Pro bono hyperbole?

Very thought-provoking editorial from Legal Action Group this month, on pro bono legal services. Here’s a couple of excerpts but the whole piece is well worth reading.

Lawyers and advice workers working in the legal aid system are quick to point out that they have always undertaken work for no pay, and with the introduction of fixed fees and other cost-cutting measures in legal aid they are doing so increasingly. The difference is that they do not label it as pro bono work, but as work for which the Legal Services Commission will not pay them; for example, advising a client on a matter which is out of scope or continuing to assist a client who has exhausted his/her legal aid funding. Some of those working in legal aid resent well-remunerated City and other commercial lawyers trumpeting a few hours’ voluntary work, when for them such work is a matter of routine.

LawWorks boasts of 36,500 pieces of advice for the clinics it supports, a great achievement, but less than seven per cent of the total number of cases the government plans to cut from the legal aid scheme next year. The Free Representation Unit, another great pro bono project which undertakes a lot of employment work, accepted just under 1,000 cases last year, less than one per cent of more than 150,000 employment tribunal claims issued in the same period. LAG does not decry the achievements of the pro bono movement, but stresses that it needs to keep a sense of proportion about what it can achieve as any claim that it can plug the gap left by the planned cuts really would be hyperbole.

Pro bono hyperbole?