When was legal aid introduced

Instead, its administration was handed over to the Law Society, which represents solicitors. Legal aid celebrates its 70th anniversary in In the s, the growing cost to the taxpayer of the legal aid budget became a political issue.

That year the first cuts to entitlements were introduced. More than half of the funds were by that stage being spent in the criminal courts. During the Thatcher administration responsibility for legal aid expenditure was transferred to the Legal Aid Board.

Its successor is now the Legal Aid Agency. Costs continued to rise. Labour went into the election vowing to cut mainly criminal legal aid. In the aftermath of the banking crisis, the coalition government initiated a cost-saving review that led to the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act Laspo. While the government says legal aid costs are higher in the UK than most other European countries, that does not take into account the overall costs of inquisitorial systems of justice, which employ far more judges.

Many Conservative MPs, including Bob Neill, the chair of the Commons justice committee, now accept that the pendulum has swung too far. The earliest legal aid societies emerged to assist immigrants in New York City in the last quarter of the 19th Century but it was not until the s that an organized, coordinated national effort took shape. Over the next 40 years, the legal aid societies that emerged were mostly reliant on sparse resources from private charity, and huge regions remained entirely unserved.

For the first time, the federal government invested in the legal aid system to support appellate advocacy, legislative and administrative advocacy, and deep community engagement. Over the next six years, federal funding grew fivefold, and LSC expanded availability of legal aid from primarily an urban program to cover virtually every county and territory of the United States.

It began advising pro bono on criminal, housing and other matters. Its influence was such that, by the end of the decade, 26 similar centres had been established. Naturally, as access to justice increased, so too did the dispensation of legal aid. Throughout these changes, eligibility remained relatively stable. In the s, legal aid became a matter of political concern.

There were two notable causes of the rising expenditure, in addition to the greater access to justice. Second, tightening of asylum law caused a surge in immigration disputes, resolution of which predictably required legally-aided litigation.

The first ever cuts to legal aid came in In addition, those who were eligible were now required to contribute more money towards their legal fees. This is important: even those who remained eligible in principle might reasonably choose not to claim, given the unaffordability of the contributions. Throughout the s, expenditure continued to rise.

A flurry of cost-cutting initiatives followed. We will consider three. First, eligibility was progressively tightened. Finally, in , Lord Irvine proposed that most civil cases be entirely removed from the scope of legal aid. Delivering on a manifesto promise, an ambitious, joined-up network of providers was envisaged: professional lawyers, the not-for-profit advice sector and local authorities would work together, delivering bespoke services to match the unique needs of each community.

The project imploded within eight years, owing to a leadership vacuum, absence of accountability and lack of any common interest. Third, and most strikingly, the Access to Justice Act was passed. The scope of legal aid was narrowed: assistance was now unavailable for, inter alia , will-making, trust law, most personal injury and business law.

Devastatingly, a hard cap was imposed on civil legal aid expenditure, incentivising ever thriftier dispensation. The new millennium dawned on an emerging crisis. Consequentially, most private firms had abandoned legally-aided work.