Meeting of the Parliament 06 January 2026
Throughout the committee’s inquiry, we heard consistent and deeply concerning evidence about the growing difficulty that individuals face in finding a solicitor who is willing or able to take on legal aid cases. Solicitors are leaving legal aid work, and those who remain face rising case loads, financial insecurity, stress and burnout. The pressure on those professionals is intense, and the consequences are borne by the most vulnerable in our society.
What was striking to me and the committee was not only the strength of feeling in the evidence, but the fact that many of the concerns have been raised for years—in some cases, since at least 2017. What is required is structural reform of a system that is no longer fit for purpose. There is a lack of any change leadership, and there are serious issues with the system that is managed by SLAB.
Regarding SLAB, the committee had intended to publish this report before the summer recess, but just as we were due to consider a first draft, we received late correspondence from SLAB suggesting that some of the evidence that we had taken was based on what it described as “demonstrable misunderstandings”. The letter was described by the committee as “disappointing”. That is an understatement, not because it delayed our work, but because SLAB had ample opportunity to respond to evidence during oral evidence sessions or through timely follow-up submissions. In my view, submitting that correspondence at a late stage was disrespectful to the committee and only served to reinforce the concerns that we heard about SLAB’s poor stakeholder engagement and its methods.
Legal aid policy is set by the Scottish Government, which oversees SLAB, yet, time and time again, we heard that SLAB’s bureaucratic processes and poor engagement are a major barrier to offering and accessing civil legal assistance.