Polly Toynbee is right to criticise the government for threatening access to justice for the most vulnerable members of society, against which the bar has been campaigning for some time (Yes, legal aid will be cut, but not where it hurts the silks, 6 March). But the focus of her anger is sadly misplaced. It is not the fees of criminal barristers in "high profile criminal cases" which have been left "untouched". The combination of Labour's cuts in its last term in government and further cuts imposed by the coalition government means fees for murder cases have been slashed by an eyewatering 40%. The real problem is that the taxpayer continues to fund legal aid for criminal cases involving hugely wealthy defendants whose assets have been frozen under restraint orders.
Assets under restraint can be released under judicial control to cover defendants' children's private school fees, but not to cover the cost of their lawyers. Cases involving restraint orders are often highly complex, lengthy and costly, disproportionately swallowing a large chunk of the legal aid budget. The Treasury may wish to reserve the funds for later confiscation orders, but such orders are frequently left unpaid, or may not be made in respect of all of the funds restrained. The government must address this scandal, targeting those who can afford to pay their legal fees rather than those who can't, and freeing up funds for more hard-hit areas of the justice budget.
Michael Todd QC Chairman of the Bar Council of England and Wales, Max Hill QC Chairman of the Criminal Bar Association
• The abolition of legal aid for social cases will leave the poorest citizens at the mercy of the wide discretion of thousands of jobcentre and local authority officials making decisions about welfare eligibility, sanctions, civil penalties and the enforcement of overpayments. They now have similar powers to magistrates imposing fines and enforcing council tax. It is thus vital that they get their decisions right, otherwise the consequent debts, enforced against the poverty incomes of welfare claimants, will cause misery, ill health and homelessness.
Checking whether officials know the Wednesbury principles, which underpin in law their decision-taking, has been depressing. Anecdotal evidence is that some have not heard of the case of Associated Provincial Picture Houses Ltd v Wednesbury Corporation (1947), which set down the standard of unreasonableness of public body decisions that render them liable to be quashed on judicial review. Officials' decisions must take into account all relevant facts, ignore irrelevant facts and be rational.
The minister for welfare reform highlighted these principles when debating the welfare reform bill, assuring peers that officials will abide by them; but there will be no quashing of their decisions when solicitors cannot afford to consider whether to challenge in judicial review the legal inconsistencies which happen in new laws or the inevitable errors and inefficiencies.The right of all citizens to challenge over-mighty government is being carelessly undermined by welfare reform.
Rev Paul Nicolson
Chair, Zacchaeus 2000 Trust
• The scale of the government's welfare reforms make it even more vital that people are able to challenge wrong benefit decisions by government agencies. Yet the legal aid bill – being debated in the House of Lords today – will remove all funding for specialist advice on welfare benefit issues. Each year 78,000 disabled people will no longer get help with complex and serious legal problems. Legal aid is at the heart of successful community advice agencies, such as Citizens Advice bureaux and law centres, which either include legal aid within their own provision or refer clients on to nearby solicitors. Without this specialist funding, agencies will struggle to deliver a comprehensive service. Advice on these issues saves the state money as it prevents problems escalating. Citizens Advice estimates it saves the nation £8.80 for every £1 spent. Support for 100,000 people will cost only £16.5m each year. Therefore we urge peers to support the amendment led by Dee Doocey and tabled by peers from all parties to keep the most specialist welfare benefits cases within legal aid.
Lesley-Anne Alexander Chief executive, RNIB
Julie Bishop Director, Law Centres Federation
Sophie Corlett Head of external relations, Mind
Colonel Marion Drew Secretary for communications, The Salvation Army
Simon Gillespie Chief executive, Multiple Sclerosis Society
Mark Goldring Chief executive, Mencap
Gillian Guy Chief executive, Citizens Advice
Richard Hawkes Chief executive, Scope
Steve Hynes Director, Legal Action Group
Deborah Jack Chief executive, National Aids Trust
Steve Johnston Chief executive, Advice UK
Mark Lever Chief executive, National Autistic Society
Michelle Mitchell Charity director general, Age UK
Liz Sayce Chief executive, Disability Rights UK
• As organisations concerned with the welfare of girls across the UK, we are today urging authorities to act on the new report by the All Party Parliamentary Group on Women in the Penal System and improve their response to girls who come into contact with the criminal justice system by recognising their specific needs. Most of these girls do not require sanctions and interventions. Resolving behavioural issues quickly and informally would avoid this and would be more effective. For the few who do need intervention, single gender projects have been shown to support girls who are truanting, living in chaotic families or experiencing abuse. These projects boost self-confidence, help resolve problems and can prevent girls from getting caught up in the revolving doors of the penal system. Government, local authorities and the police need to recognise the specific needs of girls so that the criminal justice system does not become a permanent fixture in their lives.
Frances Crook Chief executive, Howard League for Penal Reform
Penny Newman Chief executive, Platform 51
Anne Marie Carrie Chief executive, Barnardo's
Dr Theo Gavrielides Chief executive, Independent Academic Research Studies
Roger Kelly Chief executive, Gateshead council
Flavia Docherty Director, Getaway Girls