The Law Society and Bar Council have joined forces to warn that access to justice will be reduced if the government ‘ploughs on with its reckless approach’ to best value tendering (BVT).

The two bodies, together with the Criminal Bar Association, issued a joint statement as they submitted their responses to the Legal Services Commission’s consultation on the introduction of BVT for police station work. The consultation ends today.

The bodies fear BVT will lead to a ‘drastic reduction’ in the number of criminal legal aid firms, which will reduce client choice, and that the proposals will have a ‘hugely detrimental impact on the quality of representation’.

The groups point to a lack of economic or empirical justification for the proposals, particularly given the fact that the legal aid budget has benefited from significant savings following the Carter reforms.

They are also concerned about the failure of the LSC to conduct a full and proper impact assessment, taking account of the potential disproportionate impact on women and black and minority ethnic (BME) practitioners, or to carry out a proper evaluation of its effect in the pilot areas before the phased national rollout.

‘This reveals an illogical and flawed process which does not serve the interests of justice,’ they suggest.

Law Society president Paul Marsh said: ‘The widespread use of BVT is likely to savagely reduce the number of firms undertaking this work, denying clients access to many competent and dedicated solicitors who want to serve them.

‘The bidding processes proposed are opaque and not suited to the commissioning of professional services, where the freedom of the individual is put at risk.’

He said the Law Society had grave concerns that the proposed scheme was not in the interests of justice and the Society would continue to oppose any untested move towards it.

‘With little clear evidence behind these proposals, the Law Society feels that they would damage the proper delivery of justice, which should be there to protect the interests of society, including victims of crime and their families,’ Marsh said.

‘The Law Society and the bar are concerned that these proposals as currently drafted have not been properly evaluated for their impact and that they will undermine a justice system already creaking at the seams.’

Desmond Browne QC, the chairman of the Bar Council, said: ‘The introduction of BVT in this way takes no account of the negative impact it will have on access to justice. We cannot afford to sacrifice the present robust system for a scheme which lacks all economic justification, and which will have a disproportionate impact on BME practitioners.

‘The LSC’s failure to properly assess the impact on BME practitioners is potentially discriminatory and may be unlawful; it has a statutory duty to avoid discrimination and promote equality of opportunity, and it has comprehensively failed to comply with this requirement.

‘Solicitors and barristers alike are united in their opposition to a "reverse auction" for legal representation, which is likely to drive down standards, make trials more costly and lead to an ever greater number of appeals.’