The Government’s Plans on Legal Aid and Conditional Fees

Abstract

Radical proposals for the reform of legal aid were brought forward by Lord Mackay, Lord Chancellor in the then Conservative Government, in a Green Paper published in May 19951 and then a White Paper published in June 1996.2 Lord Mackay's proposals were subjected to fierce criticism by lawyers and non-lawyers alike.3 Lord Irvine of Lairg, writing as Shadow Lord Chancellor, castigated them.4 In particular, he rejected Lord Mackay's proposed cap on legal aid expenditure,5 though on the other hand, he said that there would be no more money for legal aid under a future Labour Government. He did not explain how this circle would be squared. Lord Irvine's first pronouncement as Lord Chancellor on his policy with regard to legal aid was in his speech to the Law Society's annual conference in Cardiff on 18 October 1997. It appeared from his speech that his plans for legal aid were even more radical and controversial than anything proposed by Lord Mackay. He said that conditional fee agreements (CFAs) would be extended to all money and damages actions and that legal aid for all such claims would be abolished. This proposal produced consternation and a storm of criticism. It was attacked by, inter alia, the Bar Council, the Law Society, the National Consumer Council, the Consumers' Association, Shelter,the Child Poverty Action Group, JUSTICE, the Legal Action Group, the Law Centres Federation, the National Association of Citizens' Advice Bureaux and the Advice Services Alliance.6 They were also savaged by Edward Gamier, the Conservative Front Bench spokesman, in a powerful hour-long critique in the House of Commons debate on the proposals.7 This battering had some result.8 On 5 March 1998 Lord Irvine published a Consultation Paper Access to Justice with Conditional Fees9 in which the Government outlined those of its proposals on legal aid that it thought could be