Recommendation 2

There are areas of the country lacking face-to-face provision of legal aid, which risks penalising vulnerable groups disproportionately. Stakeholders have consistently raised the issue of ‘legal aid deserts’ where large geographic areas lack a legal aid provider for specific categories of law. For example, large areas of the South West and North West have no face-to-face housing or debt support. MoJ has stated that where there is no provider, people can seek remote advice, which can work well for many. But it does not understand the impact of remote advice on vulnerable groups, for example those with limited access to public transportation, English as a second language or people with a disability. Charities such as the Child Poverty Action Group report that many of their clients struggle to obtain relevant evidence of their eligibility due to having limited access to technology or low digital capabilities: this is exacerbated when services are provided remotely as many are unable to travel, for example due to a disability. Recommendation 2: In its Treasury Minute response, the Ministry of Justice should: 6 Value for Money from Legal Aid • clarify what the options are for those who are unable to make use of remote advice. It should specifically consider vulnerable groups in areas with no face-to-face legal aid provision, whose issues may be too complex to solve via telephone; and • set out how it plans to better understand the impact of remote provision on vulnerable groups and address any problems identified.