Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations 2002 (Draft)
I refer members to paper J1/02/39/6 on the regulations. I ask the minister to speak to and move motion S1M-3502.
The regulations, which make civil legal aid available for proceedings before the social security commissioners and the child support commissioners in Scotland, show that the Scottish ministers continue to extend the legal aid scheme to improve access to justice where there is a good case for doing so and where widening the scheme is affordable. The process of reviewing the various tribunals that sit in Scotland and their treatment in relation to legal aid is continuing.
I will display my ignorance. Do people who live in Scotland have to appeal to the commissioners in Scotland or is this another case in which we send things to Newcastle, which is what happens with national insurance?
The situation is usually the opposite because cases tend to come to Scotland. For administrative reasons, cases can be sent from other parts of the UK for decision by the commissioners in Scotland. However, just because a case is dealt with in Scotland, that does not mean that the matter will be covered by Scottish legal aid. As the committee is aware, we can make subordinate legislation only within the Parliament's legislative competence. A case that involves someone from Durham but which, for administrative convenience, is heard in Edinburgh would probably not qualify for Scottish legal aid. We need a simple and clear test to ensure that only Scottish cases receive Scottish legal aid. Consequently, applicants for civil legal aid from the Scottish Legal Aid Board would need to show that any onward appeal would be to the Court of Session. That provision is set out expressly in one of the separate civil legal aid regulations that Richard Simpson has signed, which I mentioned earlier.
I am happy whenever we do things better than the English. Again this perhaps shows my ignorance, but the note that is attached to the regulations states that the financial implications will be £0.65 million. I did not realise that there would be so many appeals. Do you have figures for the number of appeals that take place at the moment?
It is estimated that there is a combined total of about 600 oral hearings.
Will comparable provisions be introduced in England? Have you received indications either way on that point?
I do not know whether comparable provisions will be introduced in England. That is a matter for the United Kingdom Government—for the Lord Chancellor, in particular. As Donald Gorrie suggested, Scotland may be leading the way in extending the scope of the legal aid system.
Presumably the United Kingdom Government is aware that an extension of civil legal aid is being considered in Scotland.
The Lord Chancellor's Department is certainly aware of what we are doing.
Legal aid is demand led. If the cost of appeals exceeds the funding that has been made available, will further funds be found within the Scottish block?
Yes. As I have explained to the committee on a number of occasions, legal aid is demand led. If demand exists and statutory criteria are met, we are obliged to pay.
Presumably you mean that the funding will be made available on cause shown.
We are obliged to pay if statutory criteria are met.
I welcome this move. In the interim report on its inquiry into legal aid, the committee identified other circumstances in which legal aid is not available and there is an imbalance between various parties. We are pursuing the Executive for responses to the points that we have made. I do not know what stage has been reached with those responses, but we would appreciate receiving them before too long so that we can complete our inquiry.
I take your point, convener.
The question is, that motion S1M-3502 be agreed to.
Motion agreed to.
That the Justice 1 Committee recommends that the draft Legal Aid (Scotland) Act 1986 Amendment Regulations 2002 be approved.
I thank the minister for his attendance. Our next meeting will take place on 26 November at members' favourite venue, the Hub. If Donald Gorrie thinks that the acoustics are a problem here, he should know that both the acoustics and the lighting in the Hub are very challenging. We will take oral evidence for our inquiry into alternatives to custody and on the Prostitution Tolerance Zones (Scotland) Bill. I remind members that the highlight of the week for them is Thursday's debate on the Title Conditions (Scotland) Bill. Maureen Macmillan gave me a cheeky wink, so she is obviously looking forward to that.
Meeting closed at 16:03.