Legal Services (Hansard, 9 April 2003)

§ Mr. Jim Cunningham
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department what steps the Department is taking to ensure the future effective delivery of legal services to all sectors of society. [106873]

§ Ms Rosie Winterton
[holding answer 8 April 2003]My Department continues to support the Legal Services Commission in developing the Community Legal Service (CLS). The CLS ensures that publicly funded legal services are targeted more effectively at areas of priority need. Initiatives such as the Methods of Delivery Pilots and the Partnership Initiative Budget are also leading to the development of new and innovative approaches to service delivery.
338W
The Government are also committed to the removal of restrictive practices, and is currently considering responses to the consultation exercise on those issues that stemmed from the Office of Fair Trading's report on competition in. professions. The removal of restrictive practices, which cannot be justified in the public interest, could provide an incentive for lawyers to provide innovative, high quality and affordable services to the public.

§ Mr. Malins
To ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Lord Chancellor's Department, what percentage salary increase was awarded to the staff of the Legal Services Commission, broken down by grade, in(a) 2000–01 and (b) 2001–02. [98645]

§ Ms Rosie Winterton
[holding answer 25 February 2003]Salary increases awarded to the staff of the Legal Services Commission are determined by a pay remit which is approved by my Department and HM Treasury.
In 2000/01 and 2001/02 salary increases to the Commission's staff were based on performance and their existing position in the Commission's pay bands and not grade.
The Commission's pay bands are constructed around a market rate (median) that has been established following a comprehensive job evaluation exercise carried out by the Commission in conjunction with HayGroup. The Commission sub-divides the pay bands into three: training (the bottom third of the scale); fully effective (the middle third of the scale) and a bar beyond which only those who achieve sustained superior performance can progress (the upper third of the scale).
The following table sets out the percentage of staff within each performance rating and the average salary increase. To provide more detailed information can be done only at a disproportionate cost.

Percentage

Performance
rating
Staff within
performance
rating
Average salary
increase

2000–01 Outstanding 7.4 7.5

Very good 32.9 5.3

Effective 53.9 3.7

Not fully effective 2.3 2.5

Unsatisfactory 3.5 0.7

2001–02 Outstanding 8.3 6.9

Very good 35.8 5.0

Effective 49.6 3.5

Not fully effective 3.0 2.2

Unsatisfactory 3.3 0.1

		Percentage
	Performance rating	Staff within performance rating	Average salary increase
2000–01	Outstanding	7.4	7.5
	Very good	32.9	5.3
	Effective	53.9	3.7
	Not fully effective	2.3	2.5
	Unsatisfactory	3.5	0.7
2001–02	Outstanding	8.3	6.9
	Very good	35.8	5.0
	Effective	49.6	3.5
	Not fully effective	3.0	2.2
	Unsatisfactory	3.3	0.1