Legal aid slashed with no thought for consequences, MoJ chief admits
“The Government was explicit it needed to make these changes swiftly"
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.The legal aid bill is being slashed by £300m without research into the potential effect of the cuts, the most senior civil servant at the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has admitted.
Under the cuts pushed through by the Justice Secretary Chris Grayling, many family, debt, housing and employment cases no longer qualify for legal aid. He says he has no alternative but to make substantial savings from the £2bn legal aid bill.
Ursula Brennan, the MoJ’s permanent secretary, told MPs that the ministry had not assessed the impact of the cuts because of the haste with which the axe had been wielded.
“The Government was explicit it needed to make these changes swiftly. It was not possible to do research about the current regime,” she told the Commons public accounts committee (PAC).
“The piece of evidence that was overwhelming was the level of spending. The evidence required was that government said we wish to cut the legal aid bill.”
But Margaret Hodge, the PAC chairman, tore into the MoJ for “endemic failure” and said Ms Brennan should have blocked the changes without a proper assessment of their impact.
Ms Hodge told her: “The thing that really distressed me is how you embarked on this with so little evidence. When you were changing the rules you had no idea the impact it would have.”
The National Audit Office has criticised the MoJ for not considering the effect of such rapid cuts on other areas of public spending.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments