Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders bill
Public Bill Committee, 14 July 2011.
Jonathan Djanogly (Conservative, Huntingdon)
On a point of order, Mr Sheridan. At the beginning of Tuesday’s proceedings the hon. Member for Bishop Auckland claimed that the Council of Her Majesty’s Circuit Judges was not giving evidence because it would not attend at a given time. I want to correct that. I understand that in fact the council was invited, but declined the invitation, as it felt that it is for politicians to decide such things, and not for the council to comment. It passed on its thanks for being invited to give oral evidence.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
That has been recorded.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
We have representatives to give evidence from Rights of Women and the National Federation of Women’s Institutes. Will you introduce yourselves to the Committee?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
We are pleased to be taking evidence from you this morning.
The Bill does not mention women, but in various ways women will be affected, and I wondered whether you had any views on whether its effects would be different or disproportionate for men and women, or whether women would be disadvantaged in any way by proposals in the Bill.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
On the sentencing provisions, the Government are exempting domestic violence cases from the new rules on bail. In other words, if a person has been accused of domestic violence, that is a reason for remanding them in custody. The definition used in that part of the Bill is, “physical and mental violence”. Are you content with that as a specific enough test? Have you thought about that part of the Bill as well?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
At the moment, women are more likely to receive longer sentences for the same serious crimes as men. Would you support the insertion of a women’s champion into the criminal justice system? That is one of the recommendations in Corston that the previous Government did not get around to implementing.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
On the subject of legal aid in general, Britain has one of the highest legal aid bills per capita in the world. One of the reasons for that is that a lot of issues, which would normally be dealt with in other countries through standard appeals procedures or through non-legal advice, end up being dealt with by lawyers. You mentioned the specific case of welfare. Is it not the case that, in order to get welfare claims properly dealt with, there are appeals procedures in the welfare system, there are other sources of non-legal advice that women could go to, and, in fact, all we are doing by involving lawyers is just ratcheting up costs and not actually benefiting the end recipients?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
That is rather different from a case about welfare benefits, which is one of the areas you mentioned in your earlier answer.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
So you would support the removal of legal aid for dealing with welfare benefits.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Does it have to be legal advice?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Do you think that our legal aid bill is too high in this country?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Domestic violence is within the scope, and the definition has been widened. It seems to me from what you are saying that we could allocate almost an infinite amount of money to legal aid because there are no areas that you think the money should not be spent on. If you are saying that domestic violence is a priority—I agree that it is, and we have widened the scope for it—let us ensure that we spend the money on that. Those eligible for domestic violence legal aid will also be eligible for things such as ancillary support through the divorce proceedings. We are being more generous in that area and less in some of those other areas where there seems to be a rational reason to cut costs. I think that the case would be better put if you focused on the areas you thought really ought to be protected rather than just saying, “We need legal aid for absolutely everything.”
I just want to make one more point about divorce proceedings. The Government have put forward proposals—
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Order. Elizabeth, I do not want to be rude, but can you get to a question because a number of people are waiting?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Sorry. My question is: do you support the Government’s proposals for bringing forward cost support in cases where there is no legal aid and there is an economic imbalance between the two parties?
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Sorry to interrupt you, but brevity would be appreciated in not only questions, but answers. Are you finished, Elizabeth?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
I have just one more point on the letter from the National Federation of Women’s Institutes in response to the initial consultation. You claim that the definition of domestic violence included only physical harm, but that was never the case; indeed, the scope has been widened. Do you acknowledge that it has been widened?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Do you agree that the initial letter you wrote was wrong and that the definition of domestic violence was always wider than just physical harm?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I want to follow up a couple of the points you have alluded to. More generally, though, could you comment first on the role you see for mediation in family cases?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Of course, legal aid will be available, although we have talked about the definition for matters involving domestic violence. What is the appropriate role of mediation in cases where there is no actual violence—physical or mental—but there are high levels of conflict?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Have you any views on the impact on the wider family, and particularly on children?
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Could I ask you to speak up?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Can I ask Emma Scott about the issue of mediation’s appropriateness? In situations where there is no actual domestic violence and legal aid will not be available for legal advice, the woman and the man could be encouraged to go through mediation in circumstances where there are still very high levels of conflict. What is your view on that?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
That brings me to the second point that I wanted to raise, following some of the remarks made a few moments ago, about the way in which problems arrive in clusters. Elizabeth Truss made the point to you a few moments ago that legal aid would still be available for ancillary relief in divorce cases. To what extent are women who are presenting and seeking legal aid at present going through formal divorce, and to what degree are they in informal relationships or separating? Do you have any information on that?
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Before you answer, six Members have indicated that they wish to speak, so brevity, please, in questions and answers.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I am asking about women who might not be getting divorced and who therefore will not be within the ambit of the court. To what degree do you think these proposals meet their needs?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
In terms of access to ancillary relief and legal aid for that.
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
Good morning, Mr Sheridan. I am delighted to serve under your chairmanship again.
Are you aware—many people who responded to the consultation did not pick this up—that should domestic violence, either mental or physical, be realised, it would unlock all the other types of support, such as ancillary relief, contact and so on, to be funded by legal aid? Are you aware of that? Should the court effectively recognise the objective test on domestic violence and grant legal aid, that would unlock legal aid for all the other remits around it. It would not just be dealt with for that specific injunction, perhaps; it would be about everything else, including contact.
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
So you do recognise that?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
But do you not think that at some stage in the process, there needs to be an objective assessment of domestic violence? Somebody has to make an assessment objectively about whether it has taken place. I would regard bullying, for example, as mental domestic violence. Somebody somewhere has to make an objective ruling, so that it isn’t just one word against another and people do not access it as a means to—
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
Secondly, I want to ask about mediation. If domestic violence is currently a factor, compulsory mediation with all the requirement to seek it is excluded, and that is not due to change. Nobody is going to force people into mediation, or force them to explore mediation as an option, if domestic violence is a recognised factor. That is what the situation is now and that is what will continue.
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
Mediation cases exist at the moment. Of the 14,600 cases in 2009-10 where mediation was started, publicly funded and full or partial engagement was achieved, in 66% of those cases agreement was reached. Mediation was a successful model for very many people. It has worked at quite a high level in the last year, 2009-10. Do you think that it is wrong, therefore, for the Government to choose it as a favoured route? It seems to be a route that has a very high success rate and that is going in the right direction.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
I think that the witness has got the question.
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
The Government’s own impact assessment says that about 79% of the current acts of assistance will not be eligible for family legal aid in future. Does the figure of 21% accurately reflect the amount of domestic violence in the UK, or the number of separations after physical, emotional and financial violence?
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
You said in your previous evidence that quite often women do not go to the statutory agencies and they go to other advice agencies instead. Do you feel that there are enough of those agencies at the present time?
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
We have to move on.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
I want to pursue the issue of mediation. Restorative justice schemes have a very high satisfaction rate with victims—95% in some cases. That is really about mediation, and it often involves antisocial behaviour, harassment and bullying. I just want to understand why you are so categorical that in no cases of domestic violence mediation is ever appropriate.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
I understand that—although I would have thought the same applied in terms of restorative justice schemes between victims and perpetrators. I hear what you are saying. On a different point, you have made it very clear that neither of you believe that legal aid cuts are necessary; in fact, Mrs Bond suggested that it should be extended. That is clearly not the Government’s view. In terms of what will be left within the scope—for example, domestic violence and harassment—do you accept that, in fact, the provisions are perhaps more friendly towards women rather than less friendly?
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
We must move on.
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
The Justice Committee’s report on family legal aid was published this morning. I do not expect that you will have seen it, but two or three headline issues have been reported, so I just wondered if you could comment on them. First, the Chair of that Committee, the right hon. Member for Berwick-upon-Tweed (Sir Alan Beith), said that there will be significantly more litigants in person following changes to legal aid and that
“Courts are going to have to make adjustments to cope with more people representing themselves in what are often emotionally charged cases.”
Are those fears that you share?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
That is my second point. The Sun covers the issue rather more prosaically under the headline “Paedos ‘to quiz victims in court’”. It quotes Mrs Justice Pauffley as telling the Justice Committee
“that, for example, a man accused of sexually abusing his stepchildren could quiz the alleged victims if he had no lawyer.”
The report continues:
“She added: ‘It would be a denial of justice, and it would be emotionally the most upsetting of spectacles for any court to encounter.’”
Do you think that there is a real fear of people either having to go through the trauma of that sort of cross-examination, or simply not being prepared to go to court at all?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
On a point of order, Mr Sheridan. Is it in order for Mr Slaughter to quote to a witness partially, without that witness having seen the details of the report or the report itself, and, secondly, to omit the role of the judge in any court vis-à-vis the protection of a witness or victim? A judge does not sit idly by and allow those things to happen. They have a duty to protect a victim or witness.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
I do not accept that that is a point of order. I am certainly not in any position to put forward a legal perspective, but I ask for brevity and accuracy in all questions, and particularly in answers.
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
I am not sure how quoting is going to be other than accurate, and I object to such time wasting when we have very few moments left.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
We have a few minutes left.
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
I have some very quick questions, but all I need is a yes or no. Emma Scott, I am sure that you are well aware of jurisdictions around the world. Would you say that Sweden is probably at the forefront of the recognition of and action on women’s rights?
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
Do you know anything about the Swedish legal system?
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
It is a matter of great interest to me. I put it to you that Sweden and Germany—I think we can agree that those two countries have led the way in progress on the recognition of and action on women’s rights—have the highest rates of mediation in legal cases in the world. Is that something we could learn from?
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
Okay; second question. Do you accept that there are some vexatious claims in court based on allegations of domestic abuse and the abuse of children?
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
So not one vexatious claim has ever been made in court on the basis of domestic abuse?
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
My third question—very quickly. Have you provided any alternatives to the Government in terms of cuts to legal aid that might be different for their impact on women?
Ben Gummer (Conservative, Ipswich)
And they were seen to be risible yesterday. Thank you very much.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
The WI did some work on mental health problems in prison. Could you tell us something about the unmet needs you found in that campaign that you ran, please?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
The Government have introduced a new signposting diversion system, which everyone welcomes. Do you think that the £5 million that they are spending on that will meet the needs that you observed in the work that you did?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Why?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Have you thought at all about the impact of privatising the health—
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Order. On that last question, perhaps you could give an answer in writing—that would be extremely helpful. I apologise if we have been somewhat abrupt, but we have limited time. Thanks very much for coming along.
Examination of Witnesses
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
We will now hear evidence from G4S and Sodexo. Just for the record, could you introduce yourselves?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
I am interested in how offender management works at present and whether you think the current National Offender Management Service structure will work.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Do you see the opportunity for further cost savings in the structure of NOMS when the Bill is implemented?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
What about working in prison? What do you think the best way is for that to be implemented?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Yes, exactly.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Before we move on to the next speaker, I am conscious that yet again a number of speakers wish to contribute, so answer briefly please. For fairness to hon. Members, there will be one question and one supplementary.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
You said that extending the amount of time that prisoners should work will be difficult. What are the resource implications in moving from where you are now to a 40-hour week? How many more prison officers will you need to run that in a prison?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Do you think that you can do that at the same time as there are 23% cuts in criminal justice? The contracts that you are making at the moment are presumably less generous than they were five years ago.
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
You both mentioned changing the culture to enable more work in prisons. How do you change that culture and bring in more partners to introduce the sort of high-value work that allows deductions and can still ultimately be turned from a cost centre to a profit centre? Ideally, that could also be integrated with the Work programme through post-release Work programmes as well.
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
Can it ultimately be a profit centre, for both the partner firm and the prison? In terms of economics, there must be some scale or curve related to hours in a week and numbers of people involved. How does that work? What does it take to get to the point where there is an active incentive, in a financial as well as a responsibility sense, to do these things?
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
But can it be a profit centre for both sides? That is really the question.
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
How can you guarantee safety in an environment where prisoners are more mobile within the prison estate, even in a situation where people might be reluctant to engage with work? What does that mean in terms of appropriate staff numbers, such as of prison officers who will be needed to supervise prisoners who are more mobile?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
So you do not think that having many more prisoners moving around the prison in different work environments will require greater supervision from prison officers.
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
So do you need additional people? That is the point. At a time when there are cuts in the system, do you not need additional people in the system to supervise prisoners when more of them are mobile within the community?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
I shall give up my slot, as Mr Cunningham has been given all the answers that I require.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
May I press you on what you are doing for businesses, for instance in hosting jobs fairs? What are you doing to get these businesses into your prisons? You will have to do that if you are going to deliver a work programme.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
I am sorry, but time is moving on. Tom, do you have a supplementary question?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Yes, I do. Are you planning to make any physical adaptations to your prisons to enable you to do more of this work?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
From the answers that you have given to my colleague, it seems that you do not have to be asked to do a lot more with fewer resources. The Minister announced yesterday that there would be a new tendering process. One of the G4S prisons is coming to an end, and there are about eight further prisons. At the same time as you are coping with those tensions in your existing work, are you intending to expand and to bid for any of those contracts?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
That is an interesting point. When you say resources, do you generally recruit your management staff or your staff generally from within the Prison Service—I do not know about your background or that of Ms Steadman—or do you tend to take people from outside?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
Is your background in the Prison Service?
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
May I move on to curfews? In two ways, most notably in terms of sentences, the Bill extends the potential ambit of curfew from six months to 12 and from 12 hours to 16. Can you give some evidence about the system, the expansion and how you as a service are going to be able to cope with the expected increase in the use of tagging and electronic devices related to curfews?
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
You are developing the points about changes in technology to make the system more effective. You mentioned unpaid work. Is it an evolution from just a monitoring service to a service that is potentially much more intrusive in terms of regulating the activity of the individual who is tagged?
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
I am not being critical.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
To what degree do you believe that the provisions of the Bill will impact your ability to meet the special needs and circumstances of women in prison?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
You have both alluded to the fact that there is no specific focus on women, either in the Green Paper or in the Bill. Do you feel that it would be useful to progress the proposal that the previous Government took from the Corston review of having a women’s champion in the penal system?
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
I want to ask about the importance of financial capability in rehabilitation, and the implicit intent to increase the prevalence of payroll deduction saving schemes, but more importantly how that can best be integrated with wider financial capability programmes in prison—there seem to be some pilots, but it is a little bit patchy—and also how you can integrate that to involve mainstream financial services upon release.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
I want to follow up on the question that Damian Hinds just asked. I think it is a very important question. When I came to Peterborough, you very kindly showed me around, Kate. We came across a story from one of the people who worked there about a woman with an infant for whom housing had not been organised before the day of release. I have since discovered that, for women leaving mother and baby units across the system, that is quite a common practice. You have said a lot about co-operating with the private sector, but I wonder how you would feel about a duty to co-operate with public sector agencies—local authorities, housing associations and primary care trusts—to ensure the kind of seamless support that people need, that Mr Hinds was really alluding to.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
We all recognise good practice when we see it and I think that we all agree that the St Giles Trust is doing great work, for example in Peterborough. However, our object is to ensure that best practice becomes common practice and my question was about putting duties on to prison authorities to co-operate so that best practice happens all the time and not just some of the time.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
I just wanted to check something that you said, Mr Petherick, to ensure that I understood it. It was about tagging. Are you saying that tagging can now act as a sort of GPS device, in that people can go somewhere and you can track the fact that they have gone there and then returned following a particular route?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Is it in use already?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
And your technical understanding of it is that it works effectively and that there are no risks with it, or no more risks than with the existing system?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
That would be very helpful. Thank you.
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
I want to return to appropriate facilities in prison for delivering the work programme. Mr Petherick, you said that you were an experienced prison officer, so doubtless you have experience of older prisons as well as new prisons. In your opinion, how difficult will it be to deliver this more comprehensive work programme in the older establishments, which have perhaps more than 1,000 prisoners, and what kind of investment do you think will be needed to make them fit for purpose?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
With your experience, how much of the prison estate do you believe is not ready to deliver this programme, in view of the large number of older prisons?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
Half?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
So it would take a long time to get the sort of comprehensive programme that is envisaged?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
May I ask you both a question about something that I am interested in: drug and alcohol treatment? Do you support the introduction of compulsory drug and alcohol treatment in prisons?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
Yes.
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
Is it simply a matter of making it compulsory? Is that how to get to that point? Are there any problems for you with that approach?
Jonathan Reynolds (Labour, Stalybridge and Hyde)
To widen that further and talk about wider prison health services, what will the effects of privatising prison health services be?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
From what you have said so far, it seems that there will be quite significant changes in how prisons are run—capital works, staffing changes and, presumably, staff will have to be trained. How will it work in contractual terms? Do you renegotiate your contracts? Do you have supplementary contracts?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
I am slightly surprised by that. What sort of hours are prisoners working at now?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
You will not go back to the Ministry of Justice to say, “We need more money” or, “We need substantive changes in the contract we already have”? You will simply use existing resources to cope with the change that the Bill introduces?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
But that might not be true—
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Sorry, Andy. I call Damian Hinds.
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
I want to ask about payment by results and social impact bonds, which touch on some of the issues that have come up, such as drug and alcohol rehabilitation and the work programme, as well as overall rehabilitation. They are new areas with which everyone is trying to come to terms. There are six challenges with PBR and social impact bonds: defining the audience; isolating the impact of interventions; defining a control group; having measures of success; the fact that savings will come from different budgets in the public sector and that there is a danger of double counting; and finally, that positive cash flows may happen over a very long time during which there may be two, three or four changes of Government. It strikes me that with stopping reoffending, you have the most perfect model to deal with those six challenges, but even within that challenge, how big a potential do you see ultimately for payment by results and social impact bonds?
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
As an order of magnitude, do you think that 1%, 10%, 100% of the ex-offender population would be covered by programmes that ultimately could be funded by social finance?
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
To a degree. To be fair, social impact bonds are kind of a subset of payment by results. You can have lots of payment-by-results programmes, of which some are suitable for social impact bonds. In fact, in the list of six challenges that I gave, I think the first four apply to all payment-by-results programmes, and two more apply particularly to social impact bonds. I am just trying to get a sense—I know it is impossible to say accurately—of how big this could grow. The pilot in Peterborough seems encouraging. How far can it go, and what percentage of the ex-offender population could be covered?
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Order. That is a lengthy question.
Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North)
I was interested to hear your response to the earlier question on your relationship with the public sector, and specifically, about the woman who was leaving—I think you said that the prison found out that the local authority had not provided housing. Does that not indicate that there is a gap in the relationship between the prison and the public sectors? The relationship does not appear to be what it should be.
Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North)
I absolutely agree with you, which is why I am trying to pursue that point. It seems to me that a gap is there from what you indicated, which does not seem to be addressed in the Bill, and I am asking for a comment. There does not seem to be a joining together of the probation service, youth offending teams, and so on, in a way that is likely to lead to stopping people from reoffending in future.
Jim Sheridan (Labour, Paisley and Renfrewshire North)
Order. I am sure that you can finish your answer in writing to Mr Watts, if necessary. I thank both our witnesses for coming along, and for their patience.
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
I welcome our witnesses. We will hear evidence from Shelter, Citizens Advice, the Law Centres Federation, the Advice Services Alliance and R3. For the record, I ask each of our witnesses to introduce themselves by name and organisation to the Committee. Once you have all done that, if any of you would like to make a brief introductory statement, you are most welcome to do so. We will start with Frances Coulson.
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
Thank you for those introductions. I encourage you to speak up crisply and clearly because you are not only addressing the Committee but, in many ways, addressing the nation, and we want to hear what you have to say. We will now start the evidence session. We will start with Mr Llwyd and then go to Mr Watts, Alex Cunningham, Yvonne Fovargue, Liz Truss, Kate Green, Robert Buckland and Andy Slaughter.
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
The Government intend to make legal aid available in cases involving domestic violence, but you will know that there has been some discussion about the definition of domestic violence in the Bill. The Government have now widened it somewhat. Do you believe that the new definition is adequate and sufficient?
Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North)
The Prime Minister is on record as saying that Citizens Advice is a wonderful organisation and that he wants to do all he can to support it. What would he need to do, and what resources would he have to provide, for you to be able to cope with the potential changes and the demands that are being put on the service?
Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North)
What increase in resources would you require to carry out the functions you have just set out? Have you any estimates of what your members’ associations would need to do that?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Is it not the case that quite a few of these issues are not strictly legal matters? At the moment, Britain treats them as legal matters, which is why we have such a high legal aid bill compared to other countries. If you look at the scope of legal aid in other countries, you see that it is narrower, and there is a lower income threshold. On issues such as the welfare system, should we not improve services at source so that fewer errors are, for example, made in the benefits system in the first place that require legal redress? Do you agree with the general principle that it is wrong to spend all this money on legal services when strictly legal issues are not the reason why the problems have been caused in the first place?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
Does that advice necessarily have to be legal?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
I am very interested to hear more about this. Do you have an assessment of the overall cost of advising in that way, as opposed to the way advice is provided here in the UK?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
That is extremely helpful.
In terms of the proposals that the Government have put forward in the Bill for the reform of legal aid, do you think that the bill is too high at the moment—that is a general question for the panel—and do you see alternative ways in which that legal aid bill could be reduced; or are you saying that it is essentially being generated by other parts of government, such as the excessively bureaucratic welfare system?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
One more point. On the subject of tribunals, is it not the case that the legal aid system has partly driven the legalisation of some of these bodies? Tribunals were initially not meant to be bodies where lawyers would represent people, but that has ended up happening. That is partly because we are pushing more money through legal aid, rather than into other ways of solving these problems.
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I would like to pursue the argument about reducing costs by simplifying the system. Gillian Guy, you mentioned that you were obviously anticipating some substantial welfare reforms and that, at least for a time, there would be transition problems and parallel running of the system, which would create a greater need for advice. In the long run, is your expectation that the system will become sufficiently simpler as a result of universal credit and other reforms, to the extent that the Government’s proposals could be made workable?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
In terms of more vulnerable clients—people perhaps with learning or mental health difficulties and so on—do you anticipate the system becoming simple enough for them to navigate without assistance?
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
This is primarily a question for Gillian Guy. I have read the submissions from Citizens Advice—LA15—with care and I was particularly interested in the last paragraph and the proposals to allow, in effect, for the creation of local legal advice partnerships. Am I right in thinking that that would be a shift in commissioning, so that the partnership or the CAB would be the commissioner of legal services locally?
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
Thank you for the detail in that answer. Following up, how would that work, for example, with local private practices and practitioners? Would they be involved in the system, or would they be outwith this idea of commissioning? How would that work?
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
I just want to follow up that point. I am generally very interested in your evidence, Julie Bishop, so thank you very much for that.
I want to come back to the problem that the Government have. I think that we all acknowledge that the issue for the Government is how they control the budget and manage to keep a purchase on their expenditure on proper legal aid. I accept the point that you made that a person coming along for advice does not turn up and go, “Hello, I’m a legal debt problem.” They turn up with a multiplicity of issues and it is often the task of the adviser to work out which category the person might fall into. That is the position with legal aid currently.
Could a system be developed so that, in effect, there were two thresholds? One would be the general threshold that you come in on and then there would be a further threshold to ensure that the Government’s objective of controlling the legal aid budget was met, so that, in other words, only people who were filtered through would get proper legal advice that was properly funded.
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
If social welfare law is removed from scope, what will be the impact on your networks and all the advice services that you provide?
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
Can I just move on slightly, to debt work? What do you think the effect, and extra costs, might be of restricting access to debt advice to people who are at imminent risk of losing their home?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
May I ask Gillian Guy, did you say you had advisers sitting idle, paid for by legal aid, who could not do other work because they are being paid for on legal aid?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
If that is happening, are there not ways within Citizens Advice that you could organise that better? Presumably there is business in other CABs that those people could be doing.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
May I ask you and indeed the representatives of the other organisations another question? When we received evidence from the Bar Council on Tuesday, its representative talked about providing more training for barristers in mediation because the Bar Council thought that there was still potential to expand in that area. Anticipating what will perhaps be an increase in mediation work, what are your organisations doing collectively to increase the number of mediators to take up that work? Can you increase the number?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
But you have an active programme of extending mediation through a number of people working in that field?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
May I ask a slightly different question about your funders? This is particularly for Gillian Guy and Julie Bishop. Is there any uniformity of approach from local authorities, for instance, on the level of funding, or are you finding that some support local CABs and others cut the budget completely? Does it depend very much, in that are some local authorities making a conscious decision to support their CABs or law centres, whereas others are making the contrary decision?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
Ms Bishop said that some 80,000 people who attend law centres will not be getting that service in future, and Ms Guy spoke of the tightened budgets to do what you are doing now, yet you face even more of a work load in future. How will you cope with that? Who are the losers? Are we facing a deficit of opportunities for appropriate support, or are we facing much more of the rationing that Ms Bishop spoke about?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
So who are the losers?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
But what sort of problems? The homeless or families?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
How do you ration in those circumstances? Who do you turn away?
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
I want to ask Gillian Guy about your document, “Towards a business case for legal aid”, which contains some very impressive cost-benefit ratio figures; no doubt, those figures will get their fair airing in the main Chamber of the Commons. Obviously, Citizens Advice offers advice in a number of formats and through different channels other than legal aid. I wonder if you have equivalent cost-benefit calculations for those other formats?
Damian Hinds (Conservative, East Hampshire)
That would be useful in a simple tabular form.
I also wanted to talk specifically about the figures. You have done this calculation that says, “For every £1 of legal aid expenditure, the state potentially saves x.” That is a perfectly reasonable thing to do; you take things like savings to the NHS and net savings to the Exchequer. Now, this may not be a reasonable question for you to answer verbally now, so perhaps you could answer it in writing later. From reading your numbers, I think that that is not what you have done. It seems like you have taken loss of employment as GDP loss and that would be many times—or at least several times—higher than the net loss to the Exchequer, which is the number that would normally be used in a cost-benefit analysis such as that. If I have read it correctly—I am not sure that I have, because I do not have your source data—that might radically change the £1 to £2.98 ratio on debt advice, for example. I wonder if you might follow up on that with a written response. Thank you.
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
I will put a question to Frances Coulson, if I may. I neglected to do so earlier.
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
I was going to say that. There is probably not a lot of legal aid in insolvency practice and you are mainly concerned with part 2 of the Bill. Thank you for your helpful submission. I think that we are seeing some of the personal insolvency practitioners, on both sides of the argument, later on today. That is where a lot of focus has been in relation to civil litigation costs. Do you see the effect on insolvency practitioners as an unintended consequence of the Bill? Were you surprised by what you found in the Bill?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
I wonder if you have any further details of cases, and how that works; it seems to be taking us beyond the simple recovering of hidden moneys, and into prevention of crime. I do not know whether you want to say any more about criminal activity, but I have another question to ask you.
You mentioned the Revenue. You say in your submission that you think the return to creditors will be down by almost half—about 47%. I think you suggested just now that the Revenue is a creditor in about a quarter of cases—or is it a quarter by volume? Is the Revenue concerned, and is it making representations? Do you know the overall loss to the Treasury?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
How much?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
If the changes in the Bill, in relation to reform of conditional fee arrangements and damages-based agreements, go ahead, do you see no prospect of dodgy directors, as you put them, being sued? Do you see that just collapsing as an area of law?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Mr Pugh, I am not sure whether you are the right person to ask, but I have a question about homelessness and ex-offenders. We know that reoffending and homelessness are very highly correlated. Do you feel that at the moment there is insufficient co-ordination between probation trusts, prison authorities and housing organisations?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Thank you.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
I just wanted to follow up on the questions that Tom Brake was asking earlier about how services are organised. Do you think that there could be improvements, in terms of value for money, from having multiple centres: for example, having Shelter, law centres and citizens advice bureaux in the same location? Do you also think that increased use of phone and e-mail services could help save money, but deliver the end result to the consumer?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I want to go back to the discussion that we were having earlier about the changes that are going on in welfare benefits, housing and so on, and managing that transition. We have also got changes to child maintenance, which are likely to create another substantial period of need for advice. Indeed, I think that the Government acknowledge that in their own proposals. Can you give us any sense of the time scale during which that transition is likely to create additional needs and are you already beginning to see any effects, for example, in relation to the early changes in housing benefit that will come in this year?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Universal credit is beginning in 2013, but there will be a long transition period. Is that period of two to three years that you mentioned in relation to the housing benefit changes?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
Would anyone like to say how long they think we will be going through a period of heightened need in relation to other changes?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
I have a question to put to R3 about CFAs and the points that you raised. I was just looking through your submission. How many of the current claimants whom you represent or who come to your practices need to use a CFA as a way of funding their case, as opposed to people who may just be part of very large corporations, or creditors seeking money, and who perhaps can just pay normal fees?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
In Lord Justice Jackson’s report, he did not seek an exemption for insolvency practices, although he did in relation to clinical negligence. He talked about the fact that he expected legal aid for clinical negligence still to be carried on but, in your skilled area, he did not try to carve out an exemption. Therein lies the following question, which is about the success bid and a principle relating to your defendants. I say defendant because they are not all dodgy directors. There will be defendants or people from whom your creditors are seeking money, whose businesses just have not worked and who have gone bust for lots of other reasons. Is it right that a defendant—not a claimant or those creditors—pays a lawyer a win bonus or a success fee to compensate the practitioner or the solicitor for other cases that they may have elsewhere? Why is it right that it falls on the defendant to compensate for other areas as opposed to someone else?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
I do not dispute the risk—do not get me wrong—but you never know which practitioner has only good cases. In other parts of the law where you might see personal injury claims, there are solicitors who represent only the easy claim. They do not go for the risky area and certainly no one can assess that at the time. I do not dispute your risk in insolvency practice; it is the question of why that risk should be borne by a defendant in a case that may not be connected with the risk that you carry elsewhere in your business.
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
Just a yes or no answer will suffice for this. The Government propose that the only access to legal services will be via a telephone gateway. Will that be appropriate for all the different client groups that you see?
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
That brings us to the end of the session. I thank our witnesses for coming along to give evidence. It is much appreciated. I am sorry that we did not get around to Mr Dave Watts’s and Mr Tom Brake’s second questions, but they can go first in the next session if they want to ask a question. We will now hear evidence from Liberty, Justice and the Legal Action Group.
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
I welcome our witnesses to the Committee. In a clear, loud voice, can you say for the record who you are and who you represent? If you would like to make a brief introductory statement, you are welcome to do so. As we went left to right last time, we will go right to left this time, starting with Mr Hynes.
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
Thank you. I remind Members that this is a shorter session than the previous one. This session finishes at 3 o’clock, so we have 40 minutes. I will open the bowling with those who missed their opportunity last time, so we will start with Mr Tom Brake.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
A part of the Bill that we have not discussed at all is the review of indeterminate prison sentences. What is your view of it, or what are you hoping will come out of the review?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
To be clear, do you believe that there should not be any indeterminate sentences?
Dave Watts (Labour, St Helens North)
I ask you to go to the nub of the matter. The Government claim that the present system is unaffordable and expensive when compared with systems in other countries. We heard the example of New Zealand, but it seems strange given that we do not have much in common with New Zealand. You said earlier that you could give us some comparison information. What do you feel is the most appropriate comparison, and how do we compare with some of the other countries that you have looked at?
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
This is a tighter session than the previous session, so we will have to make it tighter.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
In answer to the question, “What kind of society do we want to be?”, I do not think that we want to be a litigious society. My fear is that the high legal aid bill is actually fuelling legal involvement in things where it should not be, such as the content of employment tribunals or the welfare system, where these issues could be easily sorted out using a proper appeals process.
I just want to come in on the point about international comparisons. The figure you quoted for New Zealand, which sounds more up to date, is almost double that of the UK. [Hon. Members: “Half.”] Sorry, the other way round. I do not think that it is right to compare the inquisitorial system. My question is about Canada. What are the income thresholds and what is the scope of cases that are eligible for legal aid in Canada? I ask that because it seems to me, when I have taken a cursory glance at these other systems, that there is generally a lower scope and lower income thresholds in those similar countries than there are here in Britain.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
What is the means test? Can you give us a number?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
It would be really helpful if you would send that.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
It seems to me that on each variable the scope is wider, the income threshold is higher and the cost per head is higher in the UK. Whichever variable you look at, it does seem to be that we are at the high end.
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
I said similar legal systems. I did not say inquisitorial systems.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
I would like to ask Mr Smith some questions about the sentencing part of the Bill. You have been critical of the extension in the curfew requirements. I wonder if you could explain to the Committee why that is, since many people think that curfew requirements are a particularly efficient way of dealing with offenders.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Yes, that is right.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
What line does that cross?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
I am sorry, Mr Smith, I do not really understand the point that you are making. If you are making a linguistic point that you do not want something called house arrest, but you do want something called curfews—I think you are making a more fundamental point than that. I am not a lawyer and when I say that I do not understand, I really mean that I do not understand the point you are making.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Is that because you think that for the kinds of offence that a person will have committed it is disproportionate? If you think that, presumably what follows is that you do not think anyone should ever go to prison. I am sure that you do not think that.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
Thank you. I want to ask you about what you have said about bail and where you think the adult bail provisions have gone too far. I take it that you mean you think there should be more reasons for remanding people to prison than the Government have included in their proposals.
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
You are very critical of the police being able to issue conditional cautions without reference to the CPS. Why does that worry you?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
May I go back to what Mr Smith said about the Scottish system? Steve Hynes was correct about the very high cost of cases. That mostly has a big impact on the Serious Fraud Office and down south. But the contention seems to be—this came across from both yourself and Mr Hynes—that the Ministry of Justice should be looking more at taking some money out of criminal legal aid. If there is money to find, we should be tougher on criminal legal aid than on civil. The Scots did save some money in that way. I have had meetings with academics from Scotland who have said that. But they have also found themselves in trouble in relation to Cadder and things like that, where the withdrawal of legal advice from the police station has landed them in hot water with the European convention on human rights and the courts. That aside, do you still think we should be looking at criminal legal aid and whether there is money to be taken from that?
Ben Wallace (Conservative, Wyre and Preston North)
They make tremendous savings because the prosecutor chooses the venue of prosecution. That in itself would save a lot of money, but I do not think we would get the removal of such trial rights through this Parliament.
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
The Bill creates a new offence of threatening an individual with a knife or bladed instrument, which would carry a mandatory six months’ imprisonment. What are the pros and cons of mandatory minimum sentences?
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
Mr Hynes, do you have a view?
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
We have heard before that the law was adequate in this field before. That may be something to do with the press, but we do not know.
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
I do not know whether it was the Legal Action Group that coined the phrase “advice desert”, but it certainly warned about advice deserts in the past. What do you think the advice landscape will look like if the proposals to remove social welfare law go through?
Yvonne Fovargue (Labour, Makerfield)
Access will be through a telephone gateway in future. Do you have any comments about the appropriateness of that for the range of clients?
Kate Green (Labour, Stretford and Urmston)
I would like to ask Roger Smith to expand on something he said in his introductory comments on his concerns about the insufficient guarantees of independence in the Bill. I assume what you are talking about is the plan to take the key functions of the Legal Services Commission back in-house, as it were. Assuming that the Government are going to proceed with that proposal, can you suggest any safeguards that we ought to stick in the Bill?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
May I ask you about clause 12, which provides the possibility for the directors about whom we are talking to set merits and means tests in relation to the police station advice? What are the views, particularly of Liberty and Justice, on that?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
In our previous session, we asked about some of the specific scope areas, so I think I ought to give you the opportunity to say whether there are any areas we are removing from scope that give you more concern than others. Clearly, we will be looking at many of the specific areas in Committee, but it will be useful to discuss them while you are here today.
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
I was going to ask about clinical negligence, bringing in part 2 as well as part 1 of the Bill. It was put earlier, I think by Elizabeth Truss, that it would be better to improve the quality of Government decision making, as you would not then need to spend money on legal aid. You may want to comment on that. What do you mean by greater constitutional significance? I see what you mean in relation to being able to review the decisions of corporate bodies. What do you see as the overall impact on access to justice of the Bill as a whole?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
May I take you back to a different part of the Bill, on conditional cautions, about which you have expressed great concern. Can you set out any safeguards that you think could be put in place to address, or partially address, your concerns about those?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Does that not do away with the immediacy of the conditional caution?
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
That brings us to the end of our time for this session. I thank our witnesses very much indeed for giving up their time to give evidence to us today. Thank you very much indeed. We will now hear evidence from the NSPCC, the Children’s Commissioner for England, the Local Government Association and the Standing Committee for Youth Justice.
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
I welcome our new witnesses. In a moment, I will ask you to introduce yourselves. Unless any Members can tell me differently, I am sitting here on amber alert for a Division in the House. If a Division does occur, the knives in terms of timing still apply, so we lose that time from this session. Unless anyone can tell me differently, what I propose to do is to invite Members to ask questions one question at a time, so that as many Members can ask a question as possible. If the worst comes to the worst, we will have to suspend for the Division. May I ask our witnesses from left to right starting with Mr Solomon to say who they are and who they represent?
Alex Cunningham (Labour, Stockton North)
This question is for Mr Solomon and Dr Atkinson. Are children properly protected in the justice system in the light of the legal aid cuts?
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
The Bill will introduce a new offence of threatening an individual with a knife or bladed instrument in public or on school premises. It will carry a mandatory six-month sentence. However, that will not apply to under-18s. Do you think that it should apply? If so, why? Obviously, there is a prevalence of such offences among young people unfortunately; the Bill even mentions school premises. What is your view on whether that six-month sentence should apply to under-18s?
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
Are you saying that there is no need for the provision?
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
But the offence itself? Are you saying in any way that the offence itself is not necessary?
Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru, Dwyfor Meirionnydd)
But you said earlier that the law was sufficient.
Robert Buckland (Conservative, South Swindon)
I want to explore alternatives to conviction and to the usual range of sentences for young offenders. The Bill contains reference to conditional cautions and other alternatives. In that context, the value of restorative justice has been demonstrated by a number of young offender teams across the country. What is the view of the panel as to the future role of restorative justice with regard to young offenders? How do you see that aspect of sentencing or alternatives to conviction rolling out in the years ahead?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
The Government continue to set out their proposals for reform of probation services. This week, they announced the outline but not the detail of their competition strategy for non-custodial services. There are already significant cuts to probation, and particularly to youth offending teams, yet there is a lot in the Bill in relation to young offenders and additional requirements being put on to those teams. Does that seem to you to be a problem? What are your observations? What are your concerns about the way YOTs are working?
Andrew Slaughter (Labour, Hammersmith)
Does that mean, Councillor, that if savings are generated, because youth custody levels have been falling substantially, you want to see them reinvested in schemes such as community payback or restorative justice?
Elizabeth Truss (Conservative, South West Norfolk)
I want to return to legal aid, and specifically the scope for children in the legal aid system. My understanding is that 95% of what is currently covered by legal aid will be covered by legal aid for children under the proposals. Issues that were previously out of scope of the Bill, such as special educational needs, have been brought within scope. The 5% of cases that will no longer be specifically provided for under legal aid are mainly cases of clinical negligence, which can be covered by CFAs. In some of the most complicated cases, there is also an exceptional fund, at the judge’s discretion. Is it not the case that all children in difficult circumstances will be able to find recourse to justice through the legal aid that has largely been preserved, or through CFAs or the exceptional fund?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
One of the proposals in the Bill is to increase the fine for breach of a youth rehabilitation order to £2,500. Do you think that the courts will have the common sense not to use that, or do you think there could be some adverse impacts and if so, what might they be?
Helen Goodman (Labour, Bishop Auckland)
There is not really any point in having a law that cannot be used, is there?
Philip Hollobone (Conservative, Kettering)
I call Tom Brake.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Taking advantage of that choking, may I bring us back to restorative justice? First, a general question about whose responsibility it is to ensure that restorative schemes are up and running, because provision is patchy although the advantages seem to be enormous. Secondly, we had an interesting debate this morning about what types of offences might sensibly be dealt with in a restorative justice context; mediation is clearly that. I would be interested to hear whether in your experience there are types of offence that young people have committed where victims will never agree to have restorative justice-type arrangements in place.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
And the general point? Who should be pushing for restorative justice schemes?