Report comment

Nobody can doubt that there are people (and those who assist them) who try and game the PI system with false or frivolous claims. In doing so they are breaking the law and should be punished.

But the PI reforms, as I see them, illustrate the effect of a government department, the MoJ, that, has lost sight of what it is there to do, thanks to swingeing budget cuts (reported by John Hyde recently as 40% in real terms between 2011-2020).

The MoJ's purpose, broadly, is to uphold, represent and defend the UK justice system. Instead ministers have been drawn, by insurers and by the Treasury, into presiding over the hollowing out of its purpose to save money.

Those 40% cuts don't affect wealthy people, or wealthy corporations, but they do, inevitably, remove access to the law for ordinary people.

I am going currently accessing the justice system as an LiP myself, and I can confirm that the process is a nightmare. The Catch 22 is that, despite government promises to introduce online courts and make the process more palatable for the public, it has no money to carry out the significant investment this requires.

My worry is that, desperate for cash, the State will continue to turn to private corporations who are prepared to invest in the IT and infrastructure to, say, deliver an online justice system.

These businesses have a fiduciary duty to shareholders and will require a quid pro quo for their investment. Inevitably, that quid pro quo is not necessarily in the public interest.

These whiplash reforms are not altruistic, and they patently do not satisfy the criteria of improving the lot of the general public. They are instead another effect of the Global Financial Crisis and, as these reforms illustrate, those most affected by the GFC are ordinary people.