HC Deb 23 June 1998 vol 314 cc835-7
32. Mr. Nicholas Winterton (Macclesfield)

If he will make a statement on levels of charges for legal aid work. [45603]

The Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department (Mr. Geoffrey Hoon)

The levels of charges for legal aid work are principally determined under the Legal Aid Act 1988, passed by the previous Administration and no doubt supported by the hon. Gentleman. Within the limitations of that legislation, we are introducing standardised fees where it is legally possible to do so. However, we recognised quickly after taking office that the existing legislation does not afford a satisfactory level of control. That is why we announced last year that we see contracting for the provision of legal services as the most effective means of controlling the cost of legal aid.

Mr. Winterton

I am grateful to the Minister for that helpful and, if I may say so, encouraging response. Does the Minister believe it right that somebody who is well known for his support of left-wing causes, Mr. Michael Mansfield QC, should submit a legal aid bill for £22,000, which was ultimately cut to just £12,000? The fees of his junior, Miss Baird, were reduced from £22,000 to just £7,800. That relates to just three days' work. Is that right? Is it value for money? When will this abuse of public resources be stopped?

Mr. Hoon

I am most grateful for the hon. Gentleman's support, and I hope that he and those Conservative Members who appear to support his assertions will support the Government when they introduce legislation effectively to control the costs of legal aid. I also hope that he will be able to persuade Conservative Front Benchers to support the proposals that we have outlined, because the Government are determined to control the costs of legal aid.

Mr. Winterton

Michael Mansfield?

Mr. Hoon

I am not in a position to comment on a case that is currently being considered, nor should I, but I can say that there appears to have been a persistent pattern of overclaiming by members of the Bar. Indeed, statistics that I can publish suggest that, in certain high-cost cases over the past two years, barristers have claimed more than double what they have received.

Mr. David Winnick (Walsall, North)

Is it not interesting that the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Winterton) mentioned only two barristers, whom he considers to be left wing? Michael Mansfield is doing an excellent job in the Lawrence inquiry.

On the general issue, which I have raised at business questions, is it not totally wrong that the most senior QCs receive substantial sums out of legal aid work when so many people are not able to get legal aid? Surely senior banisters should not be so overpaid and should not receive hundreds of thousands of pounds through legal aid work. I hope that the Government will continue to do what they are doing about this matter.

Mr. Hoon

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his comments. I have made it clear that the Government are determined to get the costs of legal aid under control. He is right: the most expensive cases in the Crown court—the top 1 per cent.—account for more than 40 per cent. of criminal higher expenditure, which is £125 million; the most expensive civil cases—the top 15 per cent.— account for about 15 per cent. of gross civil legal aid expenditure, at £167 million. That is why the Government are determined to control the costs of legal aid.

Mr. John Burnett (Torridge and West Devon)

The Government propose to replace legal aid for civil cases with conditional fee agreements. I draw the Minister's attention to the fact that insurance premiums for defendants' costs in personal injury cases, which have a high degree of success, have risen in the past year from about £85 to about £161. When the Government's changes have taken effect, in what circumstances will the Legal Aid Board pay such premiums?

Mr. Hoon

It is clearly important that the Government control the costs of legal aid. The hon. Gentleman will know that we recently issued a consultation document setting out in principle our view that the cost of insurance should be recoverable against an unsuccessful defendant. That would clearly go a long way to assisting plaintiffs who bring cases under conditional fees to recover the costs of going to law, and would thereby increase access to justice. We are considering that carefully.