§ 31. Mr. Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield)If he intends to publish a White Paper in advance of the Access to Justice Bill. [61254]
§ The Minister of State, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)The Government published their White Paper "Modernising Justice" on 2 December 1998.
§ Mr. GrieveI am obliged to the Minister for pointing out that which had already been brought to my attention. May I take him to the reference in paragraph 6.18 of the White Paper on whether salaried defenders will be sanctioned by the Government? He knows that that issue has caused much disquiet in the legal profession and that the White Paper suggests that it will be kept under consideration. Will he explain why clause 13 of the Access to Justice Bill, which was published simultaneously, provides that Parliament will be asked to sanction exactly such a step and will be deprived of the opportunity of legislative scrutiny thereafter?
§ Mr. HoonThe explanation is that it is clearly necessary for the Government, subject to parliamentary approval, to have powers to employ salaried lawyers who may one day, if appropriate, constitute a public defender service. The Government have no plans to take forward any comprehensive scheme, but it is right that Parliament should have the opportunity to debate in principle whether that may one day become a feature of our criminal defence service.
§ Dr. Alan Whitehead (Southampton, Test)Will my hon. Friend acknowledge the bewilderment that members of the public who have recourse to the law feel when they have dealt with a lawyer whom they trust and believe is competent to carry out their business and that lawyer is suddenly replaced in court by someone whom they have barely met and do not know? Will he emphasise to me the Government's commitment to ensuring that access to audience is seriously pursued?
§ Mr. HoonI am grateful for my hon. Friend's question. He will know that the Bill and the White Paper set out proposals to eliminate the remaining restrictive practices between solicitors and barristers to allow all those who have qualified as either a solicitor or a barrister to appear in all the higher courts. That is a welcome improvement in the rights of ordinary people to secure legal representation and will eliminate the problems that my hon. Friend so well describes.
§ Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough)The Minister will recognise that the Access to Justice Bill will deny citizens the right to select a defence lawyer of their choice. How does that comply with the Human Rights Act 1998?
§ Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)Difficult, Geoffrey.
§ Mr. HoonNot at all.
The provisions that we have set out in the White Paper and the Bill will ensure that those who are represented under legal aid schemes paid for by taxpayers' money have access to specialist representation. We will contract with only those lawyers who are specialists in particular fields. For the moment, anyone who is eligible for legal aid can go to any lawyer, irrespective of whether that lawyer knows anything about the subject in hand. We will ensure through contracting that people still have a choice of lawyer, but they will have a choice of those lawyers who are qualified and experienced in the relevant field of practice. That is a considerable improvement on the present arrangements.
§ Mr. Gareth Thomas (Clwyd, West)Does my hon. Friend agree that, whatever the leader of the Bar may say, the majority of those of progressive opinion within the legal profession accept the need to modernise the profession, eliminate unnecessary restrictive practices and improve access to justice?
§ Mr. HoonI was slightly surprised to discover that members of the Bar welcomed our proposals. Although they had one or two "predictable moans", according to a leader in The Times, on balance they felt that our proposals would improve access to justice and would be to the benefit of all those citizens who have to use legal services.