§ 29. Mr. Ben Chapman (Wirral, South)What recent representations he has received on the impact of proposed changes in the legal aid system on Merseyside. [49902]
§ The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)My hon. Friend will understand that our proposals have generated a great deal of interest. Unfortunately, letters and responses were not recorded by the geographical location of the sender and that information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. I was grateful to him, however, for his letter, to which I replied in April this year.
§ Mr. ChapmanI thank my hon. Friend for that reply. He will appreciate that a number of my constituents on Merseyside who have been involved in medical accidents are particularly concerned about medical negligence, and he will be aware that that is an area of specialist expertise in the legal profession. Can he assure me that, when my constituents need advice in this area, they will be able to obtain it from specialist lawyers who may not necessarily be the family law firm or the solicitors who did their conveyancing?
§ Mr. HoonMy hon. Friend is right to say that medical negligence is a specialist area of law that requires 907 specialist lawyers. It is profoundly disturbing that, in 1996–97, the client received damages of more than £50 in only 17 per cent. of all completed legally aided medical negligence cases; that means that 83 per cent. of clients got nothing or next to nothing after what was, inevitably, a long period of worry and considerable difficulty. We cannot allow that to continue. Therefore, we have announced that, by January 1999, the Legal Aid Board will contract only with specialist medical negligence lawyers. The issues in these claims are simply too important to my hon. Friend's constituents, and to our society as a whole, to be entrusted to those who merely dabble in this kind of work.
§ Mr. John Burnett (Torridge and West Devon)The people of Merseyside would have been interested in the Minister's reply to the written question from the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Foster) on 16 July. The Minister rightly placed great emphasis on the advantages of franchising and contracting. To what extent will the general public or potential clients have available to them such information as the successful outcomes to cases by contracting or franchising firms?
§ Mr. HoonCertainly that is something which we shall be considering as we develop the franchising scheme and as we introduce legislation to allow us to contract with specialist lawyers, as I hope we will be able to do in due course, but it will be important for the public to know the qualifications and expertise of lawyers who do legally aided work.
§ Mr. Edward Garnier (Harborough)The hon. Member for Torridge and West Devon (Mr. Burnett)—[Interruption.] I am almost transparent—referred to the written answer that the Minister gave last week at columns 278–79. Is not one of the problems with that written answer that a representative of a client in Merseyside would not be able to work out with any certainty the timetable for the future development of conditional fee agreements and the other legal aid reforms? Will the Minister tell us with greater precision the exact timetable for the introduction of extended conditional fee agreements and the other changes that he and his boss in the Lord Chancellor's Department have proposed for the legal aid system?
§ Mr. HoonLike the good lawyer he is, the hon. and learned Gentleman can argue any case that is put in front of him, especially when he has a brief. In the past, he has criticised us for failing to consult, and now, as we respond to the various representatives that we have received following consultation, he is criticising us yet again. I assure him that the Government will make a statement in the autumn setting out the precise timetable and the proposals on which we intend to legislate if that is necessary.