A vote of no confidence in the Law Society’s leadership over its handling of the criminal legal aid reforms has today been passed by 52% at a Special General Meeting (SGM) of the Society.
The motion – proposed by Liverpool solicitor advocate James Parry – declares that members have ‘no confidence’ in the ability of Nicholas Fluck, president of the Law Society, and Des Hudson, chief executive, to ‘properly and effectively represent’ legal aid solicitors in negotiations with the justice secretary, Chris Grayling.
It was passed by 228 votes to 213, with nine abstentions, in a secret ballot using electronic voting equipment at Chancery Lane this morning.
Prior to the meeting, Parry said that the purpose of the SGM was to let the government know that ‘the majority of criminal practitioners are of the belief that the 17.5% cuts will make their businesses unsustainable and the consolidation models are both unnecessary and unachievable’.
In an open letter to Hudson, Parry criticised the Society for entering into agreements with the government without a mandate to do so and said that what has been proposed by the government ‘must be challenged and defeated’.
Giving a speech to the SGM, Law Society president Nicholas Fluck said: ‘Because of the fight the Law Society has put up – and I can assure you it has been a fight – the secretary of state is now starting to understand why there is a real need for more criminal legal aid practitioners than he first thought.’ He continued:
‘I think we have every chance of more victories if we do that by using all means at our disposal, and as well as shouting that has to include engagement.’
Following the vote, Law Society chief executive Desmond Hudson (pictured) said: ‘Despite the extremely close result, this is a disappointing outcome. Council are meeting this afternoon to consider our response and our plans for continuing our campaign against cuts to legal aid. While they are not bound by the vote, we are a democratic organisation and they will give consideration to all opinions expressed during this morning’s meeting.’
As noted by David Gilmore yesterday on LegalVoice, despite the motion being passed by members, it is unlikely that it will be approved by the Law Society Council unless Hudson or Fluck offers to resign.
‘Given that the Law Society council overwhelmingly supported the decision to engage with Chris Grayling, it would be a huge shock if it reversed its support and endorsed James Parry’s motion,’ said Gilmore.
- ‘Using the law to change the law is the most important thing you can do’ - 15th February 2019
- This (young legal aid) life: Mary-Rachel McCabe - 12th September 2016
- Can the rule of law survive without legal aid? - 28th May 2014
- Weekly round-up 10 – 14 March - 14th March 2014
- Des Hudson announces retirement following calls for resignation - 14th March 2014
- Legal aid cuts are ‘harsh’, admits Simon Hughes - 11th March 2014
- ‘Grayling Day’ protest: ‘A day of shame for the Lord Chancellor’ - 7th March 2014
- Sadiq Khan: ‘It’s not as simple as reversing the cuts’ - 4th March 2014
- ‘A shameful day in legal history’: reaction to Transforming Legal Aid - 28th February 2014
- Weekly round-up 24 – 28 February - 28th February 2014
