Conjuring up mental images somewhere between Orwell and Python the Minstry of Justice went live after very little parliamentary discussion and virtually no press converage on 9th May 2007. The Department of Constitutional Affairs, previously the Lord Chancellor’s department is therefore no more.
Ruthie wonders whether two name changes within the space of 10 years will actually make a difference to the quality of the service provided. The new ministry claims that it “exists for one purpose only - to improve the justice system for the public”, but in the dying days of the Blair government the people grow cynical of “improvement” simply by the repackaging of problems, particularly in the absence of any substantive debate or consultation with the people who are then required to work within the new system.
Statistics thrown out by the Central Committee will no doubt advise us that wheat production has increased 150%, collective happiness in on the increase, and that compared to other countries, where the people are poor, crossed eyed and smelly we are all jolly lucky and should be thankful to our beneficent leaders.
Despite this Ruthie confidently predicts that legal aid will continue to be eroded, prisons will remain overcrowded, young people will still commit suicide in worryingly high numbers in youth detention centres and people suffering from serious mental health problems will still be detained in custody through a lack of funding for appropriate treatment. But hey; we’ve got a great new website.
Cunningly the Minister for Justice is both liable for the funding of legal services, and liable to be defendant in the event of litigation about funding. Huzzah, Judges now get to rule against the Minister of Justice and reduce the provision of their own resources. The sort of constitutional arrangement one might expect of a third world dictatorship; but since we can’t quite bring ourselves to indict errant judges for treason, more subtle methods of control are required.
Much inclined to agree, I anticipate that the effects of the rebranding will be no more remarkable than when the all-purpose cleaner ‘Jif’ became ‘Cif’. (Although there, at least, it still does what it says on the bottle.)
I’m afraid this reform flew by me while I was looking the other way . I am decidedly fearful that David Pannick may be right about the eventual impact: while I was never a huge fan of having a Lawyer in the cabinet, I don’t buy his ’seat at the top table’ argument. But I do fear that, as usual, NeoLabour has thrown out a functional system that needed some improving and replaced it with something broken by non-design for no more reason than to say “we have done something new”. Fucking whoopee.