Debates between Richard Burgon and Jonathan Djanogly during the 2017-2019 Parliament

Criminal Legal Aid

Debate between Richard Burgon and Jonathan Djanogly
Tuesday 8th May 2018

(6 years, 7 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Richard Burgon Portrait Richard Burgon
- Hansard - -

I do agree. My hon. Friend makes a powerful point from his constituent’s experience. That is why I have been forced to bring this motion before the House to revoke the statutory instrument.

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Jonathan Djanogly (Huntingdon) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Richard Burgon Portrait Richard Burgon
- Hansard - -

I will make some progress if that is okay.

The crisis in legal aid goes much wider than the civil sector, with criminal cases affected too. As I said, that has the gravest of consequences. We now have more people representing themselves, even in the most serious of criminal cases—those tried at the Crown court. I want to draw the House’s attention to Ministry of Justice research published last week. The summary paper —only a summary—was published only after dogged pressure from journalists like Emily Dugan. It highlights judges’ concerns about people representing themselves, referring to

“unrepresented defendants not understanding how to present evidence about their case at hearings, how to prepare defence statements, or how to ask questions in court.”

The obvious result of this is that some judges and prosecutors felt that those who appeared in court without a lawyer were more likely to be found guilty. The legal system should not be skewed towards wealthier people. Everybody who wants it should have access to proper legal representation if charged with a criminal offence. Justice should be blind. It should also not be based on the depth of people’s pockets. We now have criminal barristers forced to take co-ordinated action in refusing to take up legal aid work because of changes to the Government’s funding scheme.

Labour Members are proud to have submitted this motion to annul the legislation changing the scheme through which criminal defence advocates are paid for carrying out publicly funded work in the Crown court—the so-called advocates graduated fee scheme. The motion has now won the backing of over 130 Members of Parliament. We welcome the fact that, albeit belatedly, time was given for a parliamentary vote to annul this legislation.



I hope that Conservative Members who understand and respect our legal system and the importance to justice of proper access to criminal defence will not vote along party lines tonight. I hope they will help to forge a consensus that helps the Government to rethink this flawed scheme.