Report comment

If we accept that cuts are necessary (I don't) I don't understand why legal aid has been specifically identified for particular attention. Legal aid spend is directly related to the number of suspects interviewed by the Police who ask for legal representation and the number of defendants entitled to legal aid.
If grayling wants to cut the spend on legal aid he should remove certain low level offences from the risk of custody; he should instruct the Police to arrest fewer people and the CPS to charge fewer people.
Concentrating on the fees paid to lawyers and certain aspects of eligibility misses the reality and displays a strong prejudice against the accused and those who represent them.
The entire budget for Justice should be reviewed.
Looking only at legal aid spend is like looking at how much the NHS spends on blood and demanding that spend us cut without thinking about what the blood is needed for. Cutting legal aid will lead to injustice.
The latest nonsense is to take those with a disposable income of £35.7k plus out of legal aid. If acquitted and if able to pay for a defence these people will only be remunerated at legal aid rates. Being found not guilty will cost these people money and reputation. Whilst one ought to wonder at how those who complain about crime are treated by the Police, the Court system and by defence advocates how the acquitted are treated should likewise be if concern.
Grayling and his advisers don't have any ideas other than cuts and Geayling and his advisers don't care how devastating those cuts are on the efficiency and effectiveness of the system.
Every day I see what a mess the CPS and Courts are in.
I don't see the point in talking to Grayling as he doesn't care about the mess he has created and the havoc he has planned.
Talking to grayling and his advisers is a complete waste of time, breath and dignity.