Yuppy, beady-eyed crowds; Fat Cats and Moggies! Wednesday thoughts.

Updates 16th June *** Mail on Sunday corrects daily's legal aid sums *** So that league table of supposed greed is selective bunk.

*** Please sign the e-petition on Legal Aid

The government's purge of legal aid crosses the border into authoritarianism and tyranny - Conservative Student 20th May

Lord McNally's balloons - Guy Gozem QC

Natural justice faces a savage loss of innocence - Nick Cohen - 15th June 2013


Like many nations, the UK has been hit by the general economic crisis.  It is generally accepted that there is a need to save considerable sums of money and it is for government to identify ways in which the money might be saved.  Most areas of government are having to take cuts and the decisions needed are not easy.  We all wish to have good health care, fine schools and many other things including access to justice with legal aid for those who cannot afford it.

Having said this, we have a government maintaining a militaristic foreign policy which does not seem to baulk at replacing the ageing Trident programme - £100bn a considerable underestimate?    Neither does it seem to worry about the huge 'ring-fenced' overseas aid budget even though government borrowing remains high.  In addition, huge sums of money have been doled out to various private sector service providers - see Ministry of Justice contracts for 2012 .

It is in this financial context

Act NOW to try to stop 'Justice' being only for the rich and powerful

*** Please sign the e-petition on Legal Aid - the aim is to try to persuade Parliament to debate the Ministry of Justice plans to slash legal aid.  Why should any Minister be allowed to seriously alter the rights of the British citizen just by stroke of his pen?

It beggars belief that any elected British government could put forward proposals so damaging to justice for the citizen as those in the Ministry of Justice consultation.

The Guardian - Sunday 9th June 2013 - Editorial:

"Last week, the government last week closed its hurried consultation on cuts to the £2bn legal aid budget. Few proposals have met with a more unified opposition among lawyers than the suggestion that £220m can be saved by introducing a system of price competitive tendering (PCT). This would see defendants deprived of the right to choose a defence lawyer and the number of criminal legal aid firms cut from 1,400 to 400.

VAT ~ an interesting case in the First Tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

'Value Added Tax' is disliked by most end-of-the-line consumers but it is a major 'earner' for governments.  In the UK, it was introduced in 1973 following entry to the European Economic Communities (EEC).  From 4th January 2011, the coalition government increased the rate to 20%.   Some things (such as 'food') are 'zero-rated' so there is VAT in theory but not in practice and it is, technically speaking, open to government to impose a rate.  More details of VAT are at HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC).

From a business viewpoint, where the 'registration threshold' is exceeded, a supplier of goods or services has to register for VAT and, in other cases, a business may apply for voluntary registration.   Registered businesses account to HMRC for the difference between output and input VAT.  Consider a business (B).  Output VAT is that which B collects from sales of its business output.  Input VAT is that which B has to pay on its purchases (i.e. input to the business) - see HMRC - How VAT is charged and accounted for.  The difference between output and input has to be accounted for.  Clearly, if output exceeds input then B has to pay the balance to HMRC.  Conversely, a claim may be made to HMRC.

These arrangements often result in businesses

Legal News - Legal aid - Hillsborough - Human Rights - Road safety - Kenya: a colonial legacy

Legal Aid - The Ministry of Justice received in the region of 13000 responses to their Transforming Legal Aid consultation.  Many of the responses are from bodies and practitioners with immense experience in the legal world.  Links to a sample of such responses are on the earlier blogpost.  On 4th May, a protest at the Ministry of Justice was addressed by several speakers including excellent speeches from Dinah Rose QC (a declaration of a lack of interest), Michael Fordham QC (the avocado of justice) and Geoffrey Robertson QC (there is a hidden agenda) - have a look at Head of Legal blog.    See also Garden Court Chambers blog - Speech of Stephen Knafler QC.  At this stage, it is possible for the Ministry to rethink their proposals given the overwhelming evidence that immense damage will be caused to justice should they bulldoze ahead and simply go for implementation.  The Ministry should rethink and engage with the legal profession and others to see where savings can be made without destroying the very fabric of justice for the citizen.

The MoJ is also beginning a full scale review of the legal services framework - Solicitors Journal 5th June. 

Hillsborough - In December 2012

Some responses to MoJ consultation on Transforming legal aid

Protest at Liverpool 4th June

*** Please sign the e-petition on Legal Aid

Now at 73 links:

Legal aid is the beating heart of the rule of law - Michael Fordham QC

No lawyer should have a financial interest to betray his client - Geoffrey Robertson QC

The proposals fail the basic test of good administration - Dinah Rose QC

The government's consultation on Transforming legal aid ends today.  At court locations throughout England and Wales there were brief  'silent protests' just before 10 am.

Over the next few days I will add to this post links to some responses to the consultation where the writers have chosen to publish them - for example, on their blogs or via legal practice websites etc.  Inevitably, these will just be a sample of a very large number.  They appear in no particular order other than the order in which I came across them.

The Ministry of Justice has indicated that it will consider the responses and comment in the autumn.

There are signs that the general public is becoming aware of the devastating impact of these proposals on their rights - e.g. to choose their own solicitor if charged with a criminal offence.

Here are the links ...................

Legal Aid ~ consultation closes 4th June

Under government proposals, criminal legal aid will be severely curtailed - Money, money, money ... just where is Justice heading?. and 'The real 'scumbag criminal' is still free ~ A matter at democracy's heart'.   The government's consultation ends on 4th June - see the consultation  here.

Recently, Gabriela Knaul (United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers) has urged world governments to develop and sustain effective legal aid systems as an essential component of a fair and efficient justice system founded on the rule of law - see Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

" Legal aid, a right in itself" - UN Special Rapporteur

GENEVA (30 May 2013) – “Legal aid is both a right in itself and an essential precondition for the exercise and enjoyment of a number of human rights, including the rights to a fair trial and to an effective remedy,” said Ms. Knaul, presenting her latest report to the UN Human Rights Council. “It represents an important safeguard that contributes to ensuring the fairness and public trust in the administration of justice.”

60 years ago today

2nd June is the 60th Anniversary of the Coronation of HM Queen Elizabeth II.  The BBC has had the original footage digitally remastered - see here and the The Coronation of Queen Elizabeth II  may be viewed on BBC Parliament from 1010 BST on Sunday 2 June.

The Queen's accession to the throne actually took place upon the death of her father King George VI on 6th February 1952 - 60 years a Queen: the Diamond Jubilee.  In the years of post war austerity, the Coronation was a splendid occasion and seemed, at the time, to lift the spirits of the country.  It was televised but few homes, at least where I lived, had a receiver.  In those - now seemingly far away days - the Queen made her Coronation Oath :

Archbishop. Will you solemnly promise and swear to govern the Peoples of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Union of South Africa, Pakistan, and Ceylon, and of your Possessions and the other Territories to any of them belonging or pertaining, according to their respective laws and customs?