Sorry more lazy bloggin' today (I am up to my neck in 16 Peer Review files up for appeal against a deadline).

Just in from the LAPG:

LAPG CONDEMNS “SCANDAL” OF PUBLIC DEFENDER
 
The Legal Aid Practitioners Group today challenged the LSC’s interpretation of the research into the Public Defender Service, and called for an end to the "scandal" of continuing with this expensive project.
 
Director Richard Miller said, “Now we know why this report has been suppressed for so long. The evidence shows that the Birmingham and Liverpool PDS Offices performed worse in quality terms than the average of all private practice firms in their region, while the other offices performed only a little better than average. These offices had substantially lower caseloads than private practice firms. The average of chargeable hours per fee earner was around 800, compared with Lord Carter’s requirement of 1,400 hours.
 
“They also received substantially more public money per case. The research shows that the PDS cost around half as much again as private practice, and on some measures more than twice as much.
 
“Yet they were still unable to keep up with the best private practice firms on quality. What will happen to that quality when they are under equal pressure in terms of time and money?”
 
Chair Roy Morgan said, “LAPG has never had any concerns about the independence of mind of public defenders, and believes that if the pilot had shown benefits to the taxpayer in terms of maintaining good quality while saving money, the service would have had a valid place in the system. As it is, the evidence is clear that the PDS is massively more expensive. At a time when private practice firms are faced with substantial cuts to their fees because the Government cannot afford even to maintain current rates, it is a scandal that this hugely expensive alternative which shows almost no benefits in terms of quality is being kept open.”