Recommendations & Conclusions
12 items
3
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
We are not satisfied that MoJ and the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) are doing enough to ensure that people eligible for legal aid can access it, particularly those who are digitally excluded. This Committee previously raised concerns that LAA’s reliance on remote advice in areas of the country which lack …
Read more
We are not satisfied that MoJ and the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) are doing enough to ensure that people eligible for legal aid can access it, particularly those who are digitally excluded. This Committee previously raised concerns that LAA’s reliance on remote advice in areas of the country which lack face-to-face provision of legal aid risks disproportionately penalising those who are digitally excluded (estimated to be around 24% of the population), and who are often most in need of legal assistance. For example, individuals with disabilities or those living in poverty. Significant gaps in face-to-face legal provision still exist in areas of the country, in particular for housing and debt advice. LAA has begun to explore what it can do to remove barriers to providers meeting with clients face-to-face. For example, it is looking at how it could adjust the terms of its contracts to make this easier. However, we were disappointed that MoJ and LAA could not demonstrate an improved understanding of whether those who are digitally excluded are able to access help. recommendation In its Treasury Minute response, the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Aid Agency should set out: • outside of exploring changes to contracts, how it plans to better monitor whether digitally excluded individuals can access legal aid. • what it is doing to close gaps in provision in areas where legal aid deserts still exist. 4
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government accepts the recommendation, detailing a civil demand feasibility study with Ipsos (reporting March 2026) to monitor access for digitally excluded individuals and a programme to transform legal aid services. To close provision gaps, they are injecting £20m into the sector and have secured …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
4
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
More than ten years since the legal aid reforms, MoJ has still not demonstrated a sufficient understanding of the additional costs of legal aid reforms, particularly the impact of litigants in person. A decade ago our predecessors urged MoJ to get a better understanding of the wider costs of its …
Read more
More than ten years since the legal aid reforms, MoJ has still not demonstrated a sufficient understanding of the additional costs of legal aid reforms, particularly the impact of litigants in person. A decade ago our predecessors urged MoJ to get a better understanding of the wider costs of its reforms, which removed access to most early legal advice, and the previous Committee pressed on this again in its 2024 report. MoJ’s continued failure to demonstrate meaningful progress in this area is disappointing. While MoJ has done some work with the Ministry of Housing Communities and Local Government to understand where it is funding additional legal advice, it was not able to demonstrate significant changes it had made as a result of the work. Meanwhile, organisations including the Law Society and the Public Law Project have pointed to research which suggests several areas where the lack of early advice is leading to additional costs, such as healthcare. Given continued widespread concern about the impact of the increased number of litigants in person on courts, we were also dissatisfied with progress MoJ has made on improving its data to ensure it can get a more accurate understanding of the problem. recommendation The Ministry of Justice should write to the Committee alongside its Treasury Minute response setting out: • the results of and its response to its survey of local authorities about the effects of shunting costs to other government departments, and any further investigations it plans. For example, exploring where a lack of early advice creates additional costs for other areas, such as healthcare. • on the impact of the increase in litigants in person on courts, including any additional time and cost as a result, and how it will improve the data it bases its analysis on. For example, taking into account how active a LIP is in court processes.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees and states it has already written to the Committee, alongside the Treasury Minute, providing the results of its local authority survey and planned investigations. It also committed to writing to the Committee in October 2026 to detail how it will improve data …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
5
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
We remain unconvinced that MoJ has put in place sufficient measures to ensure the future sustainability of the legal aid market. In its 2024 report, this Committee raised concerns that while MoJ was undertaking large scale reviews of both criminal and civil legal aid it had not put in place …
Read more
We remain unconvinced that MoJ has put in place sufficient measures to ensure the future sustainability of the legal aid market. In its 2024 report, this Committee raised concerns that while MoJ was undertaking large scale reviews of both criminal and civil legal aid it had not put in place mechanisms to routinely review the profitability of legal aid fees. MoJ has since committed to increasing legal aid fees for housing and immigration but it has not yet implemented these uplifts. Further, fees for other areas of civil legal aid, which have not increased since 1996, remain under review. Even after these commitments, organisations such as the Law Society remain concerned that these uplifts are insufficient to tackle the long-term sustainability of the market. LAA is exploring what it can do to reduce the administrative burdens on providers and has made entry into the market 5 for providers easier. However, there remains no mechanism in place for routinely reviewing the profitability of all types of legal aid. While we accept MoJ’s argument that setting legal aid fees is a decision for Ministers, regular reviews of profitability and sustainability would provide Ministers with the information they need to make informed decisions. recommendation Although Ministers are responsible for setting legal aid fees, the Ministry of Justice should better support them by routinely reviewing profitability and sustainability for all types of legal aid. It should set out its plans to do this in its Treasury Minute Response.
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the recommendation and is undertaking a feasibility study with Ipsos to establish a repeatable methodology for monitoring legal aid demand and market sustainability. They will also explore options to routinely monitor the profitability of legal aid firms and will provide an …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
6
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
Despite lessons learned from the cyberattack on the LAA, funding to address weaknesses across MoJ systems is uncertain. Vulnerabilities in LAA’s systems had been on MoJ’s risk register since 2021. However, MoJ’s investment of over £50 million to transform and stabilise LAA’s systems was insufficient to prevent hackers accessing a …
Read more
Despite lessons learned from the cyberattack on the LAA, funding to address weaknesses across MoJ systems is uncertain. Vulnerabilities in LAA’s systems had been on MoJ’s risk register since 2021. However, MoJ’s investment of over £50 million to transform and stabilise LAA’s systems was insufficient to prevent hackers accessing a large amount of both provider and legal aid applicant data. While the investment led to improvements that enabled LAA to identify the breach in April 2025, this came four months after attackers initially accessed the system in December 2024. LAA recognises that contingency measures it put in place as services were taken offline have created additional pressures for providers and its staff, and that there are several lessons to be learned from the crisis that can be shared across government. For example, the importance of longer-term continuity plans, and of ensuring that senior leaders understand the vulnerabilities associated with their systems. Following the attack, MoJ reviewed all of its systems to identify where vulnerabilities exist but addressing these vulnerabilities will depend on its internal decisions on how it allocates its Spending Review settlement. recommendation In the Treasury Minute response, the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Aid Agency should set out: • the lessons it has learned from the crisis and how and when it plans to share these lessons with other government departments. • whether it has sufficient funding to address the key risks identified from the review of its systems, once allocations are decided. 6 1 MoJ and HMPPS’s decision to renew the HMP Dartmoor lease Introduction
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the recommendation, detailing numerous ways lessons learned from the cyberattack have been shared across government. It also confirms that funding has been allocated for the transformation of LAA systems for 2026-2029, alongside continuous security reviews.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
13
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
In its Treasury Minute response to our predecessor’s 2024 report, MoJ acknowledged that while remote advice can be effective, some people will always require face-to-face advice. It said that it had worked with stakeholders to identify safeguards and better understand the impact of remote provision, for example, for those in …
Read more
In its Treasury Minute response to our predecessor’s 2024 report, MoJ acknowledged that while remote advice can be effective, some people will always require face-to-face advice. It said that it had worked with stakeholders to identify safeguards and better understand the impact of remote provision, for example, for those in custody. It stated that where remote advice is not appropriate, the LAA may intervene directly by calling providers to find a firm with capacity. But it did not set out clear details on alternative routes for those unable to access remote advice. Nor did it mention how it planned to improve its understanding of remote provision on different groups.28 25 Committee of Public Accounts, Value for money from legal aid, Thirty-Third Report of Session 2023-24, HC 481, 24 May 2024. 26 Law Society of England and Wales (MOJ0002) 27 HC Committee of Public Accounts, Value for money from legal aid, Thirty-Third Report of Session 2023-24, HC 481, 24 May 2024. 28 HMT, Treasury Minutes, 5 September 2024 11
Show less
Government response AI summary
The MoJ will explore removing barriers to providers meeting clients face-to-face, increase understanding of demand from digitally excluded individuals, and report back to the Committee in October 2026.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
14
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
We asked MoJ and LAA for an update on what they are doing to ensure that different groups can access legal aid, particularly those for whom remote advice may not be suitable. LAA explained that since the previous Committee’s evidence session, it had been looking at how to empower providers …
Read more
We asked MoJ and LAA for an update on what they are doing to ensure that different groups can access legal aid, particularly those for whom remote advice may not be suitable. LAA explained that since the previous Committee’s evidence session, it had been looking at how to empower providers to use their judgement on the best way to deliver advice to individuals. It stated that it has also been examining whether its contract provisions create barriers to this, and told us that it had agreed to pay travel costs for providers to travel to clients where there were gaps in the provision of criminal legal aid.29
Show less
Government response AI summary
The MoJ will explore removing barriers to providers meeting clients face-to-face, increase understanding of demand from digitally excluded individuals, and report back to the Committee in October 2026.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
17
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
MoJ’s Treasury Minute response indicated that it had begun discussions with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government (MHCLG, or the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, as it was then called) to understand whether local authorities were funding immigration legal advice. However, its response on understanding the …
Read more
MoJ’s Treasury Minute response indicated that it had begun discussions with the Ministry of Housing, Communities, and Local Government (MHCLG, or the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, as it was then called) to understand whether local authorities were funding immigration legal advice. However, its response on understanding the impact of removing other areas of early legal advice was lacking. For example, it referenced its past Early Legal Advice pilot, which did not generate any findings due to poor participation. In written evidence, organisations including the Law Society and the Public Law Project stressed that early legal advice could help reduce wider costs to government. For example, legal aid in housing cases can reduce health- related costs by addressing unsafe living conditions.35 Regarding the impact of increased numbers of people who represent themselves in court (litigants in person) following its reforms, MoJ stated that its improved digital systems would allow it to do more detailed analysis to understand this. However, it did not state whether the new systems would allow it to address our predecessor Committee’s point on distinguishing between a litigant in person (LIP) who is very actively involved in a case and someone who does not participate.36
Show less
Government response AI summary
The department has written to the Committee, alongside the Treasury Minute response, setting out the results of its survey of local authorities and any further investigations planned.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
19
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
On litigants in person, MoJ acknowledged that its data have not been good enough to understand the impact of LIPs on courts. However, it said that its court reform programme, which included the introduction of a common platform in criminal courts, will allow it to capture data about LIPs and …
Read more
On litigants in person, MoJ acknowledged that its data have not been good enough to understand the impact of LIPs on courts. However, it said that its court reform programme, which included the introduction of a common platform in criminal courts, will allow it to capture data about LIPs and more accurate data on hearing times. We asked MoJ what it had learned from this data and whether it allows it to differentiate between litigants in person who are more actively involved in presenting their case compared with those who are not. MoJ explained that it does not yet have full data from its new systems, but that its previous analysis showed that LIPs do not slow court processes down. We note that LIPs may add costs in other ways. MoJ told us that its new systems record whether a LIP has appeared at a hearing, but that assessing their involvement in a case from this data could be quite subjective.38 Sustainability
Show less
Government response AI summary
The department will improve data and analysis regarding litigants in person, and will write to the Committee in October 2026 setting out the current position on data collection for litigants in person, and the department’s intention to write to the Committee in October 2026 setting …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
21
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
In its Treasury Minute response MoJ stated that it was considering how to monitor profitability more regularly. It said that the Independent Criminal Legal Aid Board (CLAAB), established following the review of criminal legal aid, had included discussion of the current market position. But MoJ did not set out any …
Read more
In its Treasury Minute response MoJ stated that it was considering how to monitor profitability more regularly. It said that the Independent Criminal Legal Aid Board (CLAAB), established following the review of criminal legal aid, had included discussion of the current market position. But MoJ did not set out any proposals for more routine monitoring of civil legal aid beyond its review of civil legal aid.40 Since then MoJ has committed to increasing legal aid fees for housing and immigration, but has not yet implemented these uplifts.41
Show less
Government response AI summary
The department will explore options to routinely monitor the profitability of legal aid firms, improve the management information collected on demand with the support of Ipsos, and provide an update in October 2026.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
22
Recommendation
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
We asked MoJ and LAA for an update on how they were monitoring the sustainability and profitability of legal aid work. MoJ said that it had recently surveyed both criminal and civil legal aid providers and that it was currently considering recommendations made by the CLAAB. It also stated that …
Read more
We asked MoJ and LAA for an update on how they were monitoring the sustainability and profitability of legal aid work. MoJ said that it had recently surveyed both criminal and civil legal aid providers and that it was currently considering recommendations made by the CLAAB. It also stated that fees across the rest of civil legal aid remain under review. However, it 38 Qq 44-53, 67-68 39 HC Committee of Public Accounts, Value for money from legal aid, Thirty-Third Report of Session 2023-24, HC 481, 24 May 2024. 40 HMT, Treasury Minutes, 5 September 2024 41 Letter from the Ministry of Justice, 6 November 2025 14 stressed that any changes to fees are ultimately a decision for Ministers.42 LAA acknowledged that the sustainability of legal aid remains a concern and that while setting fees is outside of its domain, there are several things it was doing to help address this. This includes looking at what it can do to reduce the administrative burden on providers, extending contract terms to give providers more certainty, and making contract processes more flexible to enable firms to join the market more regularly, which was previously only possible every five years.43
Show less
Government response AI summary
The department will explore options to routinely monitor the profitability of legal aid firms, improve the management information collected on demand with the support of Ipsos, and provide an update in October 2026.
Read full response →
HM Treasury
24
Conclusion
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
MoJ and LAA acknowledged that the cyberattack on LAA’s online digital services began in December 2024, four months before the LAA detected the attack on 23 April 2025.46 LAA explained that in April, it took action to boost the security of the systems concerned and informed legal aid providers that …
Read more
MoJ and LAA acknowledged that the cyberattack on LAA’s online digital services began in December 2024, four months before the LAA detected the attack on 23 April 2025.46 LAA explained that in April, it took action to boost the security of the systems concerned and informed legal aid providers that their bank details may have been compromised. However, it did not take its systems down until 16 May 2025.47
Show less
Government response AI summary
The MoJ and LAA have already identified and shared lessons from the attack through several routes including internally across MoJ, with Permanent Secretaries, to the cross-government data practitioners’ network and the Government Cyber Coordination Centre (GC3) Impact Coordination Group, as well as writing to the …
Read full response →
HM Treasury
27
Conclusion
59th Report - Ministry of Justice follo…
Accepted
We asked MoJ whether the public could have confidence that data stored across MoJ’s systems is safe, following the attack. MoJ stated that it has comprehensively reviewed all of its systems to understand where vulnerabilities lie. It stated that its review had given it a better understanding of where the …
Read more
We asked MoJ whether the public could have confidence that data stored across MoJ’s systems is safe, following the attack. MoJ stated that it has comprehensively reviewed all of its systems to understand where vulnerabilities lie. It stated that its review had given it a better understanding of where the risks in its systems are and explained that a transformation programme is now in place to update systems and make them less vulnerable. It acknowledged, however, that there are huge costs associated with improving systems and that addressing the risks identified will be dependent on its decisions on how to allocate its Spending Review settlement across the business. It gave the same response, when we asked whether it planned to accelerate the transformation programme in light of the attack on LAA’s systems.52 50 Q 71 51 Qq 77, 88 52 Qq 81-86, 89 16
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees with the committee's recommendation and states the MoJ and LAA have already identified and shared lessons from the cyberattack through various routes, including internal committees, cross-government meetings, and the National Cyber Security Centre.
Read full response →
HM Treasury