A Little Consideration


There is but one finite solution to the controversy surrounding the introduction of Lord Carter's proposals for legal aid: for once, just once, in the history of our profession, all firms - whether large, medium or small - who carry out publicly funded work should stand shoulder to shoulder with one another in solidarity and refuse to sign contracts.



It has always been my understanding that the subject matter of any contract is something called 'a valuable consideration' passing between the parties to the contract. If you don't want the valuable consideration, don't sign the contract.



With no lawyers contracted to carry out the work for the pittance now on offer, there would be no lawyers available to provide the service being offered by the Legal Services Commission to the general public. Court and police station systems would rapidly degenerate into a fiasco and grind to a halt, and the government would then be forced to listen to the profession instead of riding roughshod over it. In the stand-off that resulted, the government would have to tender for our services on a proper market basis. You cannot provide a service with no service providers.



We all know what is at stake and this includes our livelihoods. Taking into account all other considerations, I cannot think of anything more important because it is our very ability to earn a living that enables us to provide a service to our clients, as well as providing for the welfare of our own families.



The question is whether we have the bottle to do it. If history is anything to go by, it would seem not. I can already hear the usual voices saying: 'But if I don't sign a contract I will lose money.' In the short term, if we do not sign contracts, then possibly we will. But in the long term we stand to lose a lot more than just money.



Do we want the current generation of legal aid practitioners to go down in the history of our profession as the most spineless and gutless of all time? Or do we want to be remembered as the generation that took on one of the most reactionary governments ever, and won?



It is no good looking to the Law Society to tell us what to do - it cannot be seen to be interfering in contractual relations. It is up to us, individually and collectively, regardless of practice size, to stand up and he counted or otherwise wait around, like turkeys at Christmas, and meekly watch as our livelihoods drift into oblivion.



Paul Honke, PEP Honke Solicitors, Uxbridge