Solicitor allies speak out in 'Yes' campaign for barrister action

The criminal Bar has reached the point of no return and while direct action will be painful, a failure to act will be fatal to the profession, according to a junior barrister at the coal face of the criminal justice system.

Distinguished silks and junior barristers have lent their learned opinions to the debate on whether the Bar should vote in favour of action against government cuts ahead of the upcoming Criminal Bar Association (CBA) ballot.

To combat any suggestion that its executive would use its website to push a 'propaganda' war for a 'No' vote on 'strike' action, the CBA has taken the democratic decision to publish alternative opinions from its members, including why a 'Yes' vote is necessary.

Former chairman of the CBA, Michael Turner QC, disputed Tony Cross QC's recent argument that barristers should not take direct action while there was still a seat at the negotiating table.

'None of the supposed achievements claimed by Tony are enshrined in stone and he knows it,' said Turner. 'The only recent negotiations that I have been aware of is that the CBA have been asked to back off any industrial action until September when the government will consider looking at its ideas.

'The Bar might wish to ask itself how it is that the Bar has arrived at, in Tony's words "It's last stand". We have always caved in for fear of something worse. What I care about is that cases are properly prosecuted and defended and thus the justice system is served for both victim and defendant.'

The Garden Court Chambers silk explained that he will be voting 'Yes' because the government's proposals would not serve the justice system.

'Tony has not suggested how that aim might be achieved even if his negotiations with the MoJ succeed (whatever they are because he has not told us). He has put forward not a single proposal as to how the junior Bar might be protected if the dual contracting comes in.'

Fatal inaction

Another member of Garden Court, Tom Copeland, also turned up the heat for the 'Yes' campaign by giving voice to the fears of the junior Bar if the government goes ahead with dual contracting for solicitor firms.

'I did not become a barrister for money or status,' said Copeland. 'I believed, and still want to believe, the law can be used as a tool to bring about social change. To create a fairer society. To protect our most vulnerable members. To achieve that goal I believe access to justice for all is essential.'

The most junior member of the chamber's crime team - who was the first in his family to obtain a degree - added that while he was 'living the dream'. However, the reality of government cuts to legal aid rates would make it financially unviable for firms to instruct him.

'If dual contracts go ahead those firms who have given me a chance may simply disappear. I want to stay but I will be forced to leave. Maybe people from my background don't belong at the Bar after all. Maybe this government does not want people like me here. I don't know,' he said.

'I do know that in order to have meaningful access to justice and a diverse junior Bar we cannot allow this government to go ahead with these cuts. As a junior, direct action will be painful but inaction will be fatal. I believe we are at the point of no return.'

Commenting on the new postings, Bill Waddington, chair of the Criminal Law Solicitors' Association (CLSA) said: 'It is reassuring to hear from someone with the pedigree of Michael Turner QC arguing so forcefully for the 'Yes' vote.

'Michael is a revered ally of the solicitors profession from his time as chair of the CBA when the unity of the profession was at its strongest. He is clearly not a voice in the wilderness as can be seen from the identical plea from Tom Copeland, from the junior Bar.'

Apocalyptic future

Ian West, a barrister at Fountain Court Chambers, also added his voice to the campaign, writing: 'Only by direct action is there any hope of defeating [duty provider contracts] and with them the apocalyptic future, or non-future, for our profession.

'We must support the solicitors in defeating the present 8.75 per cent cut, but that is only the first step. We must stop the DPC tendering process before the contracts are awarded. Once that happens, the solicitors will be divided into winners and losers, haves and have nots, and the winners will regard themselves as having a vested interest to protect.'

However, Simon Meyersons QC questioned how damaging the cuts will be on solicitors and the criminal Bar: 'There is no question but that the cuts will hurt solicitors and that they are unfair. I do not believe that the solicitors will go bust - if that were true, no one would have bid for a contract that cannot make them a living. It's a shame the case was overstated, and it doesn't help. (When does it ever?).'

 

John van der Luit-Drummond is deputy editor for Solicitors Journal
john.vanderluit@solicitorsjournal.co.uk | @JvdLD