Legal squabbles
Sir: Harry Mount’s angry and unfocused polemic (‘Against the Law’, 8 June), demonstrates a fundamental ignorance of the British legal system. That is surprising from a former barrister, even if he never practised after pupillage. British justice is revered worldwide, and for good reason. Rather than deal with the disastrous effects the proposals will have, should they be implemented, Mount’s invective is preoccupied with what barristers wear, rather than what we say. Barristers prefer to focus on evidence.
What could be a bigger display of Big Government than the state charging you with a criminal offence and then allocating you a lawyer, whether or not they are suitable? That is what the legal profession is fighting. To add insult to injury, these lawyers will be allocated on price alone. Quality will be eroded by a Dutch auction style system of bidding for legal aid contacts: price competitive tendering.
Legal services are not exempt from cuts in a time of economic austerity.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in