The government has united solicitors and barristers in their opposition to proposals to make further cuts to criminal legal aid work. But as both sides seek a solution that protects their members’ interests, there are differences over the best way forward.

The Bar Council and Criminal Bar Association (CBA) are holding a series of roadshows canvassing the views of barristers, while criminal solicitor groups held an urgent meeting on the issue this week.

Representative groups from both branches of the profession reacted with anger to the Legal Services Commission’s December consultation, which proposed cutting the cost of very high cost cases (VHCCs) by narrowing the scope of cases that fell within it. This preceded a paper from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) which outlined 18% cuts to Crown court advocacy rates. Legal aid minister Lord Bach said that if savings could be made from the VHCC scheme, there could be a lesser reduction in Crown court fees overall.

The CBA has designed a scheme which it calls GFS Plus to replace the current VHCC system. It provides for a fixed fee regime to pay for Crown court cases, which makes additional payments for tasks such as reading unused material and attending client conferences, which are not remunerated under the government’s proposed scheme.

While the Law Society is broadly supportive of this, it would prefer an option that ensured any cuts were confined to VHCC work and left the fees for all other criminal work undiminished.

Law Society head of legal aid Richard Miller said: ‘There is a consensus in the profession that there is no further scope for cuts to the fees for criminal work in the police station and magistrates’ courts, or for routine Crown court work.

‘The government insists that further savings have to be found. In that context, it is unavoidable that VHCCs have to be looked at. The question is whether it is possible to make savings without damaging representation and advocacy in the larger, more serious cases.’