Legal Aid: Rayner Report (Hansard, 20 December 1984)

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper.

§ The Lord Chancellor (Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone)
My Lords, the Government have welcomed the scrutiny report as a useful contribution to the discussion of means assessment for civil legal aid. Good progress has been made in bringing a number of the recommendations into effect. Discussions are still continuing on the main issues raised. I expect the Government's final decision to be announced early in the New Year.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, may I thank the noble and learned Lord for that Answer. May I also ask him whether it is the case that last June it was discovered that, under certain secret regulations known as the L Code, officials of the DHSS were being ordered to take action, which was illegal, in revealing information provided for the legal aid scheme to other members of the DHSS who were not concerned with legal aid? Is it the case that those orders were then suspended, that a rewriting of the code was ordered following the Rayner recommendations, and that the Attorney-General stated that it was under urgent consideration? Will the noble and learned Lord say that this is a sign of urgent consideration, and can he assure the House that the new regulations will be published and the public reassured over this grave breach of confidentiality?

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, if the noble Lord had really wanted a detailed answer to that question, he should have put down that question and not the Question which he did. The facts are that the L Code is being revised and it will honour Section 22 of the Legal Aid Act 1974.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, will the new regulations require parliamentary approval or assent of any kind?

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, I think not; but if I am wrong I shall write to the noble and learned Lord.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, I should like to ask the noble and learned Lord two further questions. First, so far as his understanding is concerned, is it the case that the Rayner recommendations will propose that the administration of legal aid is solely within the purview of the noble and learned Lord's own department? Secondly, are there any plans to publish 728 the new code so that the public are reassured that this breach of the law is not repeated? Are there any plans to investigate who was responsible for the original breach of the law and what action is intended to be taken?

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, two very different questions. As I said, the question of the L Code is primarily a question for the Department of Health and Social Security, and if the question is put down we shall answer it. As regards the second, the matter is under discussion within the Government and with the trade union side. There is the suggestion that the matter should be transferred to my department. I am not very keen on it, but that decision has not been taken.

§ Lord Hatch of Lusby
My Lords, may I take the question one stage further with the noble and learned Lord on his answer? When he says transferred, is it not the case that the administration of legal aid has always been under his department? Does he not agree that it should be quite clearly defined as under his department, particularly in view of the fact that as long ago as 1977 the DHSS ignored the views of his department's legal aid advisory committee that disclosure of legal aid information for any other purposes than legal aid administration was a criminal offence?

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, so far as regards civil legal aid, the overriding responsibility for the administration of civil legal aid is with the Lord Chancellor's department, but it consists of two parts. One is the assessment of means to discover financial eligibility, and one is the reasonableness of the application which is made from the point of view of the merits of the proposed case or defence. The latter is dealt with by the Law Society through its area and regional committees, the former is dealt with under the DHSS because it has the means of assessing financial eligibility which at the moment my department has not. I thought that that was fairly generally known. So far as criminal legal aid is concerned, it was transferred to my department during, I think, the present Administration.