I am sorry that my noble friend is not satisfied with the explanation that I have been rather laboriously making—which is that it all depends on the difference between scope and remuneration. The scope of legal aid has not been altered; we are simply talking about an amendment to remuneration at one stage of the process—a particular regulation which was considered in Committee. It was the subject of a debate on these matters. Admittedly there was opposition to it on the basis that this could stifle people from bringing judicial review, but it was not then suggested that there was some violent inconsistency between the LASPO Bill and what was said during its passage, and the change pursuant to Section 9. Now, however, it is being suggested that there is some bad faith on the part of the Government.
Criminal Justice and Courts Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Faulks
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 27 October 2014.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Courts Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
756 c1048 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-05-22 05:01:36 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-27/1410283000001
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-27/1410283000001
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-27/1410283000001