CBA response: Criminal Legal Aid – AGFS Reform
Statement · Criminal Legal Aid · AGFS Reform
The package is not sufficient
The CBA has today submitted its response to the Government’s consultation on reform of the Advocates’ Graduated Fee Scheme, published in July and closing today.
The response was drafted by the Remuneration Committee under Richard Christie KC, with advice from Professor Martin Chalkley, contributions from the Chair and Vice Chair, and the direct input of the young criminal Bar. It has been approved by the Officers. It is informed throughout by members’ answers to our survey.
What we have said
Taking inflation into account, the Government’s proposal leaves AGFS remuneration below where it stood in 2022. Since September of that year RPI has risen by 19.8 per cent, public sector pay by 24.9 per cent, and Crown Court judicial salaries by over 22 per cent. The first step Sir Christopher Bellamy called for has not merely stalled. It has gone backwards.
The increases must apply to all cases currently before the Crown Court, not only to new instructions.
What members told us
97.7%
say the uplifts must apply to cases already before the court
76.3%
say the overall package is not sufficient
74%
prefer a uniform uplift across the scheme to targeting
Refreshers
66%
would prioritise an increase to refreshers over the proposed rise in guilty plea fees
Our position in short
- •The overall package is not sufficient. Greater investment is needed if the profession is to recruit and retain advocates experienced enough for the more complex work in the Crown Court.
- •The increases must apply to all cases currently before the Crown Court, not only to new instructions.
- •Our preferred route remains a uniform uplift across the existing scheme rather than targeting. If the Government presses ahead with targeting, we accept the distribution is fair and reasonable, subject to the caveat below.
- •We strongly disagree with freezing Daily Appearance Fees at 2022 rates. That falls hardest on those whose practice is built on trials, most obviously RASSO work and cases involving vulnerable complainants, where guilty pleas are rare. Refreshers should be prioritised over the proposed rise in guilty plea fees.
- •Complex sentence hearings, those listed for two hours or more, are not properly remunerated. An increase would cost little and sits within the £34 million.
- •Beyond this consultation, we continue to press for an annual review mechanism tied to inflation. Both Bellamy and Leveson recommended it. The present cycle of ad hoc consultations is no way to run a core public service.
Read the response in full
The complete response, with the evidence and the survey results. It opens as a PDF.
The response has been submitted to the Ministry of Justice and copied to the Bar Council. We will report back to members when the Government publishes its own response.
Our thanks to everyone who took the time to complete the survey. The strength of the response is what gives the CBA’s position its weight.
Issued by the Criminal Bar Association · 25th August 2026