Evidence submitted by Ryszard Opasiak,
Quality Representative, Welfare Rights and Advice Service Advice
Centre
I am writing in a personal capacity particularly
in response to the third item of the terms of reference—re
the incentives for practitioners to continue legally aided work.
In relation to the expansion of Legal Aid Services
to the not for profit advice sector, that was a welcome move in
relation to addressing the issue of advice deserts (both in terms
of geographic and subject areas), the critical issue has become
the imposition by the Commission of a standard contract developed
with private solicitor practise.
The nature of the contract narrowly and rigidly
prescribes the work that can be counted and it's terms run counter
to common sense logic.
The recognised added value of advice services
in respect of adopting a holistic, inclusive and locally based
approach to their clients' issues is nowhere recognised. Rather
the principle required output measure (contract time) push suppliers
to provide a means tested duplicate private practise model of
service that for many runs against their operating ethos and the
demands of other funders, principally local authorities.
These issues are be illustrated by the issues
around representation at tribunals. The relative success rate
for represented cases compared to unrepresented appellants is
well known. Where a client has a reasonable prospect of success
we have seen representation as an integral part of the service
we provide. This reflects the low literacy level of a relatively
deprived local community in which we are based. While the provision
of legal aid for representation is a larger issue—the outright
ban within the new contract on claiming for waiting and travel
time to attend at tribunals is unfair on providers.
Another example is the standard times for producing
and reading standard correspondence that do not reflect the time
costs involved in retrieving files and recording/documenting activity
in any common sense fashion and for some agencies, depending on
their contract subjects, work unfairly.
Ryszard Opasiak
Quality Representative
January 2004
| 
