Debate contribution: Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
Debate contribution by Mr Patsy McGlone on .
- MLA
- Mr Patsy McGlone
- Party at the time
- Social Democratic and Labour Party
- Date
- 22 June 2026
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Justice Bill: Consideration Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5638990
Read the official Assembly record
Text
Thank you very much for that, Minister. I am not here this evening to arrange a fight with barristers or to be referee in a fight with barristers. Well, maybe I could do that, but, at the end of the day, I want to make sure that, whatever the outcome, there is a fair, reasoned and transparent system. I am sure that not every barrister out there is just out to screw the system and get the maximum amount of money out of it. There are those who want a fair, transparent and equal system that is accessible to many people who do not otherwise have access to the legal system. That is my point, Minister. Legal aid is not merely another item of public expenditure; it is a mechanism by which people are able to access the courts, defend their rights and secure representation. Any reform that has the potential to impact on the sustainability of legal aid provision should therefore be approached carefully, in a reasoned way, thoughtfully and by people who have experience and expertise on, dare I say, both sides of the argument and the equation. They may take different pathways to come to the one destination, but I am sure that there are many people who want to arrive at a fair, equitable and transparent outcome. The difficulty is that the evidence base and, indeed, many of the practical implications of the proposed new clause 27A remain, at this point anyway, unclear. The SDLP accepts that reform may be necessary; there is no doubt about that. We accept that the original clause 28 raised legitimate concerns and should not remain part of the Bill. However, at this stage, we are not persuaded that the replacement proposal has been subject to sufficient scrutiny, consultation, examination or engagement to justify its inclusion. Questions remain about judicial independence, the future role of independent assessment, the impact on access to justice and the extent of the powers being conferred on the Department. For those reasons, while we support the Minister in opposing clause 28 standing part of the Bill, we are unable to support amendment No 91 and the proposed new clause 27A.
364 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Awaiting analysis
This record has not been analysed yet. It is not counted in any total until it has been assessed.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reviews every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.