Chamber and committees

As, I am sure, the member is aware, the Judiciary and Courts (Scotland) Act 2008 guaranteed judicial independence and established the Lord President as the head of the Scottish judiciary, responsible for the efficient disposal of business in the Scottish courts.

Although the Scottish Government supports the ethical and responsible use of AI in public services, it has no role in judicial decision making and cannot intervene in matters that fall within the remit of the courts and the judiciary.

The Scottish Government is committed to ensuring access to legal aid in rural and island communities. Although private solicitors cannot be compelled to undertake legal aid work, we continue to invest in the system to ensure availability. Funding is available to allow solicitors to travel to rural and remote parts of the country to carry out work, which ensures that individuals do not have to rely on local provision alone when they seek publicly funded legal assistance. Through our on-going reform programme, we are considering making targeted interventions, including grant funding and capacity-building initiatives, to strengthen access to legal aid where it is needed most.

The Scottish Government does not consider it appropriate to comment on the judiciary’s use of artificial intelligence. That is because the judiciary is independent of the Scottish Government, in order to preserve the independence of the legal system and to protect it from political interference.

Legislation places a duty on all Government ministers, law officers and members of the Parliament to uphold judicial independence, barring them from trying to exert influence over judicial decisions.

Decisions about judicial processes, including whether to use AI in composing judgments, are solely for the judiciary to determine. As head of the judiciary, the Lord President is responsible for making and maintaining appropriate arrangements for the training and guidance of Scottish judicial office-holders.

Negotiations are on-going with the legal profession regarding an uplift. Two offers have been rejected. I hope that we will be able to come to a conclusion shortly, but the budget is due next week. There are 40 traineeships, but we are looking at 20 initially, and we are also looking at progressing other initiatives that are not yet in the public domain but being negotiated with the Law Society. I will keep the Parliament updated.

Scotland’s universities are rightly regarded as world leading in educating solicitors and legal professionals. The Scottish Government recognises the need to ensure that talent is deployed across all parts of the country, including in rural and island communities, where access to legal aid can be challenging. I am willing to consider all further measures with stakeholders—including trainees themselves—to find out what more can be done to attract trainees and newly qualified solicitors to rural Scotland and improve access to justice.

Furthermore, access to solicitors can be facilitated remotely in several ways, and funding is available to allow solicitors to travel to rural and remote parts of the country to carry out work, which means that individuals do not have to rely on local provision alone when they seek publicly funded legal assistance.

The debate has shown that we all want to ensure that Scotland’s legal aid system delivers fairness, equality and access to justice for all. As members have said, the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee’s report does not shy away from the challenges: a declining number of civil legal aid providers, complexity in processes and gaps in provision. The report also recognises the strength of Scotland’s system and our opportunity to make it stronger. That is the spirit in which the Government approaches reform.

Our discussion paper sets out a clear direction to design a system that can adapt to changing needs and that can remain sustainable for decades to come. That means considering how legal assistance is delivered, funded and structured, working with providers, advice agencies and service users to ensure that reforms reflect lived experience. We want to build flexibility into the legal aid system, so that it can respond to new challenges without losing sight of fairness and accessibility.

I wish to acknowledge a few specific points that have been made today—and I have a lot to get through. First, on remuneration and viability, I hear the concerns about fees and the pressures on firms. The independent fee review mechanism group is a key part of addressing that, and I will ensure that the points that have been made today, such as those on early resolution and on rural travel, are fed into that work. We are continuing negotiations with the legal aid profession about an uplift in fees across criminal, civil and children’s law.

I acknowledge the challenges around rural and island provision, which are often raised with me in the chamber. Members have highlighted gaps in coverage, and we are exploring targeted solutions, including the legal aid traineeship fund and new models under the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2025, which will allow charities and law centres to employ solicitors directly.

On user experience, several members spoke about complexity and delay. The regulations that we laid in December 2025 are a first step in simplifying processes, and further changes will follow.

In her opening speech, Tess White raised a point regarding operational issues involving legal firms and SLAB. Those concerned will be meeting the Law Society of Scotland this year, which will be the first time since Covid, to discuss operational issues.

The committee convener highlighted her wish to hear more about public legal education. The Scottish Government values stakeholder input and supports preventative approaches, and we will continue to collaborate to improve access and develop preventative tools. Public legal education is part of our longer-term reforms.

I note the committee’s concerns and what members have repeatedly said about legal aid deserts, and the Scottish Government acknowledges the challenges here. We are working with SLAB and the Law Society to build an evidence base and to develop targeted interventions. That includes grant funding and a traineeship fund. As I have said, the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Act 2025 will remove restrictions preventing charities, law centres and citizens advice bodies from directly employing solicitors to provide certain legal services to vulnerable people.

I also highlight civil legal assistance officers. SLAB has continued to employ solicitors to provide advice and represent people with particular types of civil legal problems. It has a network of three officers covering the Highlands and Islands, Argyll and Bute, Aberdeen and Aberdeenshire, and Edinburgh and the Lothians. Members of the public can check whether they are eligible for the service by contacting SLAB for details through its website.

On means testing for legal aid domestic abuse cases, the Scottish Legal Aid Board has updated its guidance to say:

“We understand that it can be difficult for applicants who have had to flee an abusive or controlling relationship to be able to provide the relevant financial verification to support their civil legal aid applications.”

SLAB goes on to say:

“we can use our discretion to either disregard income or capital where we consider it reasonable to do so.”

That update does not represent a change in policy—it is just a means to raise awareness of SLAB’s approach. Legal aid is available to victims of domestic and gender-based violence who are seeking protection through civil actions where they meet the statutory eligibility criteria.

I turn to regulation 15, which Pam Duncan-Glancy touched on. The legal aid system is designed for individual applicants and not groups or organisations, reflecting the legal context at the time that the framework was created. However, regulation 15 should not be a major barrier to public interest litigation, and legal aid has been granted in civil cases despite joint interests being identified. Nevertheless, I take on board the committee’s concerns in that regard.

I am conscious of time; I agree with Mr Whitfield that we could have had more time for this debate, as we have a lot of complex issues to cover regarding legal aid. Nevertheless, my door is always open to members who want to raise with me any issues regarding further legal aid reform.

Legal aid reform is not a single act—it is a process that requires collaboration, evidence and trust. We will continue to engage with the profession, the third sector and those who rely on legal aid and, together, we can deliver a legal aid system that reflects Scotland’s values and meets the challenges of the future.

Presiding Officer, this debate has shown—

I am sorry, but I am wondering whether there is someone else still to speak before I do.

I welcome the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee’s report on civil legal aid. It is a report that highlights the strengths of our system and also the need for change. I also thank all the organisations and individuals who contributed to the report. Those insights have been invaluable in shaping the report and they will also inform the Scottish Government’s response and work as we progress legal aid reform.

The legal aid system in Scotland remains among the most comprehensive in Europe. It is demand led, and all who are eligible receive support. In the previous financial year, expenditure reached £169 million, which is the highest figure in cash terms since 2016-17.

The committee’s report is clear: the system must evolve to meet the needs of a modern justice system. I agree—reform is essential to maintain and strengthen access to justice. We must ensure that legal aid is affordable and ensures value for taxpayers’ money.

The committee’s recommendations align closely with our programme of reform, which was set out in the “Legal Aid Reform Discussion Paper” that was published in February. That paper set out proposals for a modernised legal aid framework that is simpler, more flexible and better able to respond to changing needs. That includes exploring a single, streamlined application process and a more sustainable funding model that balances fair remuneration with value for taxpayers. Those reforms will ensure that legal aid remains accessible, efficient and resilient in the decades to come.

The discussion paper, our programme of work to prepare for future legislation and the action that we are taking now to improve the system is guided by four principles: equality and human rights; people-centred service design; evidence-based policy; and collaboration and partnership.

I will outline some of that current work. In December, we laid draft regulations to strengthen support in the children’s hearings system. Children will no longer need to pass income or merit tests to prove that their case deserves support. The initial authorised expenditure limit for solicitors will rise substantially from £135 to £550, reducing administrative burdens. Importantly, care leavers who are in receipt of our care leavers payment will not have that counted against them when their eligibility for legal aid is assessed. Those changes will ensure that financial support that is intended to help care-experienced young people does not create unintended barriers to accessing justice.

I thank the member for giving way, because this is a really important debate.

One of the big issues that I have seen as a stumbling block to primary legislation being introduced in this parliamentary session is the fee structure. I acknowledge that it has been ad hoc over many years, which is why it is so vital that we have got the fee review mechanism group, which met last year, up and running. I hope that that is welcome.