HC Deb 26 November 1992 vol 214 cc762-3W
Mr. Vaz

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what studies he made, before deciding to remove or reduce the rights of people in particular income groups to receive legal aid, into the ability of people within those income groups to pay the contributions which are now to be required of them.

Mr. John M. Taylor

In the light of the Government's priorities for public expenditure and the rapid growth in the cost of legal aid, the Lord Chancellor and I have considered carefully what can be afforded and have taken measures which will ensure that the resources available are directed to those whose need is greatest.

Mr. Vaz

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department how many people will have their rights to legal aid removed or reduced as a result of the measures he announced on 12 November.

Mr. John M. Taylor

Although such estimates are necessarily subject to many assumptions, we estimate that around 2 per cent. of households will no longer be eligible for legal aid as a result of measures taken to align legal aid allowances with income support levels. Around 14 per cent. of households who now receive legal aid free of contribution will be required to contribute. In addition, about 8 per cent. of households who fall out of eligibility in the current year because their income has risen above the upper income limit will not be restored to eligibility as a result of the decision not to uprate the upper limit in April of next year.

Mr. David Nicholson

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what analysis he has made of the reasons for the increase in spending on legal aid; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. John M. Taylor

The reasons for the increase in legal aid expenditure are complex. There are two basic components involved. First, the number of people assisted under the various parts of the legal aid scheme is increasing —around 3 million acts of assistance were paid for in 1991–92 as compared with around 2 million in 1985–86. Secondly, the unit cost of each act of assistance is increasing at a higher rate than inflation.

Mr. David Nicholson

To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department whether he will make a statement on the error which the Benefits Agency committed in assessing applications for civil legal aid between 1 October 1991 and 30 March 1992; and what compensation he proposes to pay legal aid practitioners for their costs incurred in checking whether their clients meet the criteria for reassessment set out in the Benefits Agency letter of 2 November.

Mr. John M. Taylor

I refer my hon. Friend to my reply to the hon. Member for Wallsend (Mr. Byers) on Tuesday 17 November,Official Report, columns 103–4.