Criminal Bar has 'ignored call for unity' against government cuts

The Criminal Bar Association (CBA) has refused to take direct action in opposition to government cuts to legal aid, disappointing members of the profession.

The CBA said its executive committee had debated the government's intention to introduce dual contracts and fee cuts to solicitors. Though it condemned these developments, the CBA observed that solicitors were due to hold a ballot on fee cuts but not on dual contracts.

'We await the result of that ballot. In these circumstances we will not call for barristers to forgo work in opposition to the scheme. We of course understand the difficulty solicitors face, and will continue to do all we reasonably can to support them,' said the CBA.

The statement continued: 'Our initial discussions with the new government and the MoJ since the election mean we believe there is now a real opportunity to secure long term improvements in the quality of Crown Court advocacy and to ensure a sustainable future for the junior bar and thus the future of the profession. We are aware of the deep concerns of a large number of our members, which were forcefully expressed during debate, and what they expect us to achieve in negotiation with the government.'

The CBA executive said it remained of the view that significant reforms need to be made to protect the interests of the public, which are best served through the provision of high-quality advocacy.

Responding to the vote, Jonathan Black, president of the London Criminal Courts Solicitors' Association (LCCSA), and partner at BSB Solicitors, said his group was bitterly disappointed but not surprised the Bar leadership had once again fallen for the government's attempt to divide and rule the legal profession.

'We have always been concerned about negotiations to protect the AGFS at the expense of solicitors' fees over the last few months, and this has always been denied,' said Black. 'We have spoken to young barristers the length and breadth of the country concerned about the consequences of dual contracting and the second cut, a greater threat to the independent Bar than solicitor advocacy itself. However, the CBA leadership appear to ignore these concerns, any democratic process, and any call for unity.'

Black continued: 'The question often asked since the last deal was, "What are solicitors going to do if we go back to no returns". We argued that no returns was a joint protest but picking up the gauntlet laid down by the CBA leaders we have balloted our members and included the independent Bar. We urge all solicitors to express their view on the ballot, at least we will listen and not ignore the views of our members concerns about access to justice.'

Several barristers have condemned the CBA's decision. Mark Gorge QC, of Garden Court Chambers, tweeted: 'In our decisive hour the CBA exec bottled it. They obvious don't get that dual contracts will devastate junior Bar.'

Rebecca Herbert of 36 Bedford Row added: 'A [majority] of CBA Executive don't seem to represent the 96 per cent of the Bar who wanted direct action. As most are unelected that may be why.'

By contrast, Simon Myerson QC of St Paul's Chambers, remarked: 'I don't love the decision to take no action. But that isn't a reason to accuse those who took it of betrayal. Let's see if solicitors can unite.'

While Oliver Kirk of Old Bailey Solicitors, commented: 'We are NOT being abandoned nor thrown to the dogs. It is time for sols to fight our own battles.'