Michael McCann

In principle, I support the reform of the EU scheme which the Commission first proposed in January 2014. However, work on this dossier has become bogged down on a number of important issues, including Member State concerns about the correct legal basis for the proposals, the nature of their objectives and scope, and the main financial provisions. I therefore support the Commission’s decision to review it. Defra will engage constructively with this process. In the meantime, the existing arrangements for school schemes – agreed during CAP reform and set out in Regulation (EU) No 1308/2103 – will continue to apply. Under the EU scheme, UK school children benefit from subsidies worth approximately £3.5 million a year.

In addition to the EU subsidy scheme, all pre-school children in England, Scotland and Wales who are under 5 and in day care are eligible for free milk under our domestic nursery milk scheme. The total cost of the scheme was £61 million in 2012-13.

The development of a national strategy to implement the existing, long-established EU School Milk Scheme is not expected to involve substantive changes of policy or of practice. On this basis, a formal consultation is not envisaged. However, Defra officials are engaging with a range of stakeholders in the interests of transparency and to set out our approach. The EU Commission has proposed a more substantial overhaul of the scheme which, if agreed, would take effect from 2016 onwards. The Department intends to consult on this wider process although no timescale has yet been established.

The development of a national strategy to implement the existing, long-established EU School Milk Scheme is not expected to involve substantive changes of policy or of practice. On this basis, a formal consultation is not envisaged. However, Defra officials are engaging with a range of stakeholders in the interests of transparency and to set out our approach. The EU Commission has proposed a more substantial overhaul of the scheme which, if agreed, would take effect from 2016 onwards. The Department intends to consult on this wider process although no timescale has yet been established.

The Department does not centrally record information about the identity of claimants' representatives or information relating to claimants' funding arrangements. This information could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

The Department does not centrally record information about the identity of claimants' representatives or information relating to claimants' funding arrangements. This information could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

The Home Office does not keep a central record of which cases brought against
it are legally aided, or of the law firms that represent litigants.

The Home Office does not keep a central record of which cases brought against
it are legally aided, or of the law firms that represent litigants.

It is not possible to give a definitive answer to this question, since in a number of cases where there were multiple issues before it, the Court found for the claimant on some issues and for the defendant on others.

All of the judicial review proceedings relating to Iraq and Afghanistan brought by the firm Public Interest Lawyers (PIL) in the last ten years have been publicly funded through the legal aid budget. According to available records PIL has represented approximately 200 clients in issued judicial review proceedings. It is not possible to provide a meaningful annual breakdown as some claims made in one year have had further claimants joined to them in subsequent years.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) cannot separately identify legal aid cases against the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office. Opponents are not systematically recorded against Legal Aid cases.

The net payments to Public Interest Lawyers over the past ten tears were:

These payments cover all work undertaken by the firm under legal aid. The payments made will be offset by recoupment on successful cases where the opponent has paid the costs.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) cannot separately identify legal aid cases against the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office. Opponents are not systematically recorded against Legal Aid cases.

The net payments to Public Interest Lawyers over the past ten tears were:

These payments cover all work undertaken by the firm under legal aid. The payments made will be offset by recoupment on successful cases where the opponent has paid the costs.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) cannot separately identify legal aid cases against the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office. Opponents are not systematically recorded against Legal Aid cases.

The net payments to Public Interest Lawyers over the past ten tears were:

These payments cover all work undertaken by the firm under legal aid. The payments made will be offset by recoupment on successful cases where the opponent has paid the costs.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) cannot separately identify legal aid cases against the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office. Opponents are not systematically recorded against Legal Aid cases.

The net payments to Public Interest Lawyers over the past ten tears were:

These payments cover all work undertaken by the firm under legal aid. The payments made will be offset by recoupment on successful cases where the opponent has paid the costs.

The Legal Aid Agency (LAA) cannot separately identify legal aid cases against the Department for Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Defence and the Home Office. Opponents are not systematically recorded against Legal Aid cases.

The net payments to Public Interest Lawyers over the past ten tears were:

These payments cover all work undertaken by the firm under legal aid. The payments made will be offset by recoupment on successful cases where the opponent has paid the costs.