Tony Collier, Partner and Criminal Defence Solicitor at Ferrys Solicitors LLP, joined Nicola Tallant on the Crime World podcast to discuss the criminal legal aid dispute and its implications for the justice system. Our criminal defence solicitors act for clients in the District Court, Circuit Court and Central Criminal Court, much of it under the criminal legal aid scheme.
In the interview, Tony explained why he believes changes to District Court legal aid fees must be considered alongside the work involved in defending a case, the causes of court delays and the needs of people who rely on legal representation.
Watch the full Crime World interview
Why criminal legal aid matters
Tony began by explaining the purpose of legal aid: helping people who cannot afford a solicitor obtain legal assistance, so that access to representation does not depend solely on their financial circumstances.
He described how a person's income, outgoings and family responsibilities can form part of the information put before a judge when applying for criminal legal aid. The court considers the applicant's means and the circumstances of the case when deciding whether to grant assistance.
Throughout the conversation, Tony emphasised the role of defence solicitors in maintaining checks and balances within criminal proceedings. He argued that independent representation is essential to a system in which an accused person can understand the case against them and respond to it.
The work behind a court appearance
Much of the interview focused on work that takes place outside the courtroom.
Tony explained that criminal defence involves reviewing evidence, taking instructions, advising clients and communicating with their families. In the District Court fee arrangements he described, office preparation was included in the court fee rather than billed separately by the hour.
He also outlined the practical work involved in helping a client in custody meet bail conditions. This can include contacting family members, arranging for an address to be approved, dealing with the surrender of a passport and helping organise a surety. Those tasks require calls, correspondence and coordination that may not be visible during a court appearance.
Tony said legal aid income also supports the staff and running costs of a criminal defence practice. His argument was that assessing a fee solely against time spent in court overlooks the wider work needed to represent a client.
Concerns about the District Court flat fee model
Discussing the payment model at the centre of the dispute, Tony questioned whether a flat fee adequately reflected cases involving several separate charges and repeated appearances.
He used the hypothetical example of a client facing multiple robbery charges, with different evidence to review and decisions required about how each matter would proceed. He explained that further appearances could be needed while awaiting directions from the Director of Public Prosecutions or a book of evidence.
Tony argued that this could leave solicitors carrying out substantial additional work without a corresponding increase in payment. He distinguished the District Court arrangements under discussion from separate legal aid arrangements for proceedings in higher courts.
He also raised concerns about opportunities for junior barristers. Tony described the District Court as an important training ground and explained how solicitors sometimes share their fees with barristers who appear on their behalf. In his view, pressure on those fees could make it harder to support that experience.
What causes delays in criminal cases
Tony said solicitors would welcome reforms that helped cases progress more efficiently, including earlier availability of evidence and prosecution directions.
Using a shoplifting case as an example, he described a first court appearance at which the defence still needed disclosure of the evidence. He argued that examining why material was unavailable would be more useful than assuming the resulting adjournment had been caused by the defence.
He also discussed difficulties obtaining psychiatric reports for clients receiving legal aid. Tony said the fees available could make it difficult to find professionals willing to prepare reports, with consequences for clients awaiting progress in their cases, including people in custody.
His position was that meaningful reform needed to consider how the different parts of the criminal justice system work together.
Allowing time for rehabilitation
Tony cautioned against treating the number of court appearances as a complete measure of a case's complexity or progress.
He described clients whose cases involved addiction, mental health difficulties or homelessness, and explained that obtaining reports and engaging with community support could take time. He also spoke about cases in which clients had moved towards rehabilitation and stopped offending.
For Tony, that work was an important part of criminal defence. He also highlighted the potential consequences of a conviction for young people beginning an apprenticeship or working life, and the value of legal advice at that stage.
The wider impact and a call for dialogue
Turning to the withdrawal of services discussed in the interview, Tony warned about the effect of growing backlogs on accused people and victims waiting for cases to progress.
He also expressed concern that an unsustainable funding model could lead practitioners to leave legal aid work, reducing the availability of representation. He drew a comparison with difficulties he described in civil legal aid provision, while acknowledging elsewhere in the interview that different legal aid schemes have different arrangements.
Tony concluded by calling for engagement between the Law Society and the Minister for Justice. He supported direct talks or the involvement of an independent mediator, arguing that a resolution was possible and that solicitors wanted to return to their work.
Watch the full interview for Tony's explanation of the dispute, the practical realities of criminal defence and the changes he believes would improve the operation of the courts.