§ 44. Mr. Bellengerasked the Attorney-General whether he is aware of the remarks of Mr. Justice Paull in the case Rodgers v. British Transport Commission on the possibility of legal aid being used for blackmail purposes; and what steps he proposes to take to ensure that counsel's opinion is obtained before legal aid certificates are granted.
§ The Attorney-GeneralI have seen a newspaper report of the judge's remarks. The legal aid committees frequently grant certificates limited to enabling the assisted person to obtain counsel's opinion. To take counsel's opinion in every case would add greatly to the delays and expense and would often be unnecessary, To require counsel's opinion at the applicant's expense before any legal aid certificate is granted, as the right hon. Member's Question appears to suggest, would have the effect of denying legal aid to many poor people.
§ Mr. BellengerThe newspaper was The Times Law Reports. When a judge of the High Court uses the word "blackmail" in respect of some of these cases, or refers to the possibility of some of these cases lending themselves to blackmail, should 31 not the right hon. and learned Gentleman or his Department look at the aspect not only of this case but of many similar cases which are occurring?
§ The Attorney-GeneralCertainly; of course. The functioning of the legal aid scheme is constantly under review by my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor, whose responsibility it is, and also by the profession, the Law Society and the Bar Council. In the Queen's Bench Division, of all the cases which were both tried and settled in the last year for which there are complete figures—up to 31st March, 1963–89 per cent. of the cases in which legal aid was granted were successful. This is an indication that on the whole the scheme is working satisfactorily for the benefit of those who require legal aid. Watch will, of course, be kept to ensure that legal aid is not granted in unnecessary cases.
§ Mr. Graham PageWould not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that in this case the defendants, the British Transport Commission, as in any other case, could have applied to the Law Society to review its certificate. Secondly, does he not think that Mr. Justice Paull was in error in saying that counsel would hesitate to settle proceedings after a legal aid certificate had been granted? Is it not well recognised by solicitors and the Bar that at any stage of a legal aid action counsel can advise that it should not be taken further?
§ The Attorney-GeneralIt would not be right for me to comment on individual cases, but it is the fact, as my hon. Friend has said, that both solicitors and counsel who are concerned in a legal aid case are under a duty to review the case at each stage and to see that it is not being pursued unreasonably at public expense.
§ Mr. Elwyn JonesDoes the Attorney-General agree that the legal aid machinery has worked extremely well on the whole and that many restraints are exercised by the legal profession in its approach to its responsibilities under the legal aid scheme? Is it not the case that without this scheme thousands of people would have been denied justice in the courts?
§ The Attorney-GeneralI agree with the hon. and learned Member. It has 32 conferred great benefits on people who might not otherwise have been able to obtain their rights. I hope, however, that all members of the legal profession will always bear in mind the necessity of being careful about continuing cases unreasonably, and I think that on the whole they do so. There are many safeguards in the scheme and we must all keep watch to see that it is never abused.