Petition to Save Legal Aid

The Justice Alliance has launched a new petition calling on David Cameron to halt the Transforming Legal Aid proposals accompanied by the following message:

As opposition to the legal aid cuts grows from diverse sections of society, now is the time to put down a marker. We need to send a strong and swift message to the Government, we need to show the widespread support for legal aid and we need to defend access to justice.

Please sign this petition http://chn.ge/1dWvURV and join with Joanna Lumley, the first signatory, who campaigned to secure rights for the Gurkhas, themselves reliant on legal aid. If Grayling has his way innocent people will be wrongly jailed, the state will enjoy immunity for unlawful acts, victims of trafficking and domestic violence will be left without support. Don't let that happen. Join the fight for legal aid.

Please share this petition widely and encourage others to sign it. It has reached nearly 5,000 signatories since it opened on Friday morning.

Judicial Review Consultation Response

The Haldane Society has responded to the Ministry of Justice's consultation on "reform" of judicial review.  The reform proposals would see access to judicial review massively restricted, thereby impacting on the ability of individuals to hold the government to account through the courts.  The proposals, if brought into law, would:

  • Reduce the time limit for judicial review, making it almost impossible for individuals, but not large corporations, to comply with the requirements in time;
  • Limit access to judicial review by restricting oral renewal hearings, allowing the oral rehearing of an application which was rejected on the papers.
  • Increase fees and so remove the ability of almost every ordinary person to apply for judicial review.

Download the Consultation Response