Report comment

I, just an ordinary but well educated member of the public, grew up post-war with the impression bandied about by lawyers (forget 'and politicians') that we had the most wonderful system of justice, where access to the courts (and obviously, therefore, to justice) was guaranteed, as was equality (of arms) before the law. The latter, it seemed obvious to me, must mean that it would not be permitted for a richer plaintiff/defendant to see off their opponent before or during a case simply because of the wealth they could spend on it. This was laughable before legal aid was introduced but was still not true afterwards, and neither the legal professions nor judges seemed bothered about it.
As for "access to justice", I have dug down into my computer files for a comment I made to the Guardian, in order to find a phrase it used when Clarke QC, defender of the legal system, started to wield his axe, suggesting it was "a load of meaningless tosh peddled by politicians and lawyers to suit their own self-serving ends". Many of the comments here seem to support this.