Criminal Legal Aid

Debate between Mike Kane and Shailesh Vara

Friday 29th January 2016 Commons Chamber

[Mr Vara]

I refer the hon. Lady to the Chancellor’s autumn statement. He said he would be allowing £700 million-plus for the courts reform programme and there would be £1.3 billion for reforming the Prison Service. We in the MOJ are also consolidating our estates programme generally in terms of the offices and space we use. If the hon. Lady reads the statement, she will also be aware that my Department will be making 50% administration cuts by 2019-20.

[Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)]

The Justice team must be spinning like tops at the moment. Would the Minister care to estimate how many U-turns there have been since the new Secretary of State took his position?

[Mr Vara]

I will just mention that Labour’s 13 years of squandering taxpayers’ money, which has meant that we have to take these decisions, puts into total insignificance the very cheap jibe that the hon. Gentleman seeks to aim at this Government.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Mike Kane and Shailesh Vara

Tuesday 8th December 2015 Commons Chamber

[Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)]

4. What plans he has to reintroduce the residence test for legal aid.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Shailesh Vara)]

The Government are committed to the civil legal aid residence test and are planning the next steps following the success in the Court of Appeal. Individuals should have a strong connection to the UK to benefit from the civil legal aid scheme.

[Mike Kane]

The Minister was forced to admit last year that there were no precise figures for any savings from this policy area. The policy was also criticised by the Joint Committee on Human Rights and is subject to further legal scrutiny under the Supreme Court. Is it not time that the Minister gave up the ghost on this failed area of policy?

[Mr Vara]

Given the Court of Appeal judgment on 25 November, when it sided with the Government, we have no intention of giving up on this. It is important to remember that people who seek to have benefit from UK taxpayers should show some connection to this country. It is perfectly reasonable to expect people to have continuous 12-month residency in the UK before they benefit from UK taxpayers’ money for their legal aid.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Mike Kane and Shailesh Vara

Tuesday 11th November 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Vara]

We will certainly consider the way forward on that, but I will take no lectures from the hon. Gentleman on what we have done. This Government are putting provisions into the Deregulation Bill that will enable Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to provide information to legal representatives without a court order. We are liaising with the national cancer registration service and others to allow expedited access to medical notes. We also introduced the Mesothelioma Act 2014, which again benefits sufferers and victims. I will not take any lectures from him on that front.

[Mike Kane]

In the High Court case on the Government’s mesothelioma review, Mr Justice Davis ruled:

“No reasonable Lord Chancellor faced with the duty imposed on him by section 48 of the Act would have considered that the exercise in fact…fulfilled that duty.”

Will the Minister update the House on the Department’s response to that ruling?

[Mr Vara]

The hon. Gentleman was obviously concentrating on his question, so he did not hear my response. I said that we will consider the way forward, and we will proceed accordingly.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Mike Kane and Shailesh Vara

Tuesday 18th March 2014 Commons Chamber

[Mr Vara]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. I can assure my hon. Friend we are dealing with the backlog, which is going down.

[Mike Kane (Wythenshawe and Sale East) (Lab)]

7. What his future plans are for access to judicial review.

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Shailesh Vara)]

Judicial review is, and will remain, a vital means of holding public authorities to account, but the Government are concerned about the potential for unmeritorious judicial reviews being used to frustrate decisions that have been properly made, to generate publicity and to cause delay. Last month we announced a package of reforms designed to reduce the number of unmeritorious claims and speed up the process for those claimants who have arguable grounds and a genuine case to put. Most of our reforms will be given effect through the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill, which is currently in Committee—a Committee on which the hon. Gentleman is serving.

[Mike Kane]

Last week, the Public Bill Committee on the Criminal Justice and Courts Bill heard evidence from 17 leading experts in the field of judicial review. Is not the Minister just a little concerned that not one of them agrees with the Government’s position as set out in that Bill?

[Mr Vara]

I am afraid that if the hon. Gentleman looks carefully at that evidence, he will find that one of the very last people to speak—I am thinking of only one person who comes to mind—said that the reforms would be helpful for development. Judicial review is a very good system of holding the Executive to account, but it is our intention to ensure that unmeritorious claims are dealt with so that those that are genuine can go through to help the economy and the taxpayer and ensure, ultimately, that those who want jobs can get them.