The government's legal dilema

It is hard to deny the emotional and intellectual appeal of legal aid. On one level it is very gripping as a welfare system that works to conquer unequal access to legal resources. In addition, legal aid also provides us with stories about underpaid solicitors in London assisting innocent victims get justice from uncaring bureaucrats.

Nevertheless legal aid may be the new fiscal sacrificial lamb for the Ministry of Justice. The Guardian reports that leaked documents obtained by the Observer show "that even before the final squeeze was put on the ministry, it was planning to make savings by 2014 from £2.1bn legal aid budget". It is now known that the justice system will confront cuts of around 25-30% in total.

With legal aid facing rather severe cuts there has been quite a large reaction from the public against this possibility. The argument against this is that legal aid provides a check on poor choices made by central government and local authorities.

There are those who argue that the government has a habit of making poor or unjust decisions which only anger those less fortunate. These are people who often do not have the means to effectively challenge these decisions and therefore depend on legal aid to help them through the baffling (sometimes even to lawyers in London) legal system.

Cutting legal aid, critics argue, will have repercussions for justice that go over and above the immediate justice or injustice of limiting access to legal aid. Cases brought by legal aid have pushed challenges to issues such as torture and the right to protest. Many fear that everyone's civil rights will suffer if the economically disadvantaged cannot participate as fully in government.

The long term impact of the proposed cut in legal aid will stop potentially millions of people around the country from participating in the legal system and arguably politics in general. Without access to a solicitor in London or elsewhere the potential to take part in the legal system virtually vanishes.

The government does need to make cuts somewhere and welfare expenditures are a major expense. Critics could make the case that civil liberties and social justice in general will be impaired by cutting almost any area of welfare.

While the above reaction may be true, it appears to be obvious that equal access to legal services provided through legal aid is a fundamental aspect of British democracy that should not be sacrificed for political points.