COMMONS AMENDMENT (Hansard, 19 July 1988)

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, with the leave of the House I should like to move Amendments Nos. 54 and 55 en bloc. Schedule 7 deals with transitional arrangements and paragraph 2 deals with the arrangements for winding up the old legal aid fund. After the old fund has been wound up, the Law Society will still have two residual functions; namely, to produce accounts for its final period of stewardship of the fund and to produce a report on that period. This amendment, which the Law Society has requested, provides that any expenses incurred in so doing will be paid by the Lord Chancellor. I am sure that your Lordships will think that that is appropriate in the circumstances. I beg to move.

§ Lord Elwyn-Jones
My Lords, these amendments relate to Schedule 7 which in effect says farewell to the role of the Law Society in legal aid administration. Therefore it is an important matter upon which to make some observations before we part from it. This is the last opportunity to make observations about the matters which we have discussed, but I do not propose to do so at any length. Perhaps I may just underline one or two matters.
First, what still remains to be done in and by the House is the handling of the regulations, a large number of which the Lord Chancellor is given power to introduce. No doubt in the fullness of time we shall receive and consider them in the House. Some will be dealt with by the ample procedure of affirmative resolution and others by the negative procedure. Therefore, we cannot say farewell to the Bill with any degree of confidence at this stage until we see the full quality and content of the many regulations which are still outstanding. What has already been noted is the very considerable power of direction given to the Lord Chancellor and his department.
Perhaps it may be appropriate if I also refer to the concern which has been expressed in different parts of the House about maintaining the independence of the Legal Aid Board. But we shall have to wait and see how that operates to determine the extent to which that independence is a reality.
There is one other matter which I ask leave to mention at this stage. Great concern was expressed in the House about the possibility that the Legal Aid Advisory Committee may go. It has performed very important duties. Indeed, I remember when I occupied the noble and learned Lord's position that its advice and protection across the whole field of legal aid was of immense value. Therefore we greatly hope that the power given to get rid of the committee will not be exercised.
The power of direction and the independence of the Legal Aid Board are matters which I again venture to refer to because unless they are given reality the Bill will lack a great deal of the true purpose of a reforming legal aid Bill.

§ The Lord Chancellor
My Lords, as the noble and learned Lord said, in a sense this pair of amendments reflects the end of the Law Society's stewardship when the provision comes into effect. Indeed, it would be most appropriate for me—and I do it with all my heart—to express gratitude to the Law Society for its stewardship of legal aid over such a long period. As I said, I sought to express that by making it clear that the Lord Chancellor will pay the concluding expenses. Surely, in this matter, action is as important as any words that I could have said.
As regards the regulations, obviously there are many of them to come. Many will reflect the existing regulations in substantial part. I shall certainly do my best to earn the confidence of the House in the regulations, as they are being developed, by consultation with those who can help me to get them right.
In regard to the Legal Aid Board, your Lordships have now seen the names of those appointed to it on a shadow basis—that is, looking at the situation—in preparation for taking over formally when the Bill, assuming it gets Royal Assent, is brought into operation. Your Lordships will see that they are people of stature and independence. That is the best possible guarantee for the independence of the board.
As to the Legal Aid Advisory Committee, it is certainly continuing to operate. I have made a formal refrence to it to advise me on a question which I regard as being extremely important; namely, the priorities in respect of the scope of legal aid. I should like to pay tribute to the committee. It is right that we should have power to discontinue it, but I do not intend to exercise that power in the immediate future.
I am most grateful to the noble and learned Lord for raising these matters and for the general attitude that he and other noble Lords have displayed towards this important Bill.