I read the comments of Jack straw and recent press articles regarding the provision of legal aid as an indictment of the current morality of government and the British people.

That we we have lost of sense of proportion and are not prepared to defend the weak and vunerable of society is concerning and sad to see.

Those who undertake legal aid work are prepared to spend their time with those that society choose to ignore and wish were not around. They are the final safety net for the public against the state and for unfair actions. Any assertion that they are there to help people get "off offences" is crude and ill thought out.

The figures are truly maipulated to help present a weak case for disolving independant legal advice.

It is truly amazing how legal aid lawyers are percived in this country and how quickly that is forgotten when people need help.

Proper dialogue should be entered into to find the best way forward, not bullying or sloppy sound bites.

Nick Jinks, Cantebrury,

It seems to me that the Justice Secretary is laying the blame for the legal aid bills at the door of legal professionals. Any lawyer who practises in criminal law not driven by a income-based incentive - it is well-known for being the area for lowest pay in legal practice! The reduction in funding will only contribute to alleviating access to justice to those in society who need it most.

So, Mr Straw do not blame the lawyers for the big bill...maybe you should take a look at where the real problems lie - that is to address the problems which cause people to commit crime in the first place.

More crime = more bills = unhappy minister
Less crime = less bills = more balloons at MOJ Christmas party

David Newman, Plymouth, UK

If Jack Straw is reading my emails he sure as hell is taking a long time to do anything about it.

If Mr Straw thinks £34 per head is too great for Britain we should be told what the consequences of £10 per head has cost New Zealand - it has had to sell off its Air Force and Navy.

This headlines from a 1999 article is as topical today as it was then. I suggest readers search the web for it.

"Battling legal aid ‘blowout". By Helen Bain, “The Dominion” 12 May 1999, Page 10. Wellington Newspapers Limited.

Yous etc

robert whiston, walsall, UK

Do away completely with Legal Aid and watch lawyers fees plummet, we might even get rid of some of our politicians.

howard, Basildon, England

Unlike health problems or educational difficulties, legal problems crop up intermittently. When they do they can be devastating. A divorce, problem with your home, a personal injury or mental health matter can have appalling consequences upon those involved. Without legal aid people are simply unable to deal with such problems. They are often on limited incomes or benefits and without a legal aid lawyer would be unable to deal with their personal disaster. Dealing with a problem correctly and with the benefit of legal help can often save the state thousands of pounds. Knocking the lawyers is all too easy but the consequences may be far graver.

Russell Conway, London, UK

The cause of the high legal aid bill in the uk is down VHCC or very high cost cases. The name alone is an invitation for the governement to be scammed. Terrosim , fraud and big drug cases attract eye watering bills being lodged by barristers and their clerks who rake off 10%. Last year one Qc earned 1m in legal aid fees the same ammount as it costs to fund a law centre for a year, In 2005 just 13 cases took half the legal aid budget. All because barristers, unlike everyone else in a court room ,are paid by the hour, therfore the longer a case drags on the more they earn. In 1998 parliament sought to cap lawyers fees to a maximum of £250,000 , this was resisted by the bar . Therefore a couple of major cases continue to swallow the Legal aid annual budget. Unless the governement takes drastic measures, the bulk of the legal aid money will continue to benefit the priveleged few QC's who get instructed.

Uche George, London, England

The legal aid bill needs to be increased, not cut. It’s the fastest way to resolve the prison problem, enforce the Law and ensure English citizens get the Legal protection they deserve. You can’t demand the highest standards of service for anyone accused of a crime when you are not willing to pay people working on the matter.

Who would you want defending you, someone who is dispirited and knows little of the Law, or a highly qualified and well motivated Practioner who will fight for you? Or would you rather roll over while the Government turn you into another “tough on Crime”. Quality representation is not free.

Really, this is symptomatic of Labour cost cutting that gave us MRSA, Foot and Mouth, Gun Crime and “Plastic Police men”. Strange, there’s no talk of cutting the MP's expenses Budget, or the hangers on in the Public Sector.

It is again the people who stand to lose one more liberty.

I am getting a bit sick of this exploitative government.

Liam Ryan, London,

Oh dear, the lawyers are going to be annoyed about this one.

Judy , Liverpool, england

And after charging that exraordinary £34 per head, is the quality of service/justice considerably better than in other countries where the taxpayer does not have dole out some much for lawyers? Answer must be a clear no. Mr Straw should go full steam now to save taxpayers money which they simply cannot expend so lavishly to service a group of professionals who consider that legal aid fund is a bottomless pit. I very much fear,there would be significant pressure to derail any plans to cut down payments to lawyers as they have enough friends in higher echelons to protect their interests.

Lawyers should really be ashamed of themselves but traditionally, it is a profession which has no shame for grabbing taxpayers' funds.

Alan K, London, England