Good morning - thanks to Sue Bent for inviting me. I'm delighted to be here.
It's good to get out of Westminster and see what's going on in the real world.
There's a risk that we think access to justice is all about strategies, steering groups and committees. But it's great to come to a Law Centre like this and see that justice is really about making a difference to people's lives.
I'm lucky enough to see a whole range of different projects up and down the country. Last month, I opened the Kirklees Law Centre. I can see that Coventry Law Centre is a great project, with great people, doing a great job.
I don't underestimate for a moment the amount of hard work involved in making a Law Centre work in a big city, or in a borough like my own constituency of Lewisham. So let me start by thanking everyone involved.
Let me say why I think Law Centres like this are so important.
Access to justice - by this I mean quality legal advice, regardless of ability to pay - I think it's a key part of the British system. It's as much a part of the Welfare State as Education and the Health Service. And it was a Labour Government that set up the Legal Aid system in 1949.
Law Centres like this one are a vital resource - for local communities - for other social welfare and advice organisations, whose work they complement and support. But above all, for local people - particularly vulnerable people - who rely so much on the terribly important work you do.
Of course, anybody can access a Law Centre, regardless of income, but it's right that our focus is on those who need it most. The response we provide needs to deal with all the problems people face - social exclusion is never just about one thing. It's usually a combination of any number of different things. We shouldn't deal with these issues in separate boxes.
A housing problem is often linked to a debt problem and a benefits problem. And a mental health problem will be linked to a housing and community care issue.
Very often these problems can't be dealt with in isolation as a single issue but rather need to be addressed more holistically - as a whole case.
This is what Coventry Law Centre does - that's why it's so important: it gives those people back control of their lives.
Of course, you can't do all this by yourself.
A big thank you to Coventry City Council, the Legal Services Commission, the National Lottery's Community Fund as well as a number of individual donors, who have all played their part.
And I understand that you are working with 300 other advice services so that people get the help they need. This is really important - pooling information and advice together.
Strong relations between agencies can help to make the routes through which people get help and advice that much easier. And people - vulnerable people who are often at their lowest ebb - won't have to go from door to door to get their advice from a range of different organisations.
It's a key theme that strong partnerships are also more efficient. It encourages providers to work together and collaborate rather than compete. This is a way of ensuring the socially excluded get advice.
That is precisely the sort of work that my Department is actively encouraging and we're already beginning to see it happen here in Coventry.
A couple of weeks ago, Lord Falconer and I published "The Future of Legal Services: Putting Consumers First" White Paper. It was a bit of a shock to people in the legal world that we used the word 'consumer'; it raised a few eyebrows.
A BBC journalist asked me 'Are you suggesting getting legal services should be as easy as buying a tin of beans?' I said, 'What's wrong with that?' And this became a cause célèbre.
I believe passionately that people should have access to legal services as easily as they can buy a tin of beans. What you are doing will allow people to get advice as simply as possible.
Our proposals, which have been informed by stakeholders including importantly a Consumer Advisory Panel, will create a new Legal Services Board that will provide strong and independent oversight.
At the moment additional activities cannot be brought under statutory control without primary legislation. This involves a great deal of delay which can mean that consumers remain unprotected for months or even years.
We intend to put an end to that. The legislation will provide the Secretary of State with the power to bring additional activities under the statutory control of the Legal Services Board.
A particular area in which we need to build consumer confidence is in the handling of consumer complaints. Consumers have told us loud and clear that they do not have confidence in a system under which complaints about lawyers are handled by their professional bodies.
The handling of complaints also takes too long, focusing on technicalities rather than on providing quick and fair redress to the consumer, whatever the circumstances of their case.
Under our proposals, all complaints about the services provided by legal professionals will be handled by a new, and fully independent Office for Legal Complaints.
They will be much easier for consumers to understand and to use, will be demonstrably independent, and will ensure a greater consistency of approach to the handling of complaints. But above all they will ensure the consumer receives quick and fair redress.
But our proposals do not end with high quality regulation. What people want above all is high standards of service and good value for money. That means encouraging effective competition. People don't want to have to juggle between firms, chambers, advice centres - getting piecemeal help from each. Whether it's housing, insurance, or representation in court, a person wants a seamless service from their providers.
We intend to make this an easier prospect through the opportunity of having Alternative Business Structures. Our proposals will enable different types of lawyers and non-lawyers to work together on an equal footing. This will enable firms to recruit and retain people with high skills and real talent.
External investment will also be permitted. And this will enable access to low cost capital allowing firms to expand, and to take advantages of the latest technology helping them to compete more effectively amongst themselves, but also with the best firms internationally.
These new business structures will give legal professions greater flexibility and consumers targeted protections.
It will be the responsibility of the Legal Services Board to ensure that safeguards are in place to protect the consumer, for example to deal with potential conflicts of interest. The LSB will also grant an additional authorisation to Front Line Regulators who want to act as Alternative Business Structure regulators.
With proper safeguards new business structures consumers will have access to a wider range of services.
This I hope will see a legal sector that continues to flourish.
I want to see a sector that is more competitive and which can continue to compete with the best the world has to offer.
But above all, I want to see a sector that genuinely values its consumers, whoever they may be, and delivers on their needs.
I want to say a few words about legal aid.
Legal aid really matters: it helps create the kind of society we all want to live in. That's a society that's fair and decent and safe.
As I said, Legal Aid was set up in 1949 and millions of people have benefited from it. Millions of people have benefited from free advice, help, support and representation.
They recognised then that if you were rich, you could get legal advice; if you weren't, you couldn't.
But as many of you know, the legal aid budget is under enormous pressure, as are budgets everywhere. Every year, criminal expenditure continues to go through the roof, which limits the amount of money available to fund civil legal advice. I want to redress the balance, as long as I'm Minister for Legal Aid.
That's not a fair deal for the taxpayer. Nor is it a fair deal for socially excluded people who need advice.
So in July this year, we announced a radical shake up of legal aid: a package of measures that will change the current legal system and safeguard the future of civil legal aid.
One of the key things we are trying to do is to reduce the pressure on the legal aid budget arising from very high cost criminal cases, through reforms in the way we pay for criminal defence. 1% of criminal cases take up 50% of the budget - this has got to change. If we don't succeed in doing this, our ability to offer quality civil help and advice for those who need it will be put at severe risk.
Let me tell you one of the ways. You tell us 'Too much legislation has an impact on legal aid'. We want to reduce the pressure that legal changes, introduced by other government departments, can have on the legal aid budget. Every Department will have to say what the cost is to be and they will have to meet that cost.
For too long, legal aid has had to be reactive to legal changes introduced by other parts of government - effectively if one part of government changes the law, we may be compelled to fund advice or representation in this new area, but without any additional funding to meet these requirements.
A significant improvement in the policy making process has been secured by my Department. A legal aid impact test will now be part of the way government develops policy. The test will be added to the Regulatory Impact Assessment process. These assessments are completed for every policy change, whether European or domestic, affecting the public or private sector, charities, the voluntary sector or small businesses.
Now what that means in English is that when a government department is considering trying to take a new law through Parliament, the DCA will be able to obtain commitments from other Departments to meet the costs of any new burden on the legal aid budget. We are starting to use this new process and are confident it will put a check on policies, whether by accident or design, that squeeze the legal aid budget.
So there is going to be a period of change and transition in the way legal aid is delivered. However, those changes are going to be essential if we are to safeguard the future of publicly funded legal advice.
When we go to the Treasury, I want to say Legal Aid is a pillar of the welfare state. The people that come through your doors are examples of those people we should be helping. It's like the Sure Start scheme, which helps children not just when they're three or four, but later as well. So too for Legal Aid, we've got to catch people's problems early. That's what I want to put to the Treasury: Legal Aid, just as much as Sure Start, is for the socially excluded.
What we want is a fair deal for clients and those facing legal problems to ensure that all citizens are able to gain access to justice. This is a huge challenge for all involved in the process of delivering legal aid. However, with the commitment and enthusiasm that I have seen from staff at advice agencies working as part of the Community Legal Service, such as Coventry Centre, I believe that we can rise to this challenge.
So thank you Sue, and I'd thank all of you who make the delivery of high quality legal services possible - the dedicated staff of the law centre; those who have funded the Law Centre; and those who have donated so generously to the Law Centre. I'm sure that the Law Centre will continue to deliver a vital service to the local community for a long time to come, and ensure that people in Coventry get advice as early as possible. And may I wish you all the best in the coming years.