Showing posts with label Lindsay Montgomery. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lindsay Montgomery. Show all posts

Saturday, February 26, 2011

Law Society resignations : Scottish Legal Aid Board Chief accused of interfering with Law Society to gag committee in legal aid money debate

THE entire membership of the Law Society of Scotland’s powerful Access to Justice Committee is reported in today’s Herald newspaper to have followed its Convener, the Govan Law Centre’s Mike Dailly, and resigned in a mass protest over allegations of undemocratic behaviour at the Law Society of Scotland, the body which represents all of Scotland’s 10,500 solicitors.

The Chief Executive of the Scottish Legal Aid Board, Lindsay Montgomery also now stands accused of leaning on the Law Society to silence Mr Dailly's criticisms of SLAB and how it is funded.

The Law Society’s President Jamie Millar denied all the allegations made by Mr Dailly in a rambling response, reported HERE

Mr Millar’s statement claims a number of Council members had expressed concern over the work of Mr Dailly’s Access to Justice Committee, a reference which appears to refer to a story reported in October 2010, where Mr Dailly’s Committee suggested the Scottish Legal Aid Board & the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission should be merged in the name of saving money. The idea was widely attacked at the time by SLAB, the SLCC & the Law Society as neither wanted to be merged with the other (not again ! – Ed).

Independent law publication “The Firm” has published the full text of Mr Dailly’s resignation letter to the current Law Society President, Jamie Millar. In the letter, Mr Dailly pulls no punches in his criticisms of the way the Law Society operates, telling the President he has no confidence in him or the Law Society’s Council, who appear to have been determined to axe the Access to Justice Committee after discussions had allegedly taken place between the Scottish Legal Aid Board & the Law Society to reign in Mr Dailly’s Committee.

The Herald reports the latest developments :

Lawyers in revolt at alleged ‘gagging’ attempt

David Leask Investigations Reporter

26 Feb 2011

SCOTLAND’S legal profession was plunged into chaos last night after an entire committee of the Law Society of Scotland quit, claiming a senior civil servant attempted to gag them.

The society’s Access to Justice Committee stood down in a mass protest late yesterday after its convener, prominent solicitor Mike Dailly, accused the chief executive of the Scottish Legal Aid Board (Slab), Lyndsay Montgomery, of leaning on the society to have him silenced.

The committee has led criticism of Mr Montgomery and Slab as Scotland’s lawyers squabble over who should take the brunt of millions of pounds in cuts to the legal aid budget.

Mr Dailly, in a resignation letter, said Slab had asked the society to have the committee “reined in and controlled”.

This was immediately denied by both Slab and the society. The mass resignations come less than a week after another high-profile Glasgow solicitor, John McGovern, like Mr Dailly, resigned from the society’s ruling council.

Both are members of the Glasgow Bar Association which, as The Herald revealed a week ago, is exploring legal ways to break up with the Edinburgh-based society, which both regulates and represents solicitors.

The Access to Justice Committee last year called for Slab to be scrapped. This, Mr Dailly yesterday claimed, prompted a furious response from Mr Montgomery, who phoned him to say solicitors were “useless and unable to count”. In the letter to Jamie Millar, the Law Society’s president, Mr Dailly said: “It was an intolerant and quite inappropriate call from a senior Scottish public servant.”

The solicitor, who heads the not-for-profit Govan Law Centre, believes the Law Society took sides with Slab and Mr Montgomery, and not its own committee. He said the society responded to the criticism by imposing a “gagging order” on him and his committee.

Mr Dailly claimed Mr Millar said council members were concerned about the committee’s attacks on the legal aid board. Mr Dailly added in the letter: “I find it deeply troubling that the Council of the Law Society of Scotland is incapable of standing up for free speech and open public debate on matters of importance to the Scottish public and the Scottish legal profession. Particularly, as this is a primary statutory function of the society.”

A spokeswoman for The Law Society last night confirmed that “a number of council members had expressed concern over the work of the committee”. Their main worry, she said, was that Mr Dailly had failed to answer to the ruling council for three successive monthly council meetings. They requested that he appear before a meeting next month. She said: “We are sorry that Mike has now chosen to resign from council, rather than allowing council members to discuss these matters with him directly”

Paul McBride QC, a member of Slab’s board, last night rubbished Mr Dailly’s claims that Mr Montgomery or anybody else from the legal aid quango was behind the gagging order. He said Mr Dailly was trying to “make a martyr of himself”.

A spokesman for Slab said: “We are disappointed that Mr Dailly has chosen to make misleading and personally offensive remarks.” He said the board had acted appropriately and there had been no undue influence on the Law Society.”

Sunday, December 12, 2010

Accusations of ‘spin’ levelled at Legal Aid Board as ‘satisfaction survey’ over legal aid published days after row over bank charges case funding

After a week of arguments between the Scottish Legal Aid Board and the Govan Law Centre over SLAB’s refusal to fund bank charges cases via civil legal aid, the Legal Aid Board today faced fresh allegations of ‘spin’ & ‘cover up’ as it published a ‘feel good survey’ compiled by MVA consultancy reporting there were “high levels of satisfaction with the legal aid procedures operated by the Board, particularly its online services”.

MVA consultancy were selected by SLAB earlier in February 2010 to carry out nationwide survey of solicitors who provide work under legal assistance. The survey was carried out over six weeks by way of a telephone administered questionnaire to a number of randomly selected practitioners throughout Scotland.

A senior solicitor from an Edinburgh law firm hit out today at the way in which the Scottish Legal Aid Board has attempted to cap an ongoing row over the way it awards civil legal aid funds to those seeking access to justice in Scottish Courts by the timely publishing of a “feel good survey depicting SLAB in a better light than it deserves”. The solicitor went onto allege the timely publishing of the survey “was typical media spin from a quango which found itself at the heart of a slew of bad headlines over questionable funding decisions.”

He continued : “Happy smiley face surveys aside, SLAB should be held more to account for the way in which it awards or refuses civil legal aid to clients who are routinely denied access to justice in the Scottish courts through a lack of funding due to blatantly prejudiced decisions taken by the board.”

The Scottish Legal Aid Board survey media release of 10 December 2010 follows :

Legal aid solicitor survey shows high satisfaction and commitment to legal aid (pdf)

An independent survey for the Scottish Legal Aid Board has shown a commitment to legal aid and overall high levels of satisfaction with the legal aid procedures operated by the Board, particularly its online services.

The Scottish Legal Aid Board today published the findings of its independent survey of legal aid solicitors. The survey involved phone interviews with 416 solicitors, across civil and criminal legal aid firms, to gather evidence of the profession’s views on legal aid and the guidance and support provided to them by the Board.

Findings included:

- A significant majority of solicitors are willing to take on more civil legal aid clients (in 2005 43% had said that they had stopped taking on new clients, this is now down to just 2%).

- Solicitors are very positive about continuing to provide legal aid services; 88% “certain” / “likely to” be doing legal aid in three year’s time (compared to 63% in 2005, a 26% increase). These findings support the Board’s experiences of increasing numbers of solicitors wishing to do legal aid work – both civil and criminal legal aid.

- High levels of satisfaction with legal aid processes and guidelines available from the Board. (With very low levels of dissatisfaction indicated across applications and criminal accounts. More varied views were expressed about civil legal aid accounts processes).

- Very strong support for the Board’s online legal aid processes (e.g. 92% for those who submit criminal summary applications were satisfied with the process).

The survey also sought solicitors’ views on aspects of the Summary Justice Reforms on behalf of the Scottish Government, which included reform of Summary Criminal Legal Aid. Findings included:

- 80% of solicitors felt that allowing appointed solicitors to grant criminal ABWOR (assistance by way of representation) for guilty pleas had succeeded in helping to bring about earlier resolution of cases

- about two thirds of solicitors felt that the changes to remuneration were assisting in the earlier resolution of cases.

Lindsay Montgomery, C.B.E., Chief Executive of the Scottish Legal Aid Board commented : “Overall the results are very positive and encouraging not only about the board’s processes and communications, but also in terms of solicitors’ positive attitudes to continuing to provide legal aid services. This reflects the board’s experience of increasing numbers of firms registering to undertake legal aid work. We are already looking at areas where levels of satisfaction are lower than average (albeit still the minority view) to establish where there might be scope for development. I am very grateful to those who took part in the survey.”

"Solicitors are on the front line of legal aid provision and are integral to enabling access to justice, so seeking the profession’s views in this independent way gives us useful information on solicitors’ experiences of the Board’s systems, which will be used to further develop and improve legal aid policy, practices and procedures.”

The summary research briefing (from MVA Consulting) and full results are available on the Board’s website at http://www.slab.org.uk (if anyone comes up with the direct link to this consultation, which SLAB 'forgot' to add in its Press Statement, please send it in as the SLAB website is a mess – Ed)