All 2 Debates between Sarah Wollaston and Jonathan Djanogly

Courts Service Estate

Debate between Sarah Wollaston and Jonathan Djanogly
Tuesday 14th December 2010

(13 years, 11 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The court at Goole is closing not least because of low utilisation, but when we looked at the responses to the consultation, we realised that the travel arrangements of people using public transport were different from those of people using private transport, and we think that it will be possible to use not only Beverley but Hull. That was one good outcome of the consultation.

Sarah Wollaston Portrait Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

My hon. Friend has confirmed that the work of Totnes magistrates court is to be relocated. I know he is aware that the building provides an useful facility for the coroner and those who assist him in his work, such as Victim Support, and also that the citizens advice bureau has worked extensively on a plan to share the court building. Can he assure us that this important local asset will be put to its best local use by those valuable organisations?

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend has raised an important point. I hope that the answer is yes, and if I can be of assistance she should get in touch with me to that end. Courts will be empty, and there may be local authorities or other local agencies that could make use of them. Now that we have a final list of the courts that will close, that process can begin.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Sarah Wollaston and Jonathan Djanogly
Tuesday 23rd November 2010

(13 years, 12 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Sarah Wollaston Portrait Dr Sarah Wollaston (Totnes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

15. What assessment he has made of the effects on the NHS of removing clinical negligence from the scope of legal aid.

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Mr Jonathan Djanogly)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Clinical negligence cases against the NHS are funded approximately 50:50 between legal aid and no win, no fee agreements with lawyers. We will be interested to understand through our consultation the specific impact on the NHS of the removal of clinical negligence cases from the scope of legal aid, which should save some £17 million to legal aid. However, we also estimate that our proposals to reform no win, no fee conditional fee agreements will save around £50 million each year to the NHS in reduced legal costs.

Sarah Wollaston Portrait Dr Wollaston
- Hansard - -

Could reducing legal aid for clinical negligence lead to an upsurge in no win, no fee deals and an increase in the compensation culture?

Jonathan Djanogly Portrait Mr Djanogly
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My hon. Friend is right to point out that changes in one area can have knock-on implications in another area. It is important to point out that that is precisely why we put out the legal aid consultation document on the same day as Sir Rupert Jackson’s proposals on no win, no fee agreements. The two can be weighed up together and the consultation will therefore take a holistic approach.