Dame Margaret Bazley has set the cat among the pigeons with her report saying unverified sources believed up to 80 per cent of lawyers practising in Manukau District Court could be gaming the system
Unverified sources huh?
No prizes for guessing who told her about:
"lawyers who demanded or accepted top up payments from clients who do not understand legal aid" or
"widespread abuse of the preferred lawyer policy by duty solicitors, including taking backhanders for recommending particular lawyers to applicants".
No names though. Wonder how many cases have resulted in disciplinary action, or any kind of investigation what so ever.
View the report - which makes 86 recommendations - at:
http://www.justice.govt.nz/publications/global-publications/t/transforming-the-legal-aid-system/transforming-the-legal-aid-system/?searchterm=Legal%20Aid%20Review%20report
Contains gems like:
#1 "Evolution of the legal aid .....from private to public management". That should set Cactus Kate off ! (not to mention # 50 "...in accordance with public sector best practice")
I'd question the logic of the justification "Because the legal aid system is essential to the operation of the justice system...." which leads on to more of the same in #5 .
But I'd totally agree with # 44 "The legal aid system needs to encourage lawyers to affiliate themselves with other lawyers, to ensure they get training, supervision, mentoring, support, and feedback on their performance in providing legal aid services."
...easy to put in one sentence!
# 45 "All lawyers should have premises from which they operate."
This is the electronic age. Why shouldn't lawyers work from a car boot or restaurant with a laptop and mobile?
#86 "As a matter of urgency, the government should clarify funding streams for Treaty of Waitangi Claims and modify them to ensure there is no possibility of double-dipping or triple-dipping by claimants or lawyers."
Ya think?
More to come.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Four resignations today.
Says it all really.
Yes, had to happen. I won't hold my breath on consequences other than reputational for the 'corrupt lawyers'. Balancing $$$ (very unlikely there'll be more) against quality of service will be a challenge for the new boss.
Whats going on with rec 10 about the tribunal reviewing decisions and the explanation in 154? ("...the new tribunal should have regard to both access to justice considerations and responsible expenditure of public monies. I am not confident that a Chair drawn from the legal profession will necessarily achieve the appropriate balance between these considerations"). Strange, but leaves the door open for Oswald or Garth perhaps.
Post a Comment