ADEQUATE PROVISION IN RURAL AREAS
AND SMALLER TOWNS
184. The LSC's intention to deal with fewer and larger
firms has also been criticised for failing to take adequate account
of the situation of clients in areas outside the major conurbations.
In their written evidence to us, the Legal Aid Practitioners Group
(LAPG) warned:
"The economic model suggested by Lord Carter
is not achievable outside the biggest cities. His proposals depend
on firms building up volumes of work that are not available in
rural areas and market towns. Any payment structure therefore
has to ensure that good quality criminal defence services can
be provided by viable businesses outside the cities as well. The
Carter Report tells us nothing about how this might be achieved".[215]
Andrew Otterburn voiced a similar caution in his
study for the LSC on the impact of the Carter proposals:
"Difficulty may also be encountered in rural
areas, as it is likely that economies of scale may never be realisable
in areas with small, scattered populations and lower volumes.
Schemes are likely to need to operate differently in rural areas
from concentrated urban areas."[216]
These concerns not only apply to criminal legal aid
providers, but also to civil and family legal aid lawyers, particularly
those offering advice and representation in social welfare law.
The Access to Justice Alliance predicted that the implementation
of the new fee schemes and the envisaged move to competitive tendering
aimed at reducing the number of providers the LSC deals with,
may pose a risk to geographic coverage:
"[t]he introduction of fixed or graduated fees,
the unified contract for not for profit organisations, and competitive
tendering are all likely to cause a drop in the number of providers.
This will increase the risk that advice deserts will grow rather
than diminish, with the consequent impact on clients. People may
need to travel further, wait longer for appointments, or lose
a choice of representative."[217]
185. We were warned of difficulties in dealing with
criminal cases involving multiple defendants where the issue of
conflicts of interest in conducting an effective defence might
arise.[218] Similarly,
some family law cases, such as multi-party child care proceedings
or contact proceedings, may require different firms of solicitors
acting for each of the parties to the case to prevent conflicts
of interest. The LSC recognised some of these risks[219]
but it remains unclear how it will deal adequately with them if
the number of legal aid providers continues to fall.
186. Outreach programmes, referred to by Carolyn
Regan in her oral evidence to us, [220]
and telephone advice and referral services, especially through
an improved CLS Direct and the modified CDS Direct, can alleviate
the problem of insufficient local or regional legal aid coverage
in rural areas and market towns as a consequence of a move to
fewer, larger providers. But such programmes cannot replace adequate
geographical spread of legal aid providers' offices. We repeat
the comments in the Constitutional Affairs Committee Report of
the last Parliament Civil Legal Aid: adequacy of provision
on the potential that outreach programmes might have in securing
adequate legal aid coverage in smaller towns and rural areas,
especially in social welfare law that "the details of their
implementation is of crucial importance;" and that for them
to have a chance of working, "they must not be irregular
or infrequent and they must integrate properly with other legal
services to enable proper referral".[221]
187. Restructuring
and growing in size might be a solution for criminal legal aid
firms in London and other major cities to improve their efficiency
and provide services in a more localised way, thus reducing the
time spent travelling to advise and represent clients in police
stations and magistrates' courts. However, the move to fewer,
larger suppliers is a solution confined to geographical areas
and categories of the law where there is clear over-supply. The
welcome desire to reduce the LSC's administration and transaction
costs through a reduction in the number of firms it has to deal
with must be balanced against the risk to the availability and
quality of publicly funded legal advice and representation associated
with a reduction in the number of legal aid suppliers.
205 
