The Law Society has today submitted proposals to government that would make savings of £394m in the justice system.

The proposals would provide an alternative to the £350m cuts to the legal aid budget contained in the government’s consultation paper on legal aid reform.

Chancery Lane says ‘significant savings’ can be made to the Ministry of Justice’s budget without introducing its ‘deplorable’ planned reduction in the scope of legal aid, or financial eligibility for publicly funded legal advice.

The proposals, which were due to be put before the Law Society Council as the Gazette went to press, include savings of £76m stemming from the way barristers are paid.

The Society says advocates’ fees should be capped so that no individual could earn more than £250,000 a year from legal aid.

It proposes limiting Queen’s Counsels’ fees and the travel expenses paid to advocates, as well as introducing a single fee for Crown court cases, which would be paid to and managed by solicitors’ firms. Law firms would hand over a portion of the payment to barristers.

The Society proposes that £48m could be saved by improving the efficiency of the Crown Prosecution Service, and obliging it to reimburse the legal aid budget for the cost of the 12% of Crown court cases and 9% of magistrates’ court cases that are dropped, or result in a directed acquittal.

The Society suggests that making the financial sector pay for the cost of its own fraud cases would generate £92m.

Further proposals include scrapping the Defence Solicitor Call Centre, reviewing the use of associate prosecutors which is causing delays in the system, issuing more wasted costs orders, and removing the hearsay and bad character evidence rules which increase the number of hearings.

Chancery Lane said relatively simple changes in the administration of legal aid could also produce substantial savings, for example simplifying the forms and application process, and abolishing the means test for areas where the overwhelming number of clients are eligible.

In all, the Society said that its proposals would save the MoJ a total of £394m.

Chancery Lane said that it accepted the government’s need to make savings, but not its ‘deplorable’ cuts to the legal aid budget, which would damage access to justice and the rule of law, are indirectly discriminatory, and would cost more than the £350m they are intended to save.

Law Society president Linda Lee said: 'The most vulnerable people will suffer reduced access to justice if the government goes ahead with its planned cuts, yet money can be saved by other means.'

At the time of going to press the proposals were due to be considered by the Law Society Council on Wednesday 16 February. While the deadline for consultation responses was 14 February, Chancery Lane obtained an extension until today so that its proposals could be approved by the Law Society Council.