---

Column 251

is to be expected. The hon. Gentleman referred to the Law Society both in this country and in Northern Ireland suggesting packages that could involve economies. Let me say on behalf of the Lord Chancellor that those suggestions were greatly appreciated, and the Lord Chancellor's Department is more than willing to continue to explore them. In fact, those items have been on the agenda of the efficiency commission since the mid to late 1980s. I must say that there has not been a very high degree of professional urgency in pressing them. We are more than happy to look at the profession's suggestions for economies that can be made--although I must tell the House that, as I have said on another occasion, their suggestions to date have proved on examination to be worth considerably less than claimed. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister of State would join me in paying tribute to the legal aid staff in Northern Ireland who have continued to do their administrative work, sometimes in the most appalling and, to my mind, quite frightening conditions.

The hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North asked me to give certain undertakings, and I will certainly address the matters that he put to me. I cannot predict what spending options might become available in more prosperous future times--in the realms of legal aid or elsewhere in public expenditure--but I am quite sure that, in more prosperous times, there will be no shortage of competition for the resources that are then available.

The hon. Gentleman asked me to comment upon the fact that the Lord Chancellor has indicated that there may well be two further disciplines to be anticipated in legal aid in Northern Ireland. I am sure that you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, would wish me to say that these matters can in no way be delivered by an Executive act. They can be made available on a recommendation of the Executive, but it is Parliament that will decide-- Parliament is the correct and ultimate forum for consulting the representatives of the people. The hon. Gentleman may be assured that that proper parliamentary route will be the only route down which any further changes can proceed. The regulations which are the subject of this debate and which came into operation on 12 April 1993, have had the effects of decreasing the disposable income limit below which legal aid is available without payment of a contribution ; increasing from one quarter to one third the fraction of disposable income which is payable as a contribution towards the cost of legal aid ; decreasing the disposable income limit below which legal aid advice and assistance is available without contribution ; aligning the allowances taken into account when computing disposable income in assessing eligibility for legal advice and assistance and for legal aid with those applicable for income support ; increasing the sliding scale of the amount of capital to be disregarded in respect of persons of pensionable age ; increasing the disposable income level below which legal advice and assistance is available ; extending the disregard of certain forms of welfare benefit in the assessment of financial eligibility for legal advice and assistance and substituting a new scale of contributions payable by recipients of legal advice and assistance.

The regulations do not affect criminal legal aid in Northern Ireland and are concerned with civil legal aid, legal advice and assistance by way of representation. Having explained the main effects of the regulations, it will be helpful to the House if I explain why the Government have taken these measures at this time. The House will be

---

Column 252

aware that the financial criteria determining eligibility for civil legal aid, for advice and assistance-- commonly referred to as the green form scheme--and for assistance by way of representation--often referred to as ABWOR--in Northern Ireland, have historically been the same as those applied in England and Wales.

Over a considerable number of years, eligibility changes introduced in England and Wales have been effected simultaneously in Northern Ireland. As in England and Wales, the cost to the public purse of civil legal aid in Northern Ireland has been escalating over the last few years and the Lord Chancellor was satisfied that the policy of applying similar financial criteria in the two jurisdictions should be continued on this occasion to control the acceleration of growth. The need for these measures is illustrated by the fact that over the past four years, overall expenditure on civil legal aid and advice in Northern Ireland has more than doubled from £5.1 million to £10.3 million. In the three years from 1988- 89 to 1991-92, the number of civil legal aid and advice and assistance bills paid increased by 22 per cent. while the cost of these bills increased by 63 per cent. The Government are satisfied that such a rate of increase in the expenditure of taxpayers money cannot be allowed to continue. The regulations, the detailed effects of which I have already outlined to the House, will help to contain this growth in expenditure. But in so doing, the regulations have been designed to safeguard access to justice to the greatest possible extent and will direct available funding to where it is needed most. I stress that rather than being cut, expenditure on the legal aid scheme will continue to rise. By the admission of a Labour spokesman in the House of Lords relatively recently, our system of legal aid is the most generous in the world. It is also probably one of the most expensive, if not the most expensive, and the taxpayer has an interest in the matter. 11.42 pm

Mr. James Molyneaux (Lagan Valley) : Like the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North (Mr. McNamara), I am not entirely satisfied that the Lord Chancellor's Department is absolutely correct to say that there will be only a very small reduction in the number of households affected by the economies. I doubt very much whether the reduction will be as low as 2 per cent. of expenditure overall. With regard to the inevitable means- testing of applications for legal aid, I am not certain whether the hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull, North is correct to say that people on low incomes will be hurt most. There are reasons to believe that people in the so-called middle-class bracket will suffer most. In many cases, middle income groups will find that legal aid actions will be priced out of their reach.

Oddly enough, the middle income group tends to be legitimately involved in seeking redress for grievances and in various civil actions. We must be very careful to ensure that those people are not being unduly deprived of resources. Could the Minister explain what he said about the vast and dramatic increase in the legal aid budget for Northern Ireland? Is it possible for him to give some categories that might show why there has been a mushrooming in the budget? He mentioned that there was the straightforward funding of legal action and legal aid

---

Column 253

for representation. In Northern Ireland, legal aid for representation is especially important because I understand that he had third-party representations in legal cases in mind.

Thought needs to be given to a separate matter which may not be strictly relevant in the context of these orders--the impact on law centres and advice agencies. I know that that matter was considered at great length in the United Kingdom Legal Aid Act 1988. I wonder whether it is permissible to refer to that in the context of the present debate. I support the Labour party case that there should be a commonality and relationship-- proportionately, if one likes--between expenditure in Great Britain and that in Northern Ireland. It is not enough for the Minister to say that the number of households will be limited. Certainly, it is no case for awarding Northern Ireland a budget that is smaller per capita than that for Great Britain. If it is the case that there is a variation and Northern Ireland is on a lower scale than the rest of the United Kingdom, that cannot be defended in any way.

I am sure that we are all searching for economies and want to ensure that moneys are spent wisely. Can we examine the possibility of effecting economies by omitting legal aid for cases that border on the frivolous on many occasions? In some cases, the cost of legal aid for preliminary hearings can be almost out of reach and has the habit of multiplying vastly when cases are taken to higher courts on appeal.

10.46 pm

Mr. John M. Taylor : With the leave of the House, I feel that the right hon. Member for Lagan Valley (Mr. Molyneaux) is entitled to a response. If there are any matters that I cannot address comprehensively because of the lateness of the hour, he and I can exchange letters because I am anxious to be obliging. He dwelt on the question whether we could enlarge on why the legal aid bill had gone up so much. That has been a source of puzzlement in the Lord Chancellor's Department.

One is driven to a conclusion which may require further investigation, but the fact is--I do not say this whimsically but in a straight manner--that the legal aid bill has gone up because lawyers' bills have been escalating faster than any known relevant attendant index. Certainly, volume has increased a little, but lawyers' bills have gone up much more than volume. One must look at the unit costs of the practitioner. Why are cases taking longer? I am tempted to say--with some humility--that, since the lawyers drafted the bills in the first place, perhaps they can help us by explaining why their bills have gone up. I would be interested to hear their explanation. I have always tried to be sensitive to the interests of Northern Ireland and its representatives in the House. I give a pledge--I was not asked for this--that I will continue to examine closely any representation that comes from Northern Ireland and its hon. and right hon. representatives in the House. I end as I began : this is probably the most generous system of legal aid in the world. However, it is expensive and we must exercise some discipline from time to time.

---

Column 254

10.49 pm

Mr. McNamara : By the leave of the House, I shall make just two observations. The first is in reply to what the leader of the Ulster Unionists said about the measure affecting many people. By modest means I referred to the salary and wage levels in Northern Ireland in comparison with the rest of the United Kingdom. But the effect of the increases could be across the board.

My second observation is that if we are punishing the litigant for the sins of the profession, the Government should have examined that in any case, in their auditing and control of payment of moneys. It seems wrong that the ordinary citizen should suffer because of what the Minister suggests is some fault on the part of the legal profession. That, above all, is the reason why we should vote against the regulations tonight.

Question put :--

The House divided : Ayes 56, Noes 129.

Division No. 290] [10.50 pm

AYES

Ashdown, Rt Hon Paddy

Battle, John

Beith, Rt Hon A. J.

Boyce, Jimmy

Caborn, Richard

Campbell, Menzies (Fife NE)

Clarke, Eric (Midlothian)

Coffey, Ann

Cryer, Bob

Cunliffe, Lawrence

Cunningham, Jim (Covy SE)

Dixon, Don

Dowd, Jim

Etherington, Bill

Fatchett, Derek

Foster, Rt Hon Derek

Godman, Dr Norman A.

Gordon, Mildred

Graham, Thomas

Hanson, David

Hendron, Dr Joe

Hinchliffe, David

Home Robertson, John

Howarth, George (Knowsley N)

Hoyle, Doug

Hughes, Kevin (Doncaster N)

Hume, John

Illsley, Eric

Jowell, Tessa

Kirkwood, Archy

McCartney, Ian

McFall, John

McMaster, Gordon

McNamara, Kevin

Mahon, Alice

Mallon, Seamus

Martin, Michael J. (Springburn)

Meale, Alan

Michael, Alun

Michie, Bill (Sheffield Heeley)

Milburn, Alan

Miller, Andrew

O'Brien, William (Normanton)

Paisley, Rev Ian

Pike, Peter L.

Powell, Ray (Ogmore)

Primarolo, Dawn

Rendel, David

Robinson, Peter (Belfast E)

Skinner, Dennis

Spellar, John

Stott, Roger

Wallace, James

Wilson, Brian

Wise, Audrey

Worthington, Tony

Tellers for the Ayes :

Mr. Harry Barnes and

Mr. Andrew Mackinlay.

NOES

Allason, Rupert (Torbay)

Amess, David

Ancram, Michael

Arbuthnot, James

Atkinson, Peter (Hexham)

Baker, Nicholas (Dorset North)

Baldry, Tony

Bates, Michael

Bellingham, Henry

Beresford, Sir Paul

Blackburn, Dr John G.

Bonsor, Sir Nicholas

Bowis, John

Brandreth, Gyles

Brazier, Julian

Bright, Graham

Brooke, Rt Hon Peter

Browning, Mrs. Angela

Burns, Simon

Burt, Alistair

Carrington, Matthew

Carttiss, Michael

Chapman, Sydney

Congdon, David

Conway, Derek

Coombs, Simon (Swindon)

Cope, Rt Hon Sir John

Cran, James

Davies, Quentin (Stamford)

Day, Stephen

Devlin, Tim

Dover, Den

Duncan, Alan

Emery, Rt Hon Sir Peter

Evans, Jonathan (Brecon)

Evans, Roger (Monmouth)

Fabricant, Michael

Forsyth, Michael (Stirling)

Forth, Eric

Fox, Dr Liam (Woodspring)

Freeman, Roger

French, Douglas

Gale, Roger

Gallie, Phil

---