LAWYERS ARE CONCERNED THAT WITHOUT INCREASED RESOURCES, THE CLS WILL HAVE NO SUBSTANCE, REPORTS JON ROBINS'Rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic,' is how one self-confessed sceptic views the role of the Community Legal Service (CLS), which went live at the beginning of the week.The Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine, has heralded the CLS -- which attempts to bring together the work of solicitors, citizens advice bureaux, law centres and other advice centres -- as the 'cornerstone' of his programme of reforms.

The service has three 'separate but inter-dependent' strands: a Web site, including a directory of legal services; a new quality mark for the providers; and 'partnership' arrangements where funders and providers work together planning and delivering services.Since the government unveiled its vision of the CLS in May last year, there has been much speculation that, without additional funds, it will not amount to much more than an exercise in New Labour rebranding.

A glitzy media launch -- That's Life star Esther Rantzen was one of 12 'champions' of the new service (see opposite) -- seems to have done little to assuage fears that the service will prove to be all surface and no substance.

'She doesn't even like lawyers,' the cynic opined.Speaking before the launch, Lord Irvine said: 'We all know how hard lawyers and advice workers work.

We all know how much public and charitable funding is spent.

Yet we also know that too many people in need don't get help.'According to the government, more than a billion pounds of public money a year is spent on legal services, from a variety of sources, including the Legal Aid Board, central government, and the National Lottery Charities Board.

'It's about working together on agreed plans with a shared vision, a key part of which is the local referral network of providers, a seamless service,' Lord Irvine said.It is a compelling argument and a view that many high street practitioners will happily endorse.

Richard Miller, one-time chairman and now press officer for the Legal Aid Practitioners Group (LAPG), says most solicitors are isolated in this line of work.

He says that, while they might know who their fellow solicitors are, there is no great working knowledge of other providers.

A problem for solicitors is that people come to see them when there might be other, better sources of help.

'Anything that opens people's eyes to other sources of information has got to be a good thing,' he says.Nobody disagrees with the aspirations of the service, but it is the details -- or lack of them -- that has alarmed many.

Mr Miller says that when the government revealed its plans in a 20-page consultation paper the results were 'spectacularly vague'.

The then Law Society President Michael Mathews was even more blunt, describing the paper as 'more government waffle on legal aid'.

Mr Miller says even now there is confusion as to what it all adds up to.A concern for both the Society and the LAPG was, in the words of the Society's response to the consultation exercise, the 'almo st complete lack of acknowledgement' of the role of solicitors in the envisaged service.

Legal aid practitioners 'are and always have been' the community legal service, said Mr Miller.

But he adds that he has since been reassured by positive comments from Keith Vaz when he was parliamentary secretary to the Lord Chancellor's Department last year.Bob Nightingale, chairman of the Law Centres Federation, doubts whether the IT revolution will reach the most needy in society.

'The truth of the matter is that we deal with clients who are desperate,' he says.

'Self-help is not on the agenda for them.' He reckons that IT is only useful to people who can use it because they are articulate and motivated.

'We deal with people who, to a large extent, have lost the ability to cope,' he says.He applauds the introduction of the CLS quality mark.

A CLS logo will be available for display in the windows of all vetted providers.

Quality is a huge issue, he says, adding that in south London where he works, there are plenty of 'shark solicitors and quasi agencies'.

He comments: 'If we could get rid of some of them that would be good.'Last month, the Lord Chancellor's Department published its report into six 'pioneer' partnerships in Cornwall, Kirklees, Liverpool, Norwich, Nottinghamshire and Southwark, which are to be the foundation for the service.

Solicitor Richard Moorhead, a senior research fellow at the Institute of Advanced Legal Studies at the University of London, was responsible for the review (see feature, below).

He spent six months observing these partnerships and claims that solicitors found it a positive experience.

'People who were suspicious of each other were much less suspicious and more able to work together.

I suspect it strengthened their business practices as a result, their relationships with other providers and other referral sources.'He also noted that the partnership arrangements had 'raised the profile' of legal services with local authorities and other funders, such as charities and health authorities.

'There was a feeling that it protected current sources of funding and possibly increased levels of funding.'According to the Lord Chancellor, there are already 70 partnerships covering one-third of the population, and within two years he expects 90% of England and Wales to be covered.The Law Society's main message in its response to the consultation exercise was a call for additional funding.

But, according to Karen Mackay, the Society's head of legal aid policy, that remains unheeded.

'At the moment people are spending a lot of time and effort on it,' she says, 'and people's goodwill will run out if they are spending so much time in meetings rearranging the same pool of resources.'Where the public most needs advice there tends to be a 'chronic under-supply' of people able to offer services, and that is what needs to be addressed, she says.For Mr Miller the real question is how the service will work in practice when practitioners are already facing considerable problems over contracting.

He reports that firms are already running out of work allotted under contract to be able to do it even if they have the capability.

And the static rates of pay are causing many firms to consider industrial action, such as not taking any new case starts or curtailing their contracts altogether (see [2000] Gazette, 23 March, 1).Bob Nightingale says he is looking for the new system to cure the 'severe problems' of the old, such as the prohibitively high eligibility threshold for legal aid and a lack of funding for representation at tribunals.

That will take increased resources, he insists.He cannot see how a CLS will work properly without a national network of law centres because he identifies 'a huge gap' in provision of advice between citizen advice bureaux, high street solicitors and law centres.'At the moment I don't think it delivers very much,' says Ms McKay, 'but that doesn't mean it won't develop in the future and hopefully it will.'-- The CLS Web site is at www.justask.org.ukSTEPHEN WARD TALKS TO TWO FIRMS WITH DIFFERENT APPROACHES TO LEGAL AID -- BUT SIMILAR DOUBTS ABOUT ITS VIABILITYTwo neighbouring high street firms in Gravesend, Kent, illustrate the increasing difficulty in making a living from legal aid.One firm, the Martin Tolhurst Partnership, took a decision to pull out of legal aid completely.

The other, Hatten Wyatt & Co, applied for and won franchises for all the legal aid work it was already doing.Managing partner James Carter explains the blunt economics behind the eight-partner Tolhurst Partnership's strategic decision, which was based on low and falling legal aid pay rates.'We did the sums and we didn't see how we could make it pay.

It was simple bean-counting.

If you've got to pay a secretary £11,800 a year plus National Insurance, lighting and heating and other overheads, as well as professional liability insurance, and you look at the number of hours somebody can work, then the figures just don't add up.' And his firm is an efficient one, which has invested carefully in IT.He continues: 'You can't do legal aid without subsidising it.

And that is without charging for the administration involved in running a legal aid contract.

Contracts were the final straw.'He says the firm has found it can now give a better service to private matrimonial clients.

'If you do legal aid as well, you're bogged down with emergency injunctions and the private client has to wait their turn.

They are paying more than the legal aid client, and they will go somewhere else.'Hatten Wyatt, although it took the opposite strategic decision, is itself unsure about the long-term future of legal aid in some areas of law.

Partner Richard Miller, a former chairman of the Legal Aid Practitioners Group, says: 'It is still profitable for litigation because you can recover costs at the full rate from the other side if you win.' If you are unsuccessful, you still have the lower rates from the legal aid board as insurance.He goes on: 'Crime is OK.

The standard fees have not proved too bad, and criminal legal aid will not be capped.'But in Mr Miller's view it is not possible to make money from advice and assistance in all areas of law.

'Using a paralegal you can just about break even,' he says.

He maintains that a lot of firms took contracts initially to give themselves the option of continuing when they saw how it panned out.

'But they will certainly not be seeking to expand their contracts, and many will be winding them down.'The picture in Gravesend is repeated widely, according to Karen Mackay, head of legal aid policy at the Law Society.

'It's pretty grim out there,' she says, although she adds the proviso that it is easier to make a living in areas such as the north east of England, where overheads are lower than in the south-east.

And she confirms that criminal legal aid has been affected far less than civil, and looks set to continue as a reasonable area of business.

But generally, she says: 'Firms have been giving up legal aid work on a regular basis, and others are giving up taking on new legal aid cases.'Nevertheless, there are excep tions to any rule.

Stephens & Son in Chatham, Kent, took a strategic decision to expand into the legal aid market, which it anticipated would be vacated by many with the arrival of franchising and contracts.'We realised there were going to be a lot of firms taking the decision not to do legal aid, and those clients were going to have to go somewhere,' partner Jacqueline Shicluna, says.

'Provided you get the balance and the systems and the volumes right, you can profit from that process,' she insists.

'We had to take a decision which way we were going, then we had to gear up to make it possible.'The firm has expanded from two partners to six in the past four years, and has legal aid franchises in four areas: crime, employment, personal injury and matrimonial.

Legal aid now accounts for about half of the firm's income.Ms Shicluna says one of the keys to making a success of legal aid is teamwork within the firm.

'I think it may be the ethos of our firm that makes it work,' she says.

Each department is specialised but, as a principle, even the departments that only do private work are still committed to the firm's legal aid base.

'Otherwise there could be a danger that private client and business departments would look down their noses at the legal aid departments,' she explains.Stephens & Son has also been careful to keep its overheads down, and although its staff has been expanding for some time, it is only now moving into extra premises next door.

'It had almost got to the point that if you left the office somebody would pinch your desk,' she says.The firm has also not opened branch offices to avoid duplication of overheads.

It is networked so everyone can access diaries and case files through their computers.As a firm that has decided to expand legal aid work, Stephens & Son is rare but not unique, says Andrew Otterburn, a consultant used by many regional law societies, and author of a guide on management for small and medium-sized law firms.He says the one key to making a legal aid practice work is to make sure there are sufficient numbers of cases for economies of scale.

'You will never get anywhere with small volumes,' he says.

Lawyers also have to make sure they are doing enough chargeable hours.

He says it is also essential to make sure work is done at the correct level, according to the income it is generating, while always ensuring that work done at lower than partner level is adequately supervised.Stephens & Son has no regrets about its strategy, Ms Shicluna says.

'We won't all be retiring to Guernsey, but we think it's possible to make a reasonable income.'There are few regrets either for the Tolhurst Partnership.

Mr Carter says the only downside of abandoning legal aid has been to lose the feeling that 'you are a professional serving the whole community'.

But other than that, he says, 'it has been an absolute total relief'.RICHARD MOORHEAD HIGHLIGHTS THE BENEFITS OF THE LOCAL PARTNERSHIP ELEMENT OF THE CLSThe CLS has four main elements to it.

The first is the reshaping and renaming of the civil legal aid scheme under the auspices of the Legal Services Commission, which has replaced the Legal Aid Board.

This aims to control costs and target priorities through fixed budgets, contracting and the funding code.The second element is the quality mark.

The approach of the quality mark is designed to be similar to franchising and the Legal Aid Franchise Quality Assurance Standard (LAFQAS).

As such, it holds few surprises for the legal profession.

The quality mark will be mandatory for all those contracting wit h the commission to provide publicly-funded services.

It seeks to provide a single quality assurance scheme appropriate to legal information, advice and assistance.

Eventually, inclusion in CLS directories and referral networks will be conditional on an organisation having the quality mark.The quality mark should help to develop a more consistent approach to quality assurance by most funders of social welfare law (especially local authorities) and extend the range of not-for-profit providers that are quality assured.A third element is the creation of a Web site for consumers and suppliers of legal advice services.

The fourth element is in some ways the most interesting -- CLS Partnerships.

This has developed through the creation of six pioneer partnerships and 44 associate pioneers.

Pioneers were given a fairly loose brief and asked to develop methods of joint working between funders and suppliers.

The main aspects of a pioneer's work were:Providing local assessments of need and mapping supply in an area with a view to developing local funding strategies; andThe development of supplier referral networks to improve referral between suppliers of legal advice and assistance.The pioneer exercise began in December 1998.

The research into the development of pioneers has recently been published.

It provides advice on best practice in partnership working.

More than six months were spent observing pioneers, analysing their documentation and interviewing a wide range of participants.Pioneer partnerships involved a mixture of participants.

Local authorities and LAB area offices formed the core.

Other funders also participated, including the National Lottery Charities Board (NLCB) and private funders of legal and advice services, such as insurance and utility companies.

Interestingly, a partnership was seen as an opportunity to develop the profile of legal and advice services with funders, especially local authorities and the NLCB.

Most pioneer participants saw this as likely to protect, or perhaps raise, the level of funding in their area, while recognising that levels of spending are likely to remain governed by external factors, such as the Treasury.Suppliers of legal and advice services were also involved.

In most partnerships, representatives of local law societies, or firms heavily involved in legal aid work, sat alongside the not-for-profit sector.

Participating suppliers from private practice and the not-for-profit sector welcomed the creation of partnerships and the opportunity to influence detailed planning of legal services in their area.Potentially this influence could operate at a number of levels, from making sure questionnaires are as practitioner-friendly as possible to influencing approaches to need assessment and funding strategy.

The research report strongly recommends the involvement of practitioners in CLS Partnerships.The report also advocates care in balancing the competing interests of suppliers between and within the private practice and not-for-profit sector.

It is in the increased competitive environment of contracting for legal aid funds that such competing interests come to the fore.

In this light, it was surprising to see how strongly partnership members believed working in partnership helped address barriers to co-operation between suppliers.Many participants observed how solicitors and not-for-profit agencies had gone through a process of developing understanding and eroding prejudices that led to greater co-operation.

It was a view shared as strongly by solicitors as it was by other partners.

S ometimes such co-operation could lead to specific advantages, such as solicitors training not-for-profit advisers and at the same time building up a strong referral link with the agency.

This was expected to lead to greater quality and efficiency while allowing both sectors to concentrate on what they are good at.Participation in partnerships does, however, bring responsibilities.

Most partnerships wanted practitioners who came with strategic foresight and management experience and who were prepared to communicate with, and speak up for, other practitioners beyond their own firms and organisations.

Participation also takes up valuable fee-earning time.Equally, partnership was a means of involving the essential and practical experience of solicitors and not-for-profit advisers in the management of a local network of CLS providers.

As one funder put it, 'it started to feel more real' when they involved suppliers.

Similarly, partnership was seen as an important antidote to the perceived mistrust engendered by other aspects of legal aid reform and as an opportunity to shape the way services were developed locally.Again, it was a funder who remarked: 'You cannot get the best out of organisations by giving them money and expecting them to jump through hoops.' Partnership was seen as a way of developing trust between funders and between funders and suppliers and between suppliers themselves.The CLS was formally launched on 3 April, and draft guidance for CLS partnerships has been issued for consultation.

It will be interesting to see how far the experience of the pioneers is replicated around the country.

There are, of course, areas where local authorities may not be interested in legal and advice services.

Equally, practitioners will be understandably wary of devoting precious time to such work.But the coming together of suppliers and the Legal Services Commission (with or without local authorities) can foster greater co-operation and trust, and provide a good opportunity to raise the profile and status of the profession in the eyes of others, especially the local authorities.It was revealing to see how non-solicitor participants in partnerships unlearned their prejudices about the profession and started to see the commitment to helping the poor that is at the heart of legal aid practice.

Such a process depends on solicitors getting involved in their local CLS Partnership.CLS CHAMPION ESTHER RANTZEN, BY ALISON CLARKEEsther Rantzen, television broadcaster and chairwoman of children's charity Childline, became a CLS champion because she believes 'if it works it will represent a very important addition to the way people get good information when they need it'.'I have always believed that information is power, and that enables people to take control of their lives,' she says.She says the idea of 'joined-up information' could transform people's lives and that the CLS scheme will help resolve the problems people face in being passed from one advice agency to another.'When something goes wrong, such as becoming disabled or chronically ill, people face a battalion of problems and they need to know what help is available across the board.

We must try to break the chain of events when things go wrong.

For instance, their disability might wipe out their employment, take away their accommodation and make them isolated from family and friends.

They are clearly not in a position to shop around, so the idea of coming to one place that will link them to all the other information providers seems to me to be fundamental.'Having been i nvited to become a CLS champion, Ms Rantzen says her aim is to raise the profile of the scheme.

'I suppose that -- love me or hate me -- because I've been around since 1966, talking about people needing good information via the television, and am recognisable and identifiable, that I may be able to give the scheme a slightly higher profile than it otherwise might have.'Ms Rantzen is optimistic that the scheme will work but accepts that there may well be teething problems in the early stages and says she wants to know whether or not things are working out.

'I take the view that if people are having problems, then I want to hear from them as to why the scheme has not resolved those problems.'LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSION MEMBER PHILIP ELY, BY ALISON CLARKEPhilip Ely was one of four former members of the Legal Aid Board (LAB) to be appointed to the Legal Services Commission, which, he says, has a very different function to that of the board.'The main job of the commission is seeing to the due operation of the legal aid system or Community Legal Service.

The board, on the other hand, was concerned with managing a supplier-driven fund.

That is, if someone qualified for legal aid, the board had to manage the fund and take all the consequences.

In criminal law, it just picked up the tab.

The situation now, with a managed fund, is very different and the commission has a much wider remit.'Although the functions of the two organisations differ, the former Law Society president anticipates that his role on the commission will not be very different from before.

'There are certain specialist tasks that I was undertaking for the board that will continue.

For instance, I hope to sustain my role as chair of the costs appeals committee and multi-party action committee.'Mr Ely originally joined the LAB in 1996 because of an interest in franchising, contracting and quality standards when he was senior partner at the Southampton-based firm of Paris Smith & Randall.

Now retired, he says: 'I very much support the commission's objectives as defined in the Access to Justice Act 1999 -- the provision of good-quality advice and wide accessibility and availability of services.'Despite its demise, Mr Ely remains a staunch defender of the LAB.

'I know the board takes a lot of criticism at the coal face, and obviously there have been failings from time to time, but the quality of the management of the executive has been high.

I was always impressed by the work done at the top levels and those who have developed policy and advised government have served it well.'LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSION MEMBER JULIET HERZOG, BY ALISON CLARKEAlthough Juliet Herzog is not a legal aid practitioner, she is, she says, 'committed to providing free or affordable legal services to people in need'.

As an associate partner with Liverpool law firm Silverbeck Rymer, which specialises in insurance work, she can bring a private sector perspective to her work on the Legal Services Commission.But she also has a background in public service, which, she says, is the reason she applied for the role as member of the commission.

A former community worker, she was also an elected member of Liverpool City Council for seven years.Ms Herzog says she is looking forward to her new role on the commission and is committed to its aims.

'I would not have applied for the job, or accepted it, if I had not been committed in principle to the way forward.

The commission has to ensure that a large amount of public money is targeted at those most in need.'But she accepts that it may not all be plai n sailing.

'Although the commission will be taking forward a lot of the developments of the old Legal Aid Board, most of its work will be very different to what was going on at the board five years ago.

Because it is very different there are going to be problems and complaints to overcome.'She says that at a national level, she has a part to play in developing policy and strategy for the commission.

'I will also be chairing the Merseyside and North-West England Regional Legal Services Committee whose job will be to assess need for legal services locally, and to bring together suppliers, providers and funders,' she says.

'We have to create constructive partnerships to deliver the best legal services to those in need.'Ms Herzog can foresee a number of challenges for the commission.

The first is to establish legal service contracts and make them work, which, she says, 'is a critical part of the way in which legal aid is to be targeted'.

The commission also needs to control expenditure on very expensive cases and make sure that quality standards are properly enforced.

'But ultimately,' she says 'the challenge for the commission is to provide an adequate service to those in need.'LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSION MEMBER ANTHONY EDWARDS, BY ALISON CLARKEAnthony Edwards, the senior partner of east London legal aid firm TV Edwards, calls himself a 'constructive critic' of the Legal Services Commission, to which he has just been appointed.Mr Edwards says he regrets the demise of the Legal Aid Board, which 'worked well over the years'.

But, equally, he accepts that 'no government would continue letting the legal aid budget get out of control'.He admits that he has a number of concerns about the current and future changes, but he takes a pragmatic approach.

'My view is that the changes were going to happen anyway and I wanted to be in there when they did in order to maintain the services that I think are necessary.

It's only by being in it that I have a chance of influencing things,' he says.And he is confident he will be able to make an impact: 'I expect to be able to make a difference.

I have so much practical experience and I can tell them the way that something is likely to turn out.'The challenge, says Mr Edwards, is to 'improve access to legal services and improve the quality of those services'.

But it is also 'to maintain those firms that provide a good service, which means there must be an increase in remuneration levels'.Mr Edwards adds: 'The trouble is that these are competing interests, so we have to find ways of spending the money better and directing the money better.

For instance, with the increased use of mediation, the courts are being used less so we are able to produce more for the money available.'But he is concerned about the future.

'My fear is that if we can't find a way of maintaining the present service for a fixed sum of money, then what is going to happen in the future? The system has to be workable, but cash limiting everything creates real problems.'LEGAL SERVICES COMMISSION MEMBER YVONNE MOSQUITO, BY ALISON CLARKEA Birmingham city councillor for the past four years, Yvonne Mosquito applied to become a member of the Legal Services Commission 'because I know about partnerships, which is what the commission is all about'.With a background in legal advice and other voluntary work -- she has a law degree and almost became a barrister -- she is also the NHS representative on the local primary care group and the council's representative on the West Midlands police authority.She says she wants to look at the services being provided from the client's point of view.

'We need to look at what stops clients from seeking and getting advice.

We should be making it as easy as possible for them to access the services they need.

The key is joined-up working.

When I became a councillor I started to understand the importance of strategic relationships between different agencies in achieving that.

Council departments were doing their own thing without speaking to each other on developing strategies.

The way to improve services for people is through partnerships.'Ms Mosquito accepts that resources may prove a problem, but still insists: 'We should be looking at ways of reducing the bill to the tax payer, so as to provide a service that is not a drain on the state purse.

At the moment we are dealing with fewer and fewer clients but it is costing us more and more.

So the main challenge is around budgets and how we spend our money.'The question, of course, is how.

'In my view, many cases that come before the court that don't need to get that far.

There is so much waste and the hierarchy is so divided from the real world.

We need better conciliation services so that matters are resolved before they get to court.

And this means that solicitors need to become more conciliatory.

What we need to do is join services together and make sure they are working in the interests of the ordinary person.'CLS CHAMPION LINCOLN CRAWFORD, BY ALISON CLARKE'When I was first told about it [the Community Legal Service], I thought it was one of the most exciting initiatives I had ever heard of and I wanted to get involved.' So that is exactly what Lincoln Crawford did.

A barrister specialising in employment and public law, with a history of work in the community on a pro bono basis, he is now one of the new breed of CLS champions.His role, he says, is to promote the service on the basis that it will provide people with unprecedented access to legal services.

'With CLS the people providing services will be talking to each other as partners.

The community law centres will be talking to the local authority who will be talking to solicitors who will be talking to the not-for-profit sector,' says Mr Crawford.He says the system will prevent people from getting discouraged when they try to get legal help.

'People tend to have a number of problems and before they know it the situation has escalated to the point where it cannot be controlled.

Then they get daunted by the scale of the problem and give up.

Under the new scheme, however, where one of the partners cannot provide a service, that query will be referred on and dealt with by the appropriate partner.'Mr Crawford is confident that the new set-up will help people understand their rights and how to implement them without the worry of what it will cost.

'It represents, in essence, affordable justice for people within their own communities,' he says.