Examination of Witnesses (Questions 20-25)
BARONESS BUTLER-SLOSS,
GBE, LUCY THEIS,
QC, CAROLINE LITTLE,
JUDITH TIMMS,
OBE AND ELENA
FOWLER
16 JUNE 2009
Q20 Mr Tyrie: This is all about money
really, is it not, and the fact that there is not any? If you
were given the same amount of money, do you think you could do
this job much better with a completely different structure and,
if so, how would you go about it?
Lucy Theis: We do not ask for
more money. I made that perfectly clear, I hope, in our document
that we submitted. The short answer to your question is yes, we
think we can and we think it should be a graduated fee scheme
in relation to advocacy along the lines of the existing scheme
that is currently paid to the Bar, with some recalibration. It
is a system that has been demonstrated to work. The data is there
hopefully nearly clean. With the appalling history in relation
to data issues and the Legal Services Commission, it would be
extremely dangerous to embark on yet another scheme that may have
difficulties in relation to not only the data being kept but also
the budget.
Q21 Mr Tyrie: Could I ask you to
speculate on why, if that seems so manifestly clear to almost
everyone close to this subject, there is so much persistence with
this reform?
Caroline Little: I think it is
because historically there has been so little understanding of
the cost drivers in care proceedings. There is a great deal more
information about that, but it was all put at the doors of the
lawyers. That is not the case. There is a lot of information that
this Committee has about what has driven the cost in care proceedings,
the complexity, the court delays and having a well qualified system
of representation oils the justice system much better and ensures
that things are dealt with in a timely way.
Elena Fowler: In private law proceedings,
I think it is perceived as a quick fix to shift the cost of social
work intervention onto another department when what we need is
a joined up approach between those departments to value a holistic
approach that we know through our work achieves much better, much
quicker outcomes, making a substantial saving to the public purse
in the long run both in terms of the legal proceedings, which
we do close down considerably more quickly, but also in terms
of the long term damage to the child. If these significant issues
are not addressed at the time of family breakdown, you end up
with children going into mental health problems, secure accommodation,
antisocial behaviour, etc.
Baroness Butler-Sloss: It impressed
me that the Bar are not asking for more money. What they are asking
is for a redistribution of the money in a more effective way to
pay people who do the more complex cases and to pay less to people
who do the simpler cases. That seems a practical way of approaching
it.
Q22 Mr Tyrie: I do not want to put
words in your mouth but I invite you to sum up by saying there
is no joined up government.
Caroline Little: Absolutely.
Q23 Mr Tyrie: There seems to be agreement
on that. Waste of public money going on, which would be better
spent in another way?
Caroline Little: Yes.
Q24 Mr Tyrie: And children put at
risk by failure to address these mistakes?
Caroline Little: Absolutely, yes.
Q25 Mr Tyrie: That is quite a serious
condemnation of public policy.
Caroline Little: I would remind
you that solicitors have not had any rates increase for 15 years.
Chairman: Thank you all very much.
| 
