§ 8. Mr. Marloweasked the Attorney-General upon what date the decision was taken to postpone the operation of parts of the Legal Aid and Advice Act, 1949; what steps had been taken at that date to implement the Act; and what expenditure had been then incurred.
§ The Attorney-General (Sir Hartley Shawcross)The decision to postpone the operation of certain parts of the Legal Aid and Advice Act, 1949, was taken at the discussions leading to the Prime Minister's statement of 24th October. At the time of the decision to postpone the operation of certain parts of the Legal Aid and Advice Act, 1949, as the hon. and learned Member will know, no date had yet been appointed for the coming 1659 into operation of the whole Act. The Law Society was, however, engaged on the administrative and planning functions laid down in Sections 8 to 11, in preparing the detailed scheme with a view to its submission to and approval by my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor and expenditure of £8,500 had been incurred.
§ Mr. MarloweDoes the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that this decision was made when he was in America? Can he tell the House whether he was consulted on the matter before the decision was arrived at?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI do not think it is usual to disclose what Members of the Government were consulted in connection with a decision for which the Government are collectively responsible.
§ Mr. Quintin HoggWill the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell us, as soon as possible, what parts of the scheme are in fact postponed?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI will do so as soon as possible.
§ 9. Mr. Marloweasked the Attorney-General if he will make a further statement explaining in lay language the effect of the decision to postpone the operation of parts of the Legal Aid and Advice Act, 1949; and which benefits to the poor litigant will be retained and which postponed.
§ The Attorney-GeneralThe possibility of replying to the hon. Member for Oxford (Mr. Hogg) now arises.
People whose means are within the limits laid down by the Act will get legal aid under its provisions in proceedings in the High Court and Court of Appeal, and in the county court where a case is transferred there from the High Court. Solicitors and counsel in those cases will be remunerated under the provisions of the Act.
The provisions of the Act in regard to legal aid in the criminal courts and in the county court and by way of appeal to the Privy Council and the House of Lords will be deferred, as well as those in regard to legal advice, but existing arrangements covering aid under the Poor Prisoners' Defence Act and appeals in formâ pauperis to the Privy Council and the House of Lords will continue.
§ Mr. MarloweDoes that mean that there are now a number of instances in which a poor litigant will not get assistance whereas he would have had assistance had the Act been brought into operation on the intended date? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that in future, where any litigant is under a disability for want of means, that difficulty will not be the responsibility of the lawyers, but purely the fault of His Majesty's Government in mishandling our affairs?
§ Mr. Sydney SilvermanWill my right hon. and learned Friend say what was the purpose of postponing the assistance in the case of House of Lords appeals, inasmuch as those appeals are always few in number and therefore could not have been very expensive, and also in view of the fact that in those cases alone there could be no appeal to the House of Lords unless the Court of Appeal, or the House of Lords, have certified that a question of public importance is involved?
§ The Attorney-GeneralIt was thought that the additional expenditure involved in altering the present proceedings would not be justified in view of the financial stringency of the country and in view of the fact that alternative procedure would still remain available.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesIs it the intention to appeal to the generosity and the patriotism of the legal profession to accept no fees in this respect until the crisis is over?
§ The Attorney-GeneralIt is certainly my hope that the voluntary arrangements which have hitherto existed, and to which both branches of the legal profession have in the past made most valuable contributions, will continue until the rest of the Act is brought into operation.
§ Major Sir David Maxwell FyfeWill the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the House what provision the Government are making for the Services, because I understand that the present scheme is coming to an end in July, and I think the right hon. and learned Gentleman will agree that it is important that some provision should be made for their legal assistance?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI should like to see that Question on the Order Paper.
§ Mr. S. SilvermanWhen my right hon. and learned Friend says that there is an alternative procedure in the case of House of Lords appeals, is he referring to the fact that a great deal of the professional work is done free under poor persons' rules, and will that continue? Is he not also aware that in the case of a House of Lords appeal the principal expense is the high cost of printing, for the meeting of which there is no procedure available? Is that not a great hardship which this scheme would have prevented, and which it would not have cost much to remove?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI must agree with my hon. Friend that the deferment of this part of the scheme, as indeed of the rest of the scheme, is a matter of great regret to the legal profession and the Government and I am sure to the public.