Dennis Clarke back again.

Things are happening in the Justice world but unfortunately those thinks seem to make little sense to those of us working hard at the coalface.

I have always believed that if the public decides we (criminal lawyers in particular) do not meet their perceived needs then either we can need to change immediately or we need to be replaced.

I have learned that the way in which the Justice System has been constructed over many many years is complex and delicate. It is like an ecosystem where if you change one aspect you cannot be sure what the consequences will be.

Our legal system has developed in the 'adversarial' fashion which allowed justice to be achieved in most cases working with a jury in serious criminal matters or with a judge in civil matters. Whichever one we look at the reality is that unless both parties have equal recourse to legal expertise then the system is likely to fail the interests of justice test.

It is the government's desire to alter all this by put out the work to tender and taking the lowest bid to deal with this important work.

The danger with this includes:

• the quality of the lawyer who is prepared to deal with this work is bound to reduce. At present the government's own figures show that to run a legal aid practice properly costs in the region of 4+ times the sum that is actually paid to lawyers to deal with legal aid work. This can only be achieved if the work has attracted the lowest grade lawyers who then target doing the least work necessary to get to the end of the case.
• The system works and is the cheapest available because the defence (in criminal cases) can be trusted to do its job properly and prepare for trials fully. Take away this part of the equation and all you have left is an ability for the State to convict as quickly and cheaply as possible.

It has often been said that the Tory party is the party of big business. They will enhance this view by getting rid of the many High Street firms that service the legal aid work in England and Wales to be replaced with large companies operating over very wide areas making use of as many unqualified workers as possible and only using lawyers who are prepared to work cheaply enough to ensure profits for the Companies.

Dennis

The general problem with Lawyers is nothing to do with Lawyers as such.

If you look around (and this is a general comment that catches most but not all) at professionals you will see a group of people who, when qualified, seem to believe that society now owes them a living to keep them in the comfort that they dream of.

The sad truth is that this delusion turns out to be a fact more often than not. The reason the dreams become reality is that the majority of the professionals share the same dream and as a consequence the numbers bring about the reality. This is set in stone from soooo long ago that society does not question it. Indeed, the measure of how good a professional is seems to depend upon how much they charge and still have people queuing up to see them.

There should be no doubt that financial success is not necessarily a measure of ability or of worth to society. It just is.

So far as Lawyers are concerned (and let me make it clear that I admit to being one of them) their value to society ought to be great. They need to be there to allow people to avoid oppression by the State and by those with power over them. Unfortunately, there is something that will stand in the way of the Lawyer fulfilling this role. The destruction of the legal aid system means that those whom the State picks on either by way of criminal prosecution, abuse of authority by taking their children without judicial intervention, failure to permit them to claim their entitlements from the welfare State and generally withholding rights because 'they can do so' will either fail to have any assistance to obtain redress or may simply obtain inadequate assistance.

There can be no doubt that those who seek the power of government may also have a tendency to bully. They do not like it if their decisions that affect many people are questioned and it is even worse if those questions are raised by the poor and the vulnerable and yet worse again is if the complaints are upheld in a Court.

We are entering into a period where the Courts will be there for everyone but for the first time in my long career I see that the rich will have the assistance of Lawyers but the poor will simply be the cannon fodder for the Lawyers to shoot down and the Courts to resent because they do not know what they are doing and are clogging up the Courts System with their unfocussed complaints.

If we look at who is to blame we find, as usual, it is those in Government who ought to take the blame. However, they focus all our complaints on the bankers. They forget the they were the ones who wanted the power to organise our lives, they are the ones who decided on the systems and the budgets. They are the ones who squandered the wealth of this country. They are the ones who plan the running of this Country in the way that is more likely to result in their re-election rather than deciding what is in fact for the long term benefit of the Country as a whole. They are the ones who spent too much money on PFI initiatives so that they could look good in the present no matter what it meant for the financial health of the Country. These are the people who should be saying they are sorry for our parlous state and doing what they can to keep our basic services running properly.

These are the people who have mortgaged us to the hilt and beyond so that we can no longer afford to protect the rights of the poor and vulnerable at a time when the poor and vulnerable need protecting from those who Govern.