Sixteen 'Facts' about QASA

QASA is a serious issue and I don't doubt for a second that everyone involved in the argument is thinking about it seriously. But the 16 'Facts' posted today by the BSB is not a serious document. It doesn't really merit a proper going over by serious lawyers. But I'm just a law student, so let's have a quick look. 

Sixteen Facts about QASA

1) Doctors, teachers and policemen are formally quality assessed Ok – advocates should be too. Wait… is that the extent of your logic?

1. The successes and failures of those different professions are measured in radically different ways, you need to explain how they are comparable.
2. What has the effect of that formal quality assessment been? Talk to a thousand teachers, if you can find one who sings OFSTED's praises I’ll take you to a funfair. If you need to see the failures of quality control in the health service or police force, I’ll buy you yesterday’s paper.

2) Delaying QASA won’t delay or stop Gov’s competitive tendering plans. Firstly, this isn't a fact. You may be very confident that it is true but it simply isn't a fact. It’s an assertion. Governments can and do drop or change policies depending on how the political situation evolves.  It has no link to public funding. Really? No link? The system of quality assurance for advocates in legally aided criminal cases has no link to public funding? To call such an obviously, ridiculously oversimplified statement a 'fact' is insulting to your audience, and to facts and quite possibly to statements.   

3) All advocates barristers, solicitors, legal execs Do you mean 'advocates who are barristers, solicitors, legal execs' or are you missing a comma? will need accreditation at a level between 1 and 4 to undertake criminal advocacy.

4) To undertake criminal advocacy without registering for QASA would be a breach of the code. Ok. Which code? And the word ‘need’ in point (3) rather makes point (4) redundant.

5) The Scheme has the support of the Lord Chief Justice and other members of the senior judiciary. Great, this is clearly a very strong argument. Please give their names and if possible a link to where evidence of their support can be found.

6) In order to undertake trials in the Crown Court, advocates will need to be assessed through judicial evaluation in real trials. More detail on point (3) then.

7) Non-trial work levels 2/3 will be available to those who can prove competence against full trial standards at assessment centre. But without the pressure of being in a real trial situation.

8) JAG will accredit a single assessment centre to provide QASA assessments for nontrial advocates and will monitor its performance You need a full stop here. Who assess the JAG?

9) Advocates who can’t demonstrate competence against level 2 trial standards will not be able to appear in the Crown Court in any hearing More detail on point (3).

10) All criminal advocates will be required to confirm their competence every five years. This will include silks. So instead of confirming their competence every day in front of their instructing solicitors and lay clients they’ll be assessed once every five years by their peers?  

11) Silks appointed in 2010 or later will be able to apply to be passported into the scheme. How nice.

12) The level of case will be decided by advocate and instructing party. What? The quality assurance scheme which prohibits advocates from performing cases which they are not qualified to perform allows those advocates to decide what level the case is? Judges will report abuses and disciplinary action may result.

1. Abuses of what?
2. Don’t they do that already?

13) There will be a review of QASA after 2 years to assess whether changes are required to improve its impact. What metric will be used to measure impact? This is a basic part of any experiment, how will you know if it has failed?

14) Evidence will be gathered during the operation of the Scheme and will be used to inform the Scheme review. Is this really a separate point from (13)? What form will the evidence take?

15) Over 10,000 solicitors have notified the SRA of their intention to register under QASA when it comes into force. Ok. Not really all that impressive when you point out, as Benjamin Knight from Northpodlaw has, that they were told they had to. Driving licences must be very popular, millions of people have registered for those.

16) All criminal advocates will be subject to judicial monitoring whenever they appear in court. That’s good, finally stamping down on all those lackadaisical judges, sitting around, not monitoring the advocates in their courts.

17) Find out more about QASA here http://bit.ly/10OQr7I Not really ‘point’ 17 this. 

Joseph Sherlock