Clik here to view.
At the third reading stage of the bill, peers voted by 232 to 220 to preserve legal aid funding for children
The government has suffered a fresh series of defeats in the House of Lords over proposals to cut access to legal aid for children and in medical negligence cases.
Having already forced nine unwelcome amendments onto the Ministry of Justice's cost-cutting measures during the report stage of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders bill, peers have now inflicted further damage on the legislation.
At the third reading stage of the bill, peers voted by 232 to 220 to preserve legal aid funding for children so that they should not have to present their own cases in court.
An amendment put down by Lady Grey-Thompson, the wheelchair paralympian and gold medal winner, opposed government plans to save £6m a year by removing as many as 6,000 children from entitlement to legal support. During the Lords debate she argued: "Children are not adults. They do not have the capacity to represent themselves or to interpret the thousands of pages of laws and regulations that affect them.
"If we do not support this amendment we will be asking a child to go into the courtroom alone to argue his or her case against a barrister paid for by the taxpayer. It will be unjust and unfair."
The former Conservative MP, Lord Cormack, supported her, declaring: "We know the deficit has to be cut, but that does not mean cuts have to be made in every department, particularly where small sums can make a big difference. We hope the Commons will think again, unless the minister will concede."
The government suffered a second defeat when peers rejected by 228 to 215 votes proposals to deny children access to legal aid for those involved in clinical negligence cases.
The government also made several concessions, accepting an amendment that the lord chancellor could bring back into the scope categories of legal aid without the need for primary legislation. Ministers also conceded that legal aid for victims of child abduction in the United Kingdom as well as cases abroad.
The bill, which covers a wide area of legal and criminal justice reforms, is primarily aimed at saving £350m a year from the MoJ's annual budget.
The defeats will add to the pressure on the government's parliamentary timetable. The coalition is expected to try and reverse the Lords' decisions in the House of Commons on the grounds that the bill is primarily a financial measure.
