Meeting of the Parliament 06 January 2026
I say sorry to the minister, but I will make progress.
Administrative requirements were described as “burdensome”, “disproportionate” and “damaging” to SLAB’s relationships with the legal profession. Individuals cannot access legal aid unless they go through a solicitor, and legal aid is not available to groups.
JustRight Scotland gave the committee an illustration of the kind of administrative processes that solicitors are required to engage in with SLAB. Andy Sirel told the committee:
“This afternoon, I will probably go back to my office to negotiate with SLAB over sums of money as small as £7.50”,
or that SLAB might say:
“‘You had a meeting that lasted one hour. We think it should only have lasted 45 minutes.’”—[Official Report, Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee, 13 May 2025; c 35.]
Witnesses told the committee that such processes are having a negative impact on the relationship between lawyers working in legal aid and the Scottish Legal Aid Board.
The Scottish Government has repeatedly promised reform. The programme for government 2021-22 pledged that legislation on legal aid would happen during this parliamentary session, but progress has stalled, key stakeholders withdrew from engagement and, once again, reform has been kicked into the long grass.
The Human Rights Consortium Scotland highlighted the existence of “advice deserts” in
“areas of the law such as domestic abuse, discrimination and human rights.”
As we heard from the convener, Grampian Women’s Aid told us that it is making between 50 and 60 calls just to find one legal aid solicitor. We had evidence that it had taken 117 calls for one domestic abuse survivor to find a legal aid solicitor. Women who are fleeing domestic abuse face additional barriers, particularly around financial eligibility and paperwork. Many have experienced financial abuse or fled without documentation.
SLAB told us that there were flexibilities in the system, but awareness of that is low, and reliance on that so-called flexibility has not been sufficient to help the most needy. How can it be that the former chief executive of the Scottish National Party and husband of the former First Minister can receive legal aid when the most vulnerable in our society are denied it?
Our committee was told about a survivor of domestic abuse who had to flee for her own safety and that of her 12-year-old son. Sara is legally married. Her husband has the financial means and resources to employ solicitors, who have been advising him. There are two properties from the marriage, but Sara has no access to those without legal assistance, and no solicitor will take on her case without payment. Her husband—the abuser—has recourse to the law, which has enabled him to retain all the assets from the marriage while Sara is left with no assistance whatsoever to help her in her situation, thereby enabling coercive control to continue.
I have constituents who face similar situations. One has had to leave her children behind and has no access to them. However, even though she is on the minimum wage, she earns too much to access legal aid, so again he has coercive control and control of the children. That is why the committee strongly recommended removing means testing for civil protection order and homelessness cases and exploring wider access to non-means-tested legal aid for domestic abuse cases.
The legal aid system is broken. Our committee report involved such a lot of work and effort by so many people, but it will now go on the shelf, as we are only a few months from the end of the session. That is wrong and disrespectful to the Scottish people.