The main argument put forward by the Legal Services Commission (LSC) in favour of competitive tendering is 'value for money'.

You do not have look far to find proof that we are giving value for money as legal aid lawyers. All you have to do is compare private rates to the rates currently on offer for legal aid. If you obtain costs out of central funds for a non-legally aided matter you get between three and four times the amount for the same work on an indemnity basis that would have been payable by a private payer.


It is now more than anecdotal that a plumber who comes out to fix an emergency burst at night or glazier who boards up a smashed high street window gets paid more per hour than a duty solicitor doing a criminal call-out to a local police station.


I met a partner in a firm only doing private work who had to work just two hours to achieve my daily target.


It seems to me that the government and the LSC view legal aid as some form of community punishment, whereby practitioners who dare to do it (defending the most vulnerable people in our society) should be condemned to doing unpaid work for the community for the rest of their working lives.


The age profile of those doing criminal defence work does not bode well for the future, as recruitment is increasingly difficult.


The LSC already has value for money. It cannot expect continuing investment in people and information technology when the profit margins are so tiny for such a huge expenditure of capital and energy.


The ancient pharaohs expected the Israelites to make pyramids without the resources to do so (bricks without straw). Of course, the ancient Israelites were slaves.


Stuart Kaufman, Kaufman and Co, Manchester