Does no one at the Gazette read the Guardian? Your story 'Solicitors' funding victory' (see [2005] Gazette, 10 March, 3) might have been so different. The Guardian's article was headed 'Scrapping legal aid for NHS negligence cases "too costly'''.

It claimed that plans to replace civil legal aid for clinical negligence cases were 'ditched' because of the relative cost of conditional fee agreements (CFAs) that would have replaced it; they 'would have cost the NHS £4.70 for every pound saved in legal aid'. That makes a much more interesting story. CFAs have been consistently endorsed by the Law Society, despite the ethical conflicts observed by others. Now, the Guardian claims they are much more expensive than legal aid for those against whom claims are made. This might provide some explanation for the profession's keenness but surely the government's finding implies a ringing endorsement for legal aid over private funding.


Roger Smith, director, Justice, London