Clause 8.—(FUNCTIONS OF LAW SOCIETY.) (Hansard, 25 May 1949)

§ The Attorney-General
I beg to move, in page 9, line 22, after "Society," to insert "but who are barristers or solicitors."
This is a drafting Amendment which makes it clear that the persons to be appointed to the committees administering legal aid will be qualified barristers or solicitors.

§ Mr. Royle (Salford, West)
I cannot agree with my right hon. and learned Friend that this is a drafting Amendment. Upstairs we discussed some other aspects of this subject and although as a non-lawyer I speak with bated breath on a Bill of this kind, I feel that the point of view of the non-lawyer ought to be put. In order to make myself clear, I will read the original subsection: 1357 Any committee set up as aforesaid may include persons who are not members of the Law Society.… If my memory serves me aright, my hon. and learned Friend the Member for North Aberdeen (Mr. Hector Hughes) moved an Amendment upstairs to delete the word "may" and to insert the word "shall." What we had in mind upstairs would be completely ruled out if the Amendment just moved were accepted. I suggest that while the subsection stands as it is, there is an opportunity for people who are not lawyers to be represented on those committees, but this Amendment would mean that only lawyers can sit on committees which are to give legal advice and assistance to prospective litigants.
I want briefly to express the view which some of us expressed upstairs, that it would be desirable to have on these committees people who were not members of the profession in either branch. I envisage people who have had experience of the administration of the law in a magisterial capacity. I envisage people who are clerks to local justices who may not be lawyers by examination. Amongst those people are men and women of tremendous experience and knowledge in the administration of the law, and they should be represented on the committees.
Good as this Bill is, it is becoming a sew-up between two branches of the legal profession. When it is a question of people coming for aid and advice in times of distress and difficulty, it would be advantageous to have someone on the committee who understood things from more than a purely legal point of view. If this Amendment is carried, all that will be left to the non-lawyer is what is provided in Clause 13, namely, the establishment of an advisory committee which will be appointed ultimately by the Lord Chancellor. This would probably mean that in the whole of our land only one or two people would have any part in the administration of this Measure who are not connected directly with the legal profession.
Whilst I know that at this stage of the Bill it is difficult to persuade my right hon. and learned Friend to provide for what I am now advocating, or to get him to withdraw his Amendment, and whilst I would never think of asking the House 1358 to divide on the Report stage on such a matter, I would remind you, Sir, that we had a Division on it in the Committee. I sincerely hope that before this Bill is disposed of—in another place—perhaps something will be done to ensure that people who are not lawyers may take a fairly prominent part in the administration of this important Measure.

§ The Attorney-General
I think that perhaps I did mislead the House a little in saying that this is a drafting Amendment. It is, perhaps, a little more than that, in the sense that it makes the Bill clearly embody what was at all times to the knowledge of the House and the Committee upstairs the intention of the Bill. It is perhaps a little doubtful whether the Clause as drafted fulfilled that intention.
The intention of the Bill—and this was made clear on Second Reading and in Committee—was that these committees, which are to be established to operate the legal aid scheme, should be professional committees. I agree with my hon. Friend the Member for West Salford (Mr. Royle) that it is most desirable that we should have on these committees, to use his phrase, "people who understand things." It is always desirable to have on committees people who understand things, and the kind of people who understand particular things depends on the things to be understood. These committees have to understand legal matters; that is all. They are not concerned with matters of a non-legal character. They are concerned simply with the question whether or not an applicant who comes before them for assistance has a prima facie case which ought to be litigated. The committee which decides that will consist of three, or at the most five, people; they will deal with it quite informally, and as lawyers who are being consulted by a client.
When I want legal advice, I do not go to lay persons. I go to a solicitor, and I ask him to guide me and assist me with his great knowledge. If he insisted before giving me his advice on calling in some social worker or some outside person I should probably be exceedingly annoyed about it. I see no reason why a person who is unable to employ his own solicitor and pay for him, but has to seek to take legal advice under the provisions of this scheme, should have lay people 1359 inflicted upon him when he wants to obtain legal advice and assistance. Nor do I see any possible way in which lay members could assist on these committees. These committees will have to decide whether the would-be litigant has a good case, whether he has got an action for negligence against a motorist, whether he has got a right of action against a shopkeeper, or whether he has got some other form of action. What possible assistance would it be to him or to the working of this scheme to have a motorist or a shopkeeper or a local councillor sitting on committees whose sole function was to advise on the legal rights of the would-be litigant?
Accordingly, while appreciating the point which has been made with, if I may say so, great persistence by my hon. Friend the Member for West Salford, we must maintain the position that these committees are legal committees which will deal with litigants or would-be litigants in exactly the same way as their own lawyers would and on which it would be quite inappropriate to introduce lay representation.

§ The Attorney-General
I beg to move, in page 9, line 31, at the end, to insert: of the Council of the Law Society. This, I think, is a drafting Amendment. It makes it clear that the committee to make or to vary the legal aid scheme shall be set up by the Law Society under the existing powers of the Solicitors Act.

§ The Attorney-General
I beg to move, in page 9, line 32, to leave out from "shall," to the end of line 33, and to insert: (except during any vacancy) include not less than three persons nominated by the General Council of the Bar and a person nominated by the Lord Chancellor. This Amendment gives effect to the arrangement which hag been reached between the Bar Council and the Law Society that three members of the Bar shall be appointed to the scheme-making committee, and it emphasises the joint responsibility of both branches of the profession in connection with this matter.

§ Mr. Joynson-Hicks
I should like to ask the Attorney-General a question. I do not quite follow how this will work out in practice. As I read the Clause as it will finally be amended, it will state: The functions of the Law Society in making or varying any scheme under this section shall be performed by a committee whose members shall"— and now I paraphrase—include not less than three members of the Bar Council. I do not quite follow how a committee consisting of members of the Council of the Law Society can include persons on the other side of the profession, even though nominated by the Lord Chancellor. I feel that I have probably misread the matter somewhere, but if I have, possibly others will do so as well.

§ Mr. Royle
Before we part with this Amendment, I should very much like to congratulate my right hon. and learned Friend and the hon. and learned Member for Daventry (Mr. Manningham-Buller) on having solved their difficulties as to whether the figures should be three or two in this case.

§ Mr. Gallacher (Fife, West)
If my hon. Friend the Member for West Salford (Mr. Royle) agrees, may I ask the Attorney-General if he would consider making a change so that this provision would read: not less than three persons nominated by the General Council of the Trades Union Congress"? That would be a much more democratic body.

§ The Attorney-General
I beg to move, in page 10, line 9, after "operation," to insert "and finance."
Perhaps at the same time I may deal with the two Amendments in page 14, lines 7 and 8. These all deal with similar matters. They are designed to carry out an undertaking which I gave in Committee that the annual report which the Law Society will make to the Lord Chancellor, and which has to be laid before Parliament, shall be accompanied, when it is laid, by the report which the Lord Chancellor's Advisory Committee will make to him upon the Law Society's report, and also that it shall deal with the financial position of the scheme so that Parliament will be able to discuss 1361 the whole matter of the working of the scheme and will have a proper appreciation of how the scheme is operating in regard to finances and other matters without waiting for the report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General on the purely financial aspects.

§ Mr. Manningham-Buller
I should like to express my thanks to the right hon. and learned Gentleman for tabling these Amendments. I think they meet a rather important point, and I hope that perhaps in other instances this procedure may serve as a precedent. It is useful to get before Parliament a report coupled with a financial statement earlier than we often do now with regard to some other matters about which, if I said anything now, I should certainly be out of Order.