|
Welcome to the new website of the Liberal Democrat Lawyers Association. I am confident that we can improve the quality of our services to our members through it, provide a forum for the exchange of views, and ensure that members are kept up to date, not only in relation to our activities, but in relation to policy and legal issues.
I wish, first of all, to record my thanks to Graham Colley, whose determination and hard work have borne fruit in this website. It provides us with many more functions than the previous website and we are in his debt.Associations such as ours rely heavily upon the time and goodwill of the membership. My thanks also go to the Committee for their continuing support.
We have now had a share of government, via the coalition, for over a year.When I read the coalition agreement, I was very pleased to see the number of policies which would warm the heart of any LibDem lawyer: commitments to human rights; to dealing with the pernicious control orders and extended detention without trial; to the contents of the Freedom Bill and constitutional reform; and to a referendum on AV.
As we pointed out in our motion to the party ' s Spring Conference, rights are all very interesting, but they must be enforceable to be of any use.It was a red letter day for the Association, as a SAO of the party, to propose a motion on legal aid and access to justice which was passed by the Conference with only one vote against.It is extremely unusual to find such ( virtual ) unanimity for a policy motion.This was not a motion which squeezed through by the skin of its teeth, but one which had overwhelming support in the party.As such, it was not ( and remains not ) unreasonable to see significant efforts put into securing as much of it as possible as government policy.
The text of the motion, as passed, is reproducedbelow.It can be seen that it was not just a motion which opposed any cuts, but one which contained positive suggestions as to how to deal with the funding problems.
It has to be said that the proposed Act, the LEGAL AID, SENTENCING AND PUNISHMENT OF OFFENDERS BILL has been, from many points of view, a profound disappointment, and has caused much anger amongst our membership.Of course, we recognise ( as did the motion ) the financial mess bequeathed by new Labour ( which turned out to be old Labour after all ).But, financial pressures are no excuse for a Bill which simply trots out more of the failed policies of the MoJ and the LSC.Neither of these organisations is even remotely fit for purpose.The LSC has, time and time again, been criticised by select committee after select committee, for its incompetence, for its inability to plan properly.I do not know of any professional who has had to deal with it, whether at a policy level, where its lack of regard for the truth is notorious, or at an individual level ,where its ludicrous bureaucratic procedures, transparently obstructive attitude, and administrative incompetence leave practitioners in despair, who has any confidence in it at all.The number of bureaucrats administering legal aid provision grows remorselessly, whilst the standard of service plumbs new depths. The shininess of the website is only matched by the shabbiness of the LSCs performance.
One might have hoped that the fact that they had got it wrong time and time again would have led a new government to look again at the whole thrust of policy.Simply more cuts, with the same sad old excuses trotted out, will lead to an inevitable continued decline in the quality and reach of publicly funded law.The only piece of good news on funding, and it may be no more than a palliative, was the sudden announcement of some money for CABs.
There is scope for finding alternative funding to go towards the cost of criminal law.We suggested some in the motion.There is scope for significant savings in the prison budget.Ken Clarke ' s proposals to reduce the prison population were, substantially, entirely sensible.We cannot continue to waste tens of millions of pounds in locking people up who are either in need of remedial treatment in the community, or medical treatment in relation to drug use.The proportion of the prison population represented by former servicemen is an appalling reflection upon the way in which we deal with ex-servicemen back in civilian life.It is sad that the government ran scared from the knee-jerk reaction of the right wing press, which has dominated political debate for far too long.
How can the parliamentary party and the government be held to account?How can the Partys policies be fed into the governments programme?What should be done when the government adopts a policy in stark opposition to that of the Party?
These are serious issues, central to the purpose and cohesiveness of the party. Our Fringe Debate will examine exactly these issues.It will be at Jurys Inn at 6.15 on Sunday 18th September.Tom Brake M.P. will be one of the speakers.Given the topic, I expect that the room will be packed out and I urge members to attend early.
The Associations Annual Conference was due to take place in April, but has had to be rescheduled for 24-25 September.I appreciate that this is the weekend after the Party Conference, but it was the only possible alternative.The theme will be Health and the Law.The areas to be examined will include: assisted suicide; patients rights and how to enforce them; and how to deal with medical negligence.There is an impressive list of speakers and I urge you to attend.Venue: Jesus College Oxford.Details appear elsewhere on the website.
In my next newsletter, I expect to announce new plans for the Legal Democrat.
Please note the date for the next annual dinner:19th January, 2012, at the House of Lords.
Finally, the Association is only as strong as its members.If you know of anyone who has an interest in the law and is a LibDem, please encourage them to join the Association.
Alistair
| 