Could this finally be the day that the government’s civil litigation costs reforms get the scrutiny they deserve?

The letter sent by the family of Milly Dowler to prime minister David Cameron changes the picture completely.

They claim that without the ‘no win no fee’ system they would never have been able to fight the News of the World over allegations their daughter’s phone was hacked.

It’s a compelling argument - and one that will surely make the public sit up and take notice of what is happening to their justice system.

Whether or not you support scrapping conditional fee arrangements, there is no doubt the issue has been brushed under the carpet by both the government and an apathetic national media.

What little attention the government has drawn to the civil litigation issue has often been derisory and misleading.

Justice minister Jonathan Djanogly frequently makes reference to the term ‘compensation culture’, apparently not appreciating the irony of Lord Young’s report that said the culture was largely fabricated by inaccurate media reporting.

The media in particular has been only too keen to echo this line, ignoring any counterarguments, and even the BBC has done little to provide a balanced debate. Last month’s online feature, entitled ‘Why motor premiums are so high’ and written by the AXA chief executive, stated that ‘the UK seems gripped by an American-style compensation culture, fuelled by those who seek to make a quick buck’. Nonsense.

The Dowler family were not out to make a quick buck, they simply wanted justice for their unimaginable suffering.

Their assertion that no win, no fee helped them get that justice is persuasive. Suddenly, no win, no fee is not associated just with excruciating adverts on daytime television and is instead helping to heal pain and provide genuine victims with deserved justice.

These arguments are not being put forward by lawyers temporarily lifting their noses from the trough; they are the product of ordinary people who have suffered extraordinary sadness.

These reforms are too important to sneak through into law without being placed under the microscope. If the government truly believes in them, let it explain why.