Report comment

I have believed for a long time this needs to be considered at a national level as a funding model for the Legal Aid scheme. There are a growing number of UK and international firms making vast sums of money from corporate clients and those who choose to venue shop in the UK for the benefit of using what was once a beacon of a justice system.

Now it is a justice system that shines only for those with the ability to pay. A few years ago a banking tax was levied on the basis of those in the city having the 'benefit' of using a trusted financial system to make their money. I don't see why it shouldn't be the same for the justice system.

I would suggest that a tax is levied on all firms NOT doing Legal Aid up to a certain size. This will give firms a choice - pay the levy to the upkeep of the system or employ people to do that work in house. The second option either trains and employs socially responsible lawyers, or at least reminds those destined for corporate law in the end of the importance of grassroots work. We may even end up with a talent pool of lawyers keen to work int he legal aid sector.

Then perhaps we can bring an end to this ridiculous policy of pro bono which has been used by politicians and the LS to plug gaps caused by driving decent practititioners to the wall and to pat their corporate chums on the back for helping out at a law centre on the third Tuesday of every month for 2 hours. As if that's a substitute for the talent and experience needed to give a voice to the disadvantaged.

I appreciate this will be unpopular, but some elements of the profession need to look at themselves and ask whether it is right that they don't contribute more to the system when they can routinely pay trainees more than many very experienced lawyers can earn. This is not a pay claim for legal aid lawyers, but those that rely on the system to make vast profits, should ensure that system does not collapse.