Evidence submitted by Emma Sumner, Barrister
Here's a brief synopsis of the effect of the
new graduated fees:
I can't speak for the criminal bar, but I should
imagine that describing Andrew McFarlane as a little upset is
an understatement. Certainly those aspects of the Family Bar that
undertake legal aid work have been desecrated by the legal aid
cuts. The emphasis being on those members of the bar who will
do it. In the area of private child work and ancillary relief
(money on divorce) in particular, they can only have been designed
to cut the bar out of the equation completely.
Personally, after only a couple of years on
my feet I have already taken the decision that, other than exceptionally,
I simply cannot commercially even consider undertaking legal aid.
My Chambers' rent alone is £60 a day, the standard legal
aid ancillary relief hearing pays around £120. Privately,
I might expect at least five times that sum for the same type
of hearing. I am fortunate in that I have plenty enough private
work not to have to worry about surviving on legal aid but the
net result of that is that the public is being shut off from access
to decent counsel, or even counsel at all, in a field which is
fraught with difficulties, sensitivity and emotions.
If, as some suspect, the Government's aim must
have been to cut out the role of Counsel (it could only otherwise
be unbelievable stupidity giving the current rates of remuneration
and knowing the overheads that we have at the Bar) then sadly
I believe it will succeed. Fundamentally, it is not about lawyers
being greedy—it would be hard to commercially sustain a
practice on double the current rates of remuneration—it's
about the work being viable at all.
Emma Sumner
Barrister
March 2004
|
