The controversial Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA) will be implemented in stages, but there will be no pilot, it has emerged.

A report to the Bar Standards Board indicated that consideration was being given to piloting of the scheme, which is due to open for registration in December and be fully implemented by April 2012.

But the Joint Advocacy Group, which comprises the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Bar Standards Board and ILEX Professional Standards, has said that the scheme will be introduced circuit by circuit. The JAG is responsible for developing the scheme.

Head of quality at the BSB, Oliver Hanmer, said a revised implementation plan and timetable will be published shortly.

Meanwhile, the Solicitors Association of Higher Court Advocates has dismissed as ‘absurd’ a complaint made by the Criminal Bar Association about plans to link Crown court advocates’ payments to the competence levels attained under QASA.

The complaint has been aired following a meeting with the Legal Services Commission attended by CBA chair Max Hill QC and SAHCA chair Jo Cooper.

The plan would see a change to the advocates graduated fee scheme, under which advocates are currently paid according to their category - QC, leading junior, led junior and junior - so that fees are instead directly linked to the QASA level that the advocate has been accredited with (level 2, 3 and 4 for Crown court advocates).

The CBA is angered by the proposal, because it says it will be the end of silk payments for publicly funded defence cases, since there is no separate QASA level for silks.

QCs who have been accredited with the highest QASA level (4), will be paid the same amount for a case as a junior barrister with level 4 accreditation.

In an email to CBA members, Hill rejected the LSC’s assertion that the change would be ‘cost neutral’, claiming that it would reduce to zero the £27 million he said had been paid to silks by the LSC last year, thereby introducing a further pay cut by the back door.

Hill said the development threatened the entire QASA scheme.

‘QASA was never intended to replace silks. QASA was never intended to impact upon remuneration. We have never been told that the LSC intends to use the scheme to tie remuneration to QASA levels in this way. For the avoidance of doubt, it is clear to me that the BSB were not told either,’ he said.

Hill plans to meet senior members of the judiciary to inform them of the problem, as he is ‘confident’ that they have not been told of the plan.

However SAHCA chair Jo Cooper told the Gazette: ‘There is nothing new in this. What the LSC is proposing is simply linking pay rates to case level - a proposal they flagged up to all of us back in 2009.’

He added: ‘Since the bar subsequently proposed four levels not five in QASA, there are four categories to play with, and the LSC cannot justify paying extra for a non-quality assessed accreditation such as silk.’

Cooper observed that the LSC did not seem averse to having a quality-assessed level 5, and said that an extra category was being considered.

‘But until that [level 5] is put into QASA they [the LSC] will pay their highest rate to level 4 advocates, silk or not,’ said Cooper.

Rather than abolishing payments at the silk rate, the LSC would be widening the category of advocates who will get it, he added.

‘The suggestion that silks will receive not £27m, but zero, is absurd. They will continue to be paid at the top QASA rate - assuming, that is, that they submit to quality accreditation like the rest of us and achieve level 4,’ he said.

Cooper also criticised the CBA for seeking to involve the judiciary in a regulatory matter.

He said: ‘The political fallout from this is potentially far-reaching. It is interesting that the CBA are raising this with the senior judiciary. Up until now we have been told that QASA was a process run by the Joint Advocacy Group.’

An LSC spokesman said: ‘We recently discussed with representatives of barristers and solicitor-advocates how to use the QASA as a basis for eligibility and payment of fees to advocates in criminal legal aid cases. We previously mentioned the idea in 2008, 2009 and 2010.

‘At this stage, with QASA still in development, it is only right that we gather views from all concerned before we draft proposals. It would then be for government ministers to decide whether they want to pursue the proposals and put them to consultation.’

A consultation on the scheme is open until 26 September.