Society defends solicitors over legal aid
The Law Society president has reacted to negative news coverage concerning the growth in the number of solicitors.
The Society president Linda Lee has written to the Daily Mail newspaper in response to an article published yesterday under the headline ‘Now we have more lawyers than police thanks to legal aid’.
The story reported Law Society figures revealing the rise in the number of solicitors and barristers over the past decade. The article noted that there are now 165,000 lawyers, compared to 142,363 police officers in the country.
The article went on to cover the increase in the number of lawyers employed by local authorities, the average starting salary of trainees, the Society’s campaign over the legal aid cuts and votes for prisoners.
The article made no distinction between legal aid and private practice lawyers, or indicate how many of the total number of lawyers actually did publicly funded work.
In a letter to the paper’s editor, Lee wrote: ‘I cannot understand the reference in your headline to legal aid causing the increase in the number of lawyers.
'Over the past ten years, the number of firms doing legal aid has fallen from over 5,000 to under 3,000.
‘Only 6% of lawyers in the UK undertake work which is funded by legal aid. The debate around legal aid has been going on for a long time and it is an issue for all political parties and all sections of our society.
‘The budget has been frozen in cash terms since 2004 and it has already fallen significantly in real terms.
'According to official figures, the average pay of a young qualified legal aid solicitor is £25,000, less than your quoted average starting salary for a trainee.
‘The average legal aid solicitor working in the criminal courts earns less than that of a sewage worker. Whatever is driving the numbers, it certainly is not legal aid.
‘When legal aid was set up in 1949 approximately 80% of the population was eligible for legal aid. By 2000 this had dropped to 50% and by 2007 more than two thirds of the population were not eligible for legal aid.
'If you do the simple mathematics this indicates less of a demand for legal aid lawyers.’
Lee went on to say that the article ‘inaccurately’ reported that the Law Society campaign ‘Sound off for Justice’ is against the government’s cuts to taxpayer-funded legal aid.
She said: ‘This is simply not true… The “Sound off for Justice” campaign agrees that cuts have to be made. The question is how we do this?
'The Law Society itself in its alternative reforms package is suggesting cuts of £384 million which is greater than the government required savings of £350 million pounds.’
The full letter can be read at the Sound off for Justice page.
Comments
Any sensible person should
Any sensible person should have been brought up to expect that kind of drivel from the Daily Mail (a tall order I know); trouble is, the other papers are barely any better. A public debate free of inaccurate loaded, frequently laughable assumptions is hard to find indeed; however for a laugh in the face of adversity, google "Automatic Daily Mail Headline Generator"....most amusing.
Unopularity of Lawyers
Let's face it, lawyers have never been popular and probably never will be. At best they are viewed by the public as an unfortunate necessity. And at worst, well didn't the peasants' revolt target them for lynching? Perhaps we should play hardball and remind the Daily Mail both that Robespierre and Lenin were unemployed lawyers, and that we have not forgotten The Daily Mail's support of fascism in the 1930s.
One Thing
Can we all at least agree that it's a bit shambolic for 'Representative Body Defends Members' to be a rare enough headline to be noteworthy?
A defence of lawyers practising legal aid?
To say that the figures show there is less of a demand for legal aid lawyers and that cuts need to be made to legal aid does not constitute a convincing defence.
Typical lazy Daily Mail
Typical lazy Daily Mail Journalism - I'm just surprised that they didn't link lawyers to a fall in house prices.
Stick to articles about Kate and Wills please Daily Mail.
Well the Daily Mail never did
Well the Daily Mail never did let the facts get in the way of a story.
When oh when are we finally
When oh when are we finally going to get rid of 'Legal Aid' and 'Pro Bono' ?
Then the public can really see how much it costs to conduct litigation properly.
Mind you, the Accountancy Profession have done well offering Accountancy Aid and Accountancy Pro Bono (and giving their core work areas away like auditing)...
The Daily Mail just loves to hate lawyers
Re this article and that in the Gazette this week re Luton solicitor, Mark Wardrup's campaign to change road safety laws following the death of his clients' daughter due to a cyclist's reckless driving - well done to him for campaining and lobbying the MP who now seeks to put a bill through parliament so that cyclists face the same sentences for causing such deaths as car drivers. There's an article about the matter in today's Daily Mail but nowhere is Mr Wardrup mentioned or given any credit for highlighting the issue. But then, how could the Daily Mail be expected to bring themselves to report anything positive about a lawyer!? It might undermine their own campaign to brand all lawyers as self interested fat cats.