We move on now to item 7, a statement by the Counsel General and Minister for the Constitution on legal aid and access to justice. I call on Mick Antoniw to make the statement.

Thanks, Llywydd. This year marks 10 years since a series of draconian and punitive cuts to legal aid were passed by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition Government. The cuts were made through the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. At the time, the justice Minister, Jonathan Djanogly, claimed that the Act would make legal costs fairer. Yet, since then, it has become apparent that these cuts have achieved the exact opposite.

Llywydd, according to the findings of the Law Society, legal aid is no longer available for many who need it. Those eligible for legal aid find it hard to access, wide gaps in provisions are not being addressed, and the Act has had a negative impact on the state and on society. It has led to the creation of a two-tier justice system, with access to justice being denied for so many people in Wales. The legal aid cuts, which is what they are, have even led to innocent people being sent to prison because they cannot secure the legal support necessary to protect their freedom.

The Llywydd took the Chair.

These perverse outcomes are completely contrary to the vision that lay behind the creation of the state legal aid system by the post-war Labour Government, and they are contrary to the vision and beliefs of this Welsh Labour Government. The vision was

'that whatever the difficulties may be in the way of poverty, no citizen should fail to get the legal aid or advice which is so necessary to establish his or her full rights.'

This was said to be

'an essential reform in a true democracy'.

Llywydd, I go further, to say that this is a basic human right that is now being denied.

Legal aid is more than just a process for the funding of lawyers in legal cases. When it was established in 1949, they were creating an NHS for the law, and it was recognised that access to justice, the right to advice, representation and support, is a fundamental human right. It is not just about the courts, it is about empowerment of people, it is about ensuring that all have genuine rights in society. Is it any wonder, then, that so many people disengage from civic society when they do not feel part of it, are not listened to and are powerless?

Members of this Senedd will be aware that I and the Minister for Social Justice have increasingly been issuing joint written statements around these justice issues, and this is because we recognise that the link between justice, access to justice and our core public services is a key to tackling poverty, social disadvantage and inequality. That is why the issue of devolution of justice is such an important issue for this Government, because it interlinks with so many of the devolved responsibilities and it is a necessary component of our strategy to tackle social injustice.

Sir Christopher Bellamy, in his recent independent review of criminal legal aid, found that that there had been 'years of neglect' of the legal aid system. He expresses serious concerns about the impact of funding cuts on the 'equality of arms' between prosecution and defence, which not only appears unfair but causes profound unfairness. Individuals facing criminal prosecution and imprisonment fear that the financial costs of defending themselves could bankrupt them even if they are successful, and this means that the only option they may rationally choose is to plead guilty to an offence they have not committed, so that their home and other assets are protected for their family’s benefit.

Most recently, this is demonstrated in what has been described as the greatest miscarriage of justice in modern times. Hundreds of sub-post office managers across England and Wales were wrongly convicted in the Post Office Horizon scandal. Many felt they had to choose to plead guilty for crimes they had not committed, solely because legal aid was insufficient for them to achieve justice against the financial might of private prosecutions brought by the Post Office. This is not just an issue in criminal justice. The 27-year fight for justice over Hillsborough is another example. Once again, there was an absence of legal aid to support families of the victims in securing justice, leading to calls for a Hillsborough law.

Those lawyers, paralegals and advisers, and those in the third sector, who work tirelessly on legal aid or for free are community heroes. They are not the so-called fat-cat lawyers the press is so fond of reporting about; they are at the unrecognised and undervalued end of one of the most important services in civil society—a service that many of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged people in our communities need and depend upon, and it is a sector that is slowly dying. It is no wonder that the legally aided element of the legal profession is so demoralised. Offices have closed, as entrants to the profession are deterred by rates of pay sometimes of the order of 50 per cent lower than existed in the late 1990s, to such an extent that members of the bar are considering taking legal action and industrial action. Many of our rural and Valleys communities have now become court and legal advice deserts. For many, there is no longer any justice, only a legal and administrative process in which they become passive victims.

Sir Christopher Bellamy states that academics at Cardiff University have an ethical dilemma when advising students on a career in criminal legal aid:

'Either they encourage their students to enter a profession with few opportunities for social mobility and progression, or they advise against, in which case "without new blood" the profession is most certainly going to perish in 10-15 years' time if not less.'

Similar dilemmas appear in other areas of the law. The Welsh Government is doing all it can to make up for the failings of the current system and to support those most in need of social welfare advice. During this financial year, over £10 million of grant funding has been made available to single advice fund services in Wales. We fund services that reach deep within local communities, helping people resolve multiple, and often entrenched, social welfare problems, including representation before courts and tribunals. In the last financial year in Wales, single advice fund services helped 127,813 people. The Welsh Government is now funding the Cardiff drug and alcohol court pilots and many other initiatives. Yet a fundamental problem remains. We fully agree with Sir Christopher’s central recommendation that at least £135 million additional funding—at least—is needed each year just to support criminal legal aid. And we contend that civil legal aid is similarly inadequately funded.

There is much else in the Bellamy report that the Ministry of Justice should take forward. And yet the current justice Secretary seems more concerned with tearing up human rights protections for ordinary citizens than fixing the problems that his party in Government has helped to create. It is a disgrace that, in the coming human rights review, the Government has refused to give any consideration to introducing social and economic rights, and that part of the focus of the review is on so-called 'rights inflation', as we apparently have too many rights. This is an issue that the Minister for Social Justice and I plan to address in our response to the review.

It is easy, of course, to simply call for more expenditure. So, let me remind Members of the Thomas commission finding that, based on statistics provided by the Legal Aid Agency, spending per head on criminal legal aid is £11.50 in Wales compared to £15 in England. So, put simply, if it were devolved and we received our fair share of funding, we could fund legal aid better. We could create our own Welsh legal aid and advice service, one that is genuinely designed to serve the people of Wales and provide the access to justice we all believe in.

It is imperative the UK Government brings forward the radical reforms needed to ensure the equality of access to justice for our citizens, as well as constraining the potential abuses of state power. Viscount Simon said in 1948 that

'It is an incorrect slander to say there is one law for the rich and another for the poor', yet this is where we are and this is what we must change. Diolch, Llywydd.

Legal aid is intended to help meet the cost of legal advice, family mediation and representation in a court or tribunal. The rules about who qualifies are set out in the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 and regulations referred to by the Counsel General. Whether you qualify will depend on the type of case and your financial circumstances.

Does the Counsel General acknowledge that, last year, the UK Government spent over £1.7 billion on legal aid; that they announced £51 million more for the legal aid sector last year, supporting legal professionals; that they invested £0.25 billion to keep justice moving and support recovery during the pandemic in the last financial year, including over £50 million more for victims and support services; and that the Chancellor's spending review also provides an extra £477 million for the criminal justice system to meet the increased demand from additional police officers and to recover performance following the pandemic?

As a point of fact, does the Counsel General also acknowledge that the court backlog was lower under the current UK Government just before the start of the pandemic than it was in the last year of the UK Labour Government, therefore helping make justice more accessible? Will the Counsel General join me in welcoming the UK Government's extension of 32 Crown Nightingale courtrooms, including one in Swansea, until April 2022, to hold as many hearings as possible in response to coronavirus, and that it is opening a second supercourtroom this week, further increasing capacity for large trials? Does he agree that the UK Government was right to make the estates safe by installing plexiglass screens into over 450 courtrooms and jury deliberation rooms and reconfiguring around 70 courtrooms to hear large trials of up to 10 defendants?

In terms of access to justice, does he welcome the reduction in the number of outstanding cases in magistrates' courts by around 80,000 since its peak in July 2020, that levels of outstanding cases in the Crown Courts are stabilising and that thousands of cases are being listed each week? What consideration has the Counsel General given to the current UK Judicial Review and Courts Bill to give the Crown Court more powers to return cases to the magistrates, reducing demand in the Crown Court and freeing up to 400 sitting days a year? What consideration has he given to the help provided by Civil Legal Advice, or CLA, providing free and confidential advice as part of legal aid in Wales and England?

Last July, the House of Commons Justice Committee report on the future of legal aid identified a real need for a more flexible scheme that allows anyone with a legal problem who cannot afford a lawyer to access early legal advice. The UK Government was due to respond to this report and other related reviews, including its legal aid means test review, as part of its broader legal support action plan by the end of 2021. The Counsel General omitted to mention any of this. What engagement, therefore, has he had with the UK Government regarding these matters and the consultation that will follow? What consideration has he given to the announcement by the UK Government yesterday of additional funding into the family mediation scheme to help thousands more families avoid the courtroom? What role does he consider the Welsh Government's single advice fund partner organisations can or should play in reaching people before their problems spiral out of control, and how could he capture those advice services providing key support that are not supported by the fund?

Calls for the devolution of criminal justice to Wales fail to recognise that criminal activity does not recognise national or regional boundaries, or that over 1.4 million people in Wales—48 per cent of the total—live within 25 miles of the border with England, and 2.7 million—90 per cent of the total—within 50 miles of the border. We're therefore not going to agree on issues around the devolution of justice. However, replying to me last November, he also stated that he was engaging with the UK Government and with the Ministry of Justice on those areas where they could co-operate and where they could make a contribution to improve the arrangements that are already in hand. So, finally, how is this progressing in the context of today's statement?

I thank the Member for those comments and for the various questions, most of which, though, did not actually address the fundamental part of the statement I've issued, which is actually about the access of citizens and people to legal aid and the problems that exist with that.

Let me just deal with a few of the issues you raised. You talked about the funding of additional police officers. Of course we welcome that and the increase, although we have yet to see it reach the level of policing that the Tory Government inherited in 2010. We still have fewer police officers than we use to have, and in actual fact, the Welsh Government, as part of the justice system, is now funding 600 police community support officers in our communities because of the absence of UK funding.

On the issue of Nightingale courts and specialist arrangements because of COVID, I have no problem with some of those arrangements. I've yet to see the detail of some of them and how they might actually work in practice, but it doesn't address the issue of people actually having access to lawyers and access to advice and so on. What the Member fails to recognise is that what happened in 2012 was that the Conservative Government massively cut access to justice and excluded whole areas of social welfare law access to people. The legal aid budget in 2012, when you introduced the legislation, was £2.2 billion. At a stroke, you cut £751 million from that budget. On top of that you've closed courts, which means many people cannot even get to the courts. There are people—and this is reported in the Bellamy report—who actually cannot afford to get to court, so they wait for a summons to be issued so they can be arrested and that the police will then bring them to court. This is the actual state we're in. And we actually have people now, in terms of online, who don't have access to the technology, sometimes, to access online proceedings, who give evidence by mobile phone. That is grossly unacceptable. What happened in 2011 was that there were 91,000 citizens across the UK who received advice for welfare issues, and that fell, as a result of the UK Government's cuts, by 99 per cent, at a stroke. And since then, the issues in terms of social welfare issues, housing and family issues have increased, actually, dramatically.

You raise the issue about safety measures being introduced in courts and, of course, I welcome that—safety measures have been introduced in most workplaces and public places. But we still have a system where we do not have proper investment in the civil justice centre—a proper and decent court in the capital of Wales, Cardiff—which we've been pressing for for some time. It is the responsibility of the Ministry of Justice, yet we don't seem to get court facilities that are suitable for lawyers, for those who are participating in the proceedings, and for the safety of the judiciary themselves.

In terms of the Judicial Review and Courts Bill, that will be a matter of a very detailed discussion at some stage, because, essentially, the judicial review Bill is more about enabling the Government to pass legislation and not be scrutinised in any way by the courts where the Acts of Government are unlawful.

Now, in terms of drug and alcohol courts and so on, well, of course, we have the first pilot in Cardiff, and I welcome that very much. But, of course, even though it is not our responsibility, it is being funded by hundreds of thousands of pounds of Welsh Government money.

Now, in terms of engagement with the UK Government, I have met, as has the Minister for Social Justice, with Lord Wolfson. We've been discussing these issues. We are looking at those issues where we can collaborate and work together on justice issues, and we're also looking in terms of those areas where we actually need change and reform in respect of the way justice is actually delivered, which is where we come to the importance of the devolution of justice. You have given, obviously, the Downing Street line, in terms of devolution of justice. What I would hope is that we will present, actually, the way in which we can show that justice can be delivered better. But what I will say in conclusion to my answer to your comments is that what you have totally done is sidestep. The fundamental issue is that we have advice deserts within Wales and we have many, many thousands of our constituents, across Wales who have no access to justice at all, and that we have a two-tiered justice system. It is a great sadness that you did not address that in your questions to me.

Llywydd, I'm very grateful to the Counsel General for this important statement in an area that is not devolved to Wales, but it does show how serious the Government is in dealing with the huge problems that the people of our nations are currently facing. It's not overstatement to say that the people of Wales have been cruelly hit by the merciless austerity policy of the Tory and Liberal Democrat Government back in 2011 to cut legal aid.

Let's look at a few facts here, and it would be good for the Tories to listen to these facts from the Legal Aid Agency. In England expenditure on legal aid between 2012 to 2019 fell by 28 per cent; in Wales it fell by 37 per cent. In England the number of firms offering legal aid fell by 20 per cent; in Wales it was 29 per cent. In England legal aid in civil and family law fell by 31 per cent; in Wales it was 40 per cent.

I could go on and on. I could give you numerous examples similar to those. They are there. These are facts from the Legal Aid Agency that show how these cuts have impacted Wales. As a tribunal judge, I saw hundreds and hundreds of people, people with mental health problems, physical health problems, additional learning needs, having to face a complex situation, complex law, without any professional support. People were appearing before me in tears. They were at the end of their tether. Two widows appeared because their husbands had committed suicide before the appeal. There was no support there for them.

As a barrister, I saw thousands of people who couldn't secure access to justice because of their financial situation. Literally, the door of justice in Wales had been slammed in the faces of hundreds of thousands of people living in our nation who live in poverty. That is the situation of justice in Wales. But we can work differently. In Scotland, for example, where justice is devolved, 70 per cent of the population there qualify for legal aid.

Counsel General, we both know from our legal careers of the close link between social justice and the justice system, so I'm pleased to see the joint statement between you and the social justice Minister. Factors such as poverty, health inequalities and social disadvantage play a huge role in one's relationship with the justice system. Do you agree, therefore, that the devolution of justice, equalities and even welfare needs to be pursued as a package here? Despite all the unquestionable evidence to the contrary, the Tories in Wales—and we saw it again this afternoon—the Tories in Wales and the Tories in Westminster continue the same tired argument that the jurisdiction of England and Wales is serving the Welsh people well. Well, it is not. Instead of filling clear gaps within our justice system, the Westminster Government is hellbent on restricting further rights—the right to judicial review, the right to rely on the European convention on human rights, the right to quash unlawful secondary legislation. I'll ask the Tories here present: why do you think the Welsh Government is spending £10 million on the single advice fund, an area that is reserved? They are doing so as, without it, 128,000 people—more than the population of Wrexham and Bridgend put together—will not receive legal advice otherwise. I'll ask again for the Tories here present: why do you think the Welsh Government is funding a Ministry of Justice pilot, the family drug and alcohol court in Cardiff? The answer is because these families would not have the support they need otherwise. And I'll ask the Counsel General: what proportion has the Welsh Government spent on this very important Ministry of Justice project?

As the Counsel General highlighted, we see in Wales a huge arc between Swansea and Wrexham without hardly any legal services or courts and tribunals. For example, a person needing to travel to the Aberystwyth Justice Centre from Cardigan would have a two-hour journey using public transport. There are no courts in Anglesey. To travel from Anglesey by public transport to Caernarfon would mean a 90-minute journey on two buses. In many rural areas, as James Evans, the Conservative Member, mentions very often, there is no real proper public transport. So, what are the Welsh Government doing to ensure court centres and tribunals are connected by good public transport. Remote hearings have worked well on the whole during the COVID pandemic. It doesn't suit everybody, I admit, but will virtual hearings continue in the Welsh tribunals in the future?

If Mark Isherwood thinks that the Westminster Government kept justice moving during the COVID pandemic, then obviously he has not spoken to the legal professions. There are now longer delays than ever. Yes, partly because of COVID, but the long delays existed well before the pandemic. They existed because of cuts, systematic cut, year after year, to the justice system. And you cannot ignore that. 

I can attest to the comments of Sir Christopher Bellamy about criminal law practitioners. Many of my contemporaries who started off practicing in criminal law have now moved to other areas or have left the profession altogether. In mid and west Wales, 60 per cent of the criminal law solicitors are over 50 years old. But I note, Counsel General, that for the Welsh Government, the majority of the barristers they are instructing are still based in England. Do you agree with me that Welsh Government and Welsh public bodies as a whole—local authorities, health boards—can do far more to support the Welsh legal profession? Llywydd, we are seeing the erosion of rights in the UK. We are seeing rights being taken away from the Welsh public. We need a strong justice system. We need access to justice now more than ever before. Diolch yn fawr. 

Well, I thank the Member for those comments and for those detailed figures, all of which are ones that I'm aware of and are absolutely pertinent to the reality of this situation. I suppose the difference between you and me and, I suppose, the Welsh Conservatives, is of course that we have both practiced in those courts. We have actually had the direct experience. And in many ways what we are doing is actually reflecting what is happening on the ground and the extent to which the situation is deteriorating. The Government's own statistics actually confirm the scale of that deterioration, and I think you might well agree with me that not only has justice been dumbed down increasingly over the past decade, but access has been savagely cut.

You make the point about the link between social justice and, I suppose, the judicial system, and you're absolutely right there, because the interlink between housing, between poverty, between social services, the family issues, the issue of domestic violence and abuse and the poverty that pertains around that are all contributing factors that result in people being brought into the courts. And it just cannot be right that people don't have access to proper advice when it is actually needed and, possibly, might even assist in their not being in the courts or, even if they had to participate in the courts, not having to effectively speak in person. 

And of course there are other areas in respect of the issues around the devolution of justice. We don't argue this because of some sort of power struggle as to whether Westminster should control it or whether we should, I think it's just the case that it is blatantly obvious now that the linking of all those responsibilities of this Parliament, which the Welsh Government has responsibility for, are all part and parcel of the same justice jigsaw. And not having one of the tools in the armoury undermines the ability to deliver better justice. We could deliver better justice for the people of Wales than the system that is currently available to us, and that is our argument—not who controls it, but because we can and we could do so much better. So much progress has been made in terms of the collaboration with the Ministry of Justice, but that is wholly dependent on the goodwill of the UK Government, a transitory goodwill that may exist at any time and is not the basis for strategic planning and development. 

You raised the issue of virtual tribunals, particularly within our tribunal system, and they, of course, have been effective during COVID. Those tribunals are, perhaps, more suited to online hearings, but we have to be very wary that, in using the advantages of technology, we don't actually deny access to those who may not have those digital skills or access to that. And, of course, Welsh Government is working in that particular area as well. 

You raised a final point on the issue of instructing counsel, the development of the legal profession in Wales. It is something that's very important. Of course, it is open to counsel and solicitors from across the UK to actually go onto the approved list to agree the terms and conditions on which members of the legal profession engage in Welsh work. So, that is work in progress; it is ongoing activity. And, of course, you are right that, as Welsh law becomes more and more extensive, it is necessary to ensure that we have the skills within Wales, but also that we build up the legal economy in Wales—so, looking at the issue of the development of corporate law and competition law within Wales and making Wales a centre of such economic activity. But, to do so, we do actually need decent courts to enable that to happen. 

I'm grateful to you, Counsel General, for that statement. I have to say, listening to the Conservative spokesperson this afternoon, I think Herod missed out on some first-class defence there. There seems to be virtually no policy coming from the UK Government that the Conservatives here wouldn't seek to defend. And this is, I think, one of the most pernicious approaches that we've seen from the UK Government, where, over the last decade, we have seen poorer people being deprived of their fundamental right to justice, and that is something that is completely unacceptable and should be unacceptable in any civilised society. And I'm surprised that anybody would seek to defend that.

In terms of our approach, Counsel General, I was very interested in both the statement and then your response to Rhys ab Owen, because I think you said some really important things there. I'm interested to understand how the Welsh Government is bringing together the response that you're making on the legal, political side of things and the work being done by the Minister for Social Justice on advice services, because I think there is an opportunity there to provide some support for people who require it. I'm also interested in how we can work with the universities and law schools across the country to improve the legal infrastructure and to provide more opportunities to provide support for people.

And also, in terms of tribunals—and I think the points that have been made repeatedly by Plaid Cymru on this matter are very important—I was always very concerned by the lack of participation in tribunals from poorer and more deprived communities, and I believe that the issues we're discussing this afternoon will add to that. But how can we ensure that everybody has equal access to the tribunal system, because I'm not convinced that we're in that situation today?  

And finally, Presiding Officer, are there examples that you know of, Counsel General, from other legal jurisdictions, that we can draw upon in order to ensure that we do have access to a first-class advice system and service, and also to legal aid to provide the support for people to ensure that everybody can access justice equally?

Thank you for those questions. Just in terms of engagement, well, of course, there's a lot of engagement that has been taking place to have discussions around a lot of these issues with the judiciary. The judiciary, of course, cannot engage in the political aspects, but it's important to engage in those areas where we can give support to collaborative issues, just like we have done with the drug and alcohol courts. 

In terms of advice services, well, of course, the advice services that we are funding and setting up, which I think have handled something like well over—. Well, nearly 300,000 issues have been resolved for 130,000 people. That is significant, although it isn't a long-term solution to, I think, a more fundamental reform that's required. And that's why I think the devolution of legal aid was recognised by the Thomas commission, because it recognised the integration of all those services, how they all had to come together in order to have a cohesive justice system and a support system. Of course, we don't have many of those particular levers, so we make the input that we can out of our own resources in a non-devolved area, and it is important. But you do recognise—. It's the very point that you made later, actually, with the tribunals, in terms of the fact that, certainly from poorer communities, there will probably be less accessing of those rights. It was very interesting to note in the Bellamy report, of course, that something like 53 per cent of people who are entitled to criminal legal aid in police stations don't actually access it. I think there is some work that needs to be done to look at why that is—whether they can't actually access a lawyer, or whether it is the case that people are just not still aware of their rights or being informed of their rights when they're in that particular situation.

With regard to the issue of universities and law schools, yes, that is very important. That's why I was so pleased that my predecessor, Jeremy Miles, started this process. Again, it was a recommendation of the Thomas commission, and I was glad to be able to launch the first meeting of it and to continue to support it. It has had its first meeting. And that is the Law Council of Wales, which I think is a very important initiative.

In terms of the tribunals, I think it's very important that we do not have—. I don't think they are this, but I think that we can move further about the issue of non-adversariality, whereby the role of the tribunal panel is there to give the assistance to ensure the just outcome, rather than it being an adversarial battle between two different sides, often which may be differently resourced.

In terms of other systems, when I was in Scotland, I met with the president of the Court of Sessions there. Of course, the courts are tribunals are devolved there. I think that there are some very interesting ways in which they have approached justice, because they have that devolution of justice. If we had the same devolution of justice that Scotland has, there are initiatives that we could be taking now that Scotland has taken in respect of legal aid, in respect of access, in respect of the way that the courts and tribunals service is operating, to deliver a better service. So, I think there's an interesting debate and discussion that could take place there, because Scotland, in many ways, shows how these things could be done better.

This is not just an issue for Wales and Scotland. There are parts of England where the devolution of justice in areas of England would be beneficial, where you pull together—. The same argument applies in terms of the interlinking of those services with the justice system. So, we're not making a case that is solely about Wales in that respect, but in terms of how we can actually deliver justice better. That is the case, I think, that I and the Minister for Social Justice are working on to deliver.  

Chair of the legislation committee, Huw Irranca-Davies.

Diolch yn fawr iawn, Llywydd. Counsel General, the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee welcomes the statement today. It's in a very important area of policy. It's a pleasure as well to follow on from the comments of my committee colleagues, Rhys ab Owen and Alun Davies, which are well informed and, in the case of Rhys, professionally informed too. It's an area that he knows we're taking a keen interest in. 

We've already explored access to justice during evidence sessions with the president of the Welsh Tribunals, Lord Thomas, in relation to the work of his commission, and of course with the Counsel General himself yesterday. In that session yesterday, we explored many of the issues referred to in his statement today. So, Counsel General, we were pleased to provide a practice run for you for today's main event.

Now, we note from the Counsel General's statement today that you refer to the findings of the Law Society on the impacts of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012, and the independent review of criminal aid, led by Sir Christopher Bellamy, and the worrying conclusions there on the state of the legal aid system, including the so-called legal aid deserts in parts of Wales, including rural and post-industrial areas. The committee would be grateful for any further up-to-date analysis of this that you could share with us either today or subsequently, and with Senedd colleagues.

We note also that you reference, as we explored in our committee session with you yesterday, the well-reported concerns over employment confidence, or the lack thereof, recruitment and training for the criminal legal aid sector, and the longer term sustainability of that sector, when faced with continuing uncertainty. We note also your worrying reflections on civil legal aid too, when you refer to it in your statement as a sector that is slowly dying. That is of extreme concern.

Now, the statement refers to the work that he and the Minister for Social Justice are undertaking in respect of access to justice. In your statement, you refer to the link between justice, access to justice, and our core public services as a key to tackling poverty, social disadvantage and inequality. And thereby it leads your Welsh Government to continue to seek the devolution of justice to Wales and an ambition to create a Welsh legal aid and advice service, if devolved with appropriate funding. So, can I ask you, Counsel General: how do you intend to take these ambitions of the Welsh Government for further devolution forward, and what engagement has he had with the UK Government to date and what response? And we further note your reference to the additional support provided by Welsh Government to organisations charged with providing social welfare advice, including through the single advice fund and other necessary initiatives. We would welcome, again, any update, in writing or today, on the continuity of that funding, as set out in the recent budget. 

Now, Counsel General, we hope to undertake more detailed work in this area, though, I have to say, our programme of work and the time available to our committee is somewhat constrained by what I know he recognises as a veritable mountain of legislative consent motions and statutory instruments and regulations and more, which assail this Senedd and indeed the Welsh Government. But because of the importance of these matters, in the background we have, through our communications team, started to use online focus groups to improve our general understanding of the challenges and experiences on the ground in accessing justice in Wales. And we look forward to contributing further to the analysis of legal aid and access to justice in the coming months, and at this point we would simply ask the Counsel General to confirm his willingness, and that of his officials, to continue to engage with our committee on this vital area of work, which, far from being an arcane or an academic topic, is vital to the rights of people in Wales and to their ability to have equal access to the law and to justice. Diolch yn fawr iawn.

Well, thank you for those comments, and I appreciate the invitations to your committee, because it is an opportunity to talk about the work that is going on, to gain ideas as to areas that we could be focusing on, and it's an important part of the parliamentary process. Can I just say, on the issue of engagement with the committee, of course I'm very keen to engage as fully as is possible? In terms of the fundamental issue you raise, which is around the issue of access, this is ultimately about the rule of law. This is what we're standing up for within Wales. Lord Bingham, in his very famous book on the rule of law, said that the

'denial of legal protection to the poor litigant who cannot afford to pay is one enemy of the rule of law' and I think we have to get back to fundamental principles and recognising that the issue of access to justice and legal aid is about the empowerment of people—the empowerment of all people, irrespective of how much money or how much wealth they actually have.

You did touch on a couple of important points that—. I know there are so many areas here that we could develop and talk for a long time; I know the Presiding Officer, the Llywydd, won't allow that. But, in terms of access to data, the fact that much data with regard to the court system is England-and-Wales data and not disaggregated—. And those are discussions that I've had and the First Minister has had, and others have had, the Minister for Social Justice has had, with the Lord Chief Justice. The Minister for Social Justice and myself, we'd sought a meeting with the new Lord Chancellor, Dominic Raab. It was arranged instead that we would meet with Lord Wolfson. Well, we've met with Lord Wolfson, and we do have areas of co-operation that are proceeding, but we have made those very points about data, and I think they are recognised. The question is getting systems that change and actually deliver, to enable us to properly evaluate how we can do things better. We do have, of course, certain developments—the youth justice blueprint, and so on—which will provide further information, but we're still far off having the sort of information that we'd need in respect of the proper co-ordination of all those areas we have responsibility for, in conjunction with the justice system.

I think that probably has covered most of the points that you've made. If there are any, I'm sure they'll get explored at my next session at the Legislation, Justice and Constitution Committee.

I really welcome today's statement from the Counsel General and the work behind this statement, from both the Counsel General and the Minister for Social Justice. I think Members of this Senedd, no matter what political home we find ourselves in, should recognise and welcome a Government that is seeking to retip the scales of justice towards ordinary people, and this is something certainly that is echoed in today's statement, and I wondered if the Counsel General has any advice of his own to the Welsh Conservative group in terms of them reflecting on their position.

Counsel General, we see example after example of the powerful hiding behind a system that is rigged in their favour: Grenfell, the Post Office Horizon scandal, and of course Hillsborough, to name just a few of them. Those with deep pockets can often afford access to huge legal teams, and then ordinary people are often left feeling intimidated by this, and frankly, even when they do get some level of legal support, there is often a lack of parity of esteem: teams of barristers funded by the state or large organisations and companies up against people consistently worried about how they will fund their own legal team and how long these proceedings will last. Again and again, the powerful use delays to grind opponents down because they can afford to. It's a tactic; it's simply a tactic to avoid justice, and that is wrong on every single level.

Counsel General, thankfully, there are some legal firms out there, like Hudgell Solicitors, who will support the underdog, but the system should not rely on their goodwill. Can I ask the Counsel General how do we start that journey of retipping the scales of justice in terms of devolution of further powers to address these problems, and, again, does he have any advice for Members of the Welsh Conservative group about this issue so that they can reflect and retip their own judgments on the scale of justice? Diolch yn fawr.

Thank you for that, and thank you for the consistent way in which you are raising this issue of access to justice, because it's important to everybody within Wales, in devolved and non-devolved areas. You raise the issues of Grenfell and Hillsborough. I would add to that the long-standing issue in terms of the coroner's courts and how that ought to be something that is devolved, after all, it is funded by the local authorities. The full provision there is made by local authorities; it's paid for out of money that comes ultimately from Welsh Government. So, there is a logic there to some of these particular changes.

I agree with you very much about the point you made and I think that others have made, and that is the imbalance that exists within our justice system, and that is why we have these fundamental arguments for reform, because, as I've said, this actually should not be a party political issue; this is about fundamental democracy, fundamental issues around the rule of law.

Can I say, in terms of the last point you tempted me to comment on, which I normally wouldn't but on this occasion I will, just how impressed I've been by the Scottish Conservatives at least taking a stand in respect of their political interest in respect of Scotland? And how disappointing it is on an issue where, whatever their political persuasion is, people should be standing up for something that is clearly of importance to the people of Wales, rather than a sort of banal subservience to Westminster, irrespective of the logics and the merits of the arguments that we've been discussing today. I really do hope that will change, because we could make so much more progress in terms of the reform and the devolution of justice if we had the Welsh Conservatives actually talking about what I suspect they know is right but are not prepared to actually put their heads above the parapet to take that particular stance. So, that is the particular change I want there.

But in terms of the overall progress, there are three elements to it, I think. One is that we will work increasingly collaboratively with UK Government and the Ministry of Justice on those areas that are non-devolved but where we can work for the benefit of the people of Wales. Secondly, we will be increasingly putting the case as to how we can make justice better in Wales and the things that we want to see changed. Thirdly, I think we have to start preparing for the structure of what a new Welsh justice system would look like, because I agree very much with what Lord Thomas said—it's not a question of if, but when, and we have to be prepared for that. Of course, one of the key triggering factors may well be the moves in terms of the reforms of that part of the justice system that already we are responsible for, and that is the tribunals service. Thank you for your question.

That concludes that statement.