§ 28. Lady Olga MaitlandTo ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what comparison he has made between legal aid arrangements in the United Kingdom and in other EU countries. [31466]
Mr. TaylorFrom the comparisons that we have made, I believe that our legal aid scheme is the most generous in the European Community. Generally, United Kingdom citizens have the same access to legal aid in a European Community country as a citizen of that country.
§ Lady Olga MaitlandI thank my hon. Friend for that reply. It is excellent news that citizens of this country have access to the most generous legal aid support. Does my hon. Friend agree that the time has come to reassess exactly how legal aid is delivered? The legal aid bill is rising year after year, and we must ensure that those who genuinely need legal aid receive it, while those who do not, do not.
Mr. TaylorI am looking forward to reading Hansard tomorrow because my hon. Friend could not have put it better. There can be no question but that our legal aid system is generous and that enormous amounts of money are devoted to it. The issue is whether legal aid is going to the right people, and that is the thrust of my hon. Friend's question. The Green Paper provides an opportunity for the most radical review of legal aid in the past 50 years, and we should take that opportunity.
§ Mr. SkinnerOne of the problems with the £1.4 billion of taxpayers' money that is spent on legal aid is that a lot of it goes to relatively few people—many of whom, just like those on the Treasury Bench, come from the belly of the banking establishment. In other words, the Tory Government are handing large sums of money to people such as Roger Levitt and their other Tory friends in the City—I will throw in the Maxwells who have benefited as well, just in case the Minister mentions them. He should pay some attention to the document produced by the Labour party in the past few days, in which we suggest that the £1.4 billion should go to deserving people—many of whom do not qualify for legal aid—rather than to the fat cats.
§ Mr. Tony BanksMy hon. Friend could not have put it better.
Mr. TaylorThe hon. Gentleman could not have put it more typically. A consultation document entitled "Legal 620 Aid for the Apparently Wealthy" was released some time ago and I gave as much publicity to it as I could. I do not recall any response from Bolsover to that paper.
As a result of wide consultation, the Lord Chancellor announced in April that he would tighten up legal aid means assessment for the apparently wealthy. His proposals include a special unit to investigate unusually complex cases and the confiscation of undeclared assets.
§ Mr. John MarshallDoes my hon. Friend realise that the issue of legal aid has united the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and me? There is widespread disquiet about the way that the legal aid fund is operated, and my hon. Friend may have seen the article in Saturday's Daily Mail about a child who has received legal aid on the basis of a quite flippant argument. Will my hon. Friend please look at the operation of the Legal Aid Board, which seems to waste public money? Will he recognise that, in civil cases, a legal aid certificate is the most important way of screwing a large sum of money out of the other party?
Mr. TaylorMy hon. Friend has always been very clear and very consistent in his criticism of the legal aid system. I remind him and the House that the legal aid Green Paper, which is now available for consultation, represents the widest and most radical opportunity for reform of legal aid, and I look forward to receiving my hon. Friend's reply.