An influential committee of MPs has criticised the government’s ‘dramatic’ legal aid reforms and called on ministers to ‘refine’ their proposals.

In a report published this week, the House of Commons Justice Committee recommended that the Ministry of Justice look at other ways to make the £350m-a-year savings envisaged, for example by considering the ‘polluter pays’ scheme put forward by the Law Society.

The committee, chaired by Liberal Democrat Sir Alan Beith, said the country’s legal aid system is one of the most expensive in the world and needs reform, but added that the ‘dramatic’ changes proposed ‘present a severe challenge to those involved with the justice system’.

It called on the government to assess the likely impact of its reforms more fully, for example by considering their effect on the operation of the courts and tribunals, and on public spending.

The report said: ‘There is potential for the government to devise longer-term options for reform rather than concentrating on simple options, such as reducing the scope of legal aid.

'[It] needs to refine its proposals further before introducing a major change in the way the accessibility of the justice system has come to be viewed.’

The committee urged government to consider whether public bodies such as the Department for Work and Pensions should be subject to a ‘polluter pays’ approach, whereby they would pay a surcharge for poor decision-making which leads to successful appeals.

It advised government to examine this and other proposals put forward by the Law Society in its consultation response. In family law, the committee said the proposed 10% fee cut was better than further scope changes.

But it called on government to reconsider its use of domestic violence as a gateway to public funding, voicing concerns that it could create a perverse incentive to make false accusations of domestic violence.

It also recommended that the definition of ‘domestic violence’ be broadened to explicitly incorporate non-physical abuse.

The committee said it was ‘not convinced’ by fears expressed by some providers that the proposals will result in the end of legal aid as a national public service.

But it said the plans could result in a ‘significant under-supply’ of providers in some areas of the country, or ‘advice deserts’.

Law Society president Linda Lee said she was pleased that the ‘independent, cross-party committee’ had supported many of the Society’s proposals.