Commons Sense

House of Commons · Ministers' Questions

Legal Profession: Government Criticism

Thursday 5 November 2020 · 6 questions

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

At a glance

Answered 0 Partly answered 6 Not answered 0

Key points

  • Andrew Slaughter questioned the Attorney General about discussions with Cabinet colleagues regarding public criticism of the legal profession.
  • Matt Western asked the Attorney General to clarify the steps taken to address the criticism with Cabinet members and to champion the interests of lawyers.
  • Ellie Reeves requested the Attorney General to condemn references to criminal defence lawyers and immigration lawyers as "activists" and "do-gooders."

Topics (select to filter)

Questions & Answers

Q1 Andrew Slaughter Lab Hammersmith and Chiswick
Context

Public criticism by the government towards lawyers has been controversial.

Question

What discussions she has had with Cabinet colleagues on recent public criticism of the legal profession by the Government?

Answer from Suella Braverman

I speak regularly with Cabinet colleagues, including the Home Secretary, and I am in no doubt whatever that this Government are rightly proud of the UK's legal tradition and our legal profession. We benefit enormously from the contribution of our excellent and hard-working lawyers, and I will always champion our profession and lawyers of all stripes, whichever side they represent, but sadly from time to time there are those who take advantage of their position and abuse the court process.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not address specific discussions with Cabinet about criticism

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q2 Matt Western Lab Warwick and Leamington
Context

Attorney General has been criticized for not addressing attacks on lawyers.

Question

Does the Attorney General agree that she has to speak out and say that she does not condone these attacks? Will she explain what steps she has taken to address the matter with Cabinet members?

Answer from Suella Braverman

I am proud of the profession, and in my role as head of the Bar, I will not hesitate to champion the interests of our lawyers. Indeed, given that it is Pro Bono Week, I take this opportunity to thank the thousands of lawyers out there who regularly give their time and their services free of charge on a pro bono basis, helping some of the most vulnerable in our society.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not address specific steps taken or condemn attacks

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q3 Andrew Slaughter Lab Hammersmith and Chiswick
Context

Prime Minister made controversial statements at the Conservative Party conference.

Question

Will she at least see that the chair of the Bar gets a reply to that letter sent a month ago?

Answer from Suella Braverman

Lawyers play a vital role in our justice system and in upholding our democratic society. However, I find the words of the Lord Chief Justice very useful. He recently took the opportunity in the Court of Appeal to make the general point that it is a matter of regret that a minority of lawyers have lent their professional weight and support to vexatious representations and abusive late legal challenges.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not provide commitment on letter response

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Context

Concerns about the independence of the legal profession.

Question

Does she recognise that it lies in the hands of parliamentarians and legislators to correct faults in the system that are abused?

Answer from Suella Braverman

My hon. Friend and I are in total agreement on this. I know that during his years of practice at the Bar, he will have been part of a profession that upheld the highest standards. Generally, the profession is very well policed. We have a robust code of conduct. We have regulatory authorities that call out and discipline those lawyers who fall short of the standards.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not commit to enhancing public legal education

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Q5 Ellie Reeves Lab Lewisham West and East Dulwich
Context

References by Home Secretary and Prime Minister regarding lawyers.

Question

Will she today condemn the references to criminal defence lawyers and immigration lawyers as “activists” and “do-gooders”?

Answer from Suella Braverman

Yes, I know that the hon. Lady had an esteemed career as a lawyer, and we share a common interest in upholding the position of lawyers in our society. Any violence—I must make this clear—is utterly deplorable against any lawyer or anyone going about their work.

Partly answered

Not addressed: Did not explicitly condemn references to lawyers as activists/do-gooders

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)

Context

The question arises from the Attorney General's comments on the Home Office and Prime Minister's remarks that were seen as devaluing lawyers' values. There are concerns about sources in Government and Whitehall identifying individual law firms and lawyers for anonymous briefings.

Question

I think many in the legal profession will be horrified by the approach that the Attorney General is taking today. She must, like the Lord Chancellor, accept that the comments from the Home Office and the Prime Minister went way beyond legitimate criticism, devaluing the values of lawyers and questioning their motivation. Will she join the criticism of the remarks that were made? Will she also investigate whether sources in the Government and Whitehall have been responsible for identifying individual law firms and lawyers when anonymously briefing newspapers about activities that the Home Secretary and No. 10 are angered by?

Answer from Suella Braverman

The hon. Gentleman refers to law firms and, by implication, the incident, which was very serious and, as I say, deplorable. It is not something to trivialise or politicise, and we should be careful not to draw conclusions about any incident that is under investigation. We know that the vast majority of lawyers who specialise in immigration law are upholding the highest standards, are devoted to their clients and are working to secure justice. But we only have to look at the records of the Bar Standards Board or the Solicitors Regulation Authority to see that there are those who fall short of those high standards, and it is right that action should be taken to stop that sub-optimal delivery of service.

Partly answered

Not addressed: The specific ask about joining criticism of Home Office and Prime Minister remarks was not directly addressed. The investigation into sources in Government and Whitehall for anonymous briefings was also not confirmed or denied.

How: Trivialise, Politicise

Was this summary accurate? Tell us

How accurate was this summary? (1 = poor, 5 = spot on)