This is a simple and black and white issue. It does criminal justice a disservice when people such as Tony Jones are rude without understanding the issues at stake. Equally, Nicola Chubb does not seem to understand that £91 an hour is an extremely low wage, particularly given the experience and skills of barristers conducting such matters, and their liabilities.

The government is in the process of tearing apart the world's leading criminal justice system. The promotion of the unqualified and erradication of the independent bar will see the standard of advocacy and quality of justice plummet. I can assure Ms. Chubb and Mr. Jones that the number of 'fat cat' barristers could be counted on the fingers of one hand. The overwhelming majority of criminal barristers work extremely hard, often long into the night, preparing the effective delivery of their cases: The earlier competent counsel is instructed in a case of reasonable complexity, the more money will be saved.

Simon Rippon, birmingham, UK

£91 an hour is not what most barristers receive. The scheme pays junior barristers £62 per hour for preparation, but £126 to £252 a day during trials when you can work 12 hour days. Barristers are self-employed. From these fees they pay for their offices, staff, legal texts and insurances. They have no holiday pay or pensions. There is no job security. There may not work everyday. The competition is cut throat. A poor performance in court today means no work tomorrow. A barrister takes on these risks and provides an important public service, without which there would be no law and order. A highly skilled barrister with 20 years experience doing the most difficult cases can take home less than a decorator. I recently refused a decorating quote which was more than I would be paid to prosecute or defend a murder. Paying low fees which do not attract able barristers is a false economy as other costs will rise as cases take longer in court and there are more miscarriages of justice.

William Baker, Manchester,

Cheer up Ann. If your legal training has cost you and your husband only 'tens of thousands of pounds' you won't have to wait 'many years' to recoup it bearing in mind how much you will be able to charge when you are qualified About two should do the job.
I trust you will be proud to join the most despised profession in the country after politics. (Sorry, but I don't regard estate agency as a profession.?

Tony Jones, Grantham, Lincs

Twice the Barristers necessary practice for the amount of work. Woolf should have made it easier to commence and fund proceedings. In reality the DJ's are not smoothing the passage of suits through the system, the Small Claims Court is often viewed with contempt and the Costs Judges are not reducing costs. With so many litigants now not issuing and not going to Court, the need for the numbers at the Bar has decreased. So what to do? Put up costs to make the exercise even more expensive. Very sensible to me if also a little ironic.

It is not true that DCWs lack the knowledge or experience. After all they may spend most of their time on one narrow area. Do we say that a Tax Barrister has litle advocacy experience because they may go into Court twice a year?

Barristers and Solicitors must understand there is competition out there, spend some time training new entrants and make Advocacy the subject of a separate tough, examined and specialised college within the Law Society.

Alistairs Solicitors, Bristol, UK

In response to Allan, criminal solicitors are paid significantly less than police officers and do not have their training paid for my the taxpayer. Not to mention that the police will be getting a pay rise this year unlike solicitors who once again will be getting pay cuts.

Why is the CPS increasing the role of DCWs when it could be taking on more trainees. Trainee solicitors are paid less than DCWs and would provide the CPS with a long term cost effective solution.

At a time whenthere are more and more trainees and pupils without jobs that DCWs are being increasingly relied on.

Chris, Hereford, UK

I remember in the late 60's and early 70's prosecuting my own cases in magistrates courts whilst a police constable in the Met. I dont remember my exact pay rate then but you can be sure it was considerably less than any solicitor or barrister. Later, in West Mercia, there were Police Inspectors doing it, again their pay rates didnt match those of the legal profession by a long way. Perhaps they have cut their own throats with their charges in recent decades, and of course there is also the business of spinning the job out for as long as you can, thereby blocking the court system etc. No sympathy here chaps, try jumping ship into the corrupt House of Conmen where a lot of your colleagues are slurping at the trough.

allan, Worcester, uk

Some of the blame should lie with the Bar Council for their restrictive practices.

My daughter is a qualified barrister but cannot practice because there are insufficient places for the required year of "pupillage" ie work experience and shadowing a practising barrister. As a result she has abandoned the law - as do 50% of people emerging from the Bar Vocational Course each year.

I suspect that if the rules were changed so that working with CPS for a few years entitled one to practice, she would jump at the chance. However I don't see her becoming a DCW in a hurry.

tanker21, Stevenage,

I am nearing the end of a long route to qualification as a solicitor and do mostly criminal work. My husband has just finished his pupillage as a barrister and in total it has cost us tens of thousands of pounds and it will be years before we can "reap the rewards". We both chose these jobs and in particular criminal law not for the money(!) but because we enjoy the work.
It now makes me wonder why I bothered - I could work for the CPS as a caseworker and do the same job. It makes a mockery of the long process that trainee solicitors and barrister have to go through to qualify.

Ann, Bristol,

Its also worth pointing out that this is the rate for the most complex and serious cases where there is the most at stake for the public and the defendant. You would pay a 1 year qualified solicitor in London undertaking a normal commercial transaction well over twice the hourly rate for their work than you would for a QC prosecuting or defending in a murder case. If the cuts continue you will see more and more cases prosecuted by the CPS, which is, despite their claims (and notably never the claims of the police, bar or defence solicitors), the quickest route to increased acquittal rates and successful appeals.

Peter, London,

Local authorities have used in-house paralegals for their work before a Magistrates' Court for many years, including not guilty trials for offences which can carry sentences of imprisonment and many of which are triable either way. The problem is not with the fact they are paralegals but with the quality of their training and their own levels of confidence/skill. I have never heard it suggested that these local government employees have had any difficulties with their duty to the court! I currently work before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia where many Counsel appearing before the court including the Appeals Chamber have no formal professional legal qualifications, but of course are graduates with other appropriate experience. This does not necessarily make them good advocates.

Paul Rogers, The Hague, Netherlands

your article fails to make clear that a junior barrister simply means one who is not a Q.C ans that many junior barristers can
have 30 years of experience or more

puting so-called paralegals up against experienced advocates means that the former willl simply lose and the police will go spare

peter codner, devizes, england

Just to put the hourly rate into perspective I am quoted £92 p.h (plus V.A.T) as a mechanics rate for working on a Mercedes Benz in the East Midlands.
Robert, Northamptonshire.

Robert Hawkes, Wellingborough, Northants.

This can be extrapolated to medicine as well where nurses are now doing tasks previously performed by doctors and sometimes outside the remit of their training.
The government is cost cutting in every professional area.

The sooner this government is gone the better for the country!

Cameron, London, UK

£91 per hour!!!!!!! and that's after a pay squeeze. I'm in the wrong profession.

Having a degree and being qualified for work in a court room should not give the people the right to charge that amount of money.

If i had a degree i wouldn't want that much. that is like saying being legally trained and your laughing all the way to the bank.

Nicola Clubb, Bournemouth,

The figures in your report are not entirely accurate - the rate for barristers under the proposed deal for complex cases is £91 for QCs. Junior barristers will get paid far less, and are being asked to accept a significant cut in rates when those rates have not been increased (even in line with inflation) since 1996.

Peter, London,

I had always thought that under English law an individual could choose to represent themself in court, but otherwise required a "recognised" solicitor or barrister to do it for them. Am I wrong?

MikeM, St. Albans, England

So we have 'teaching assistants' delivering lessons for which they are untrained, Police Community Support Officers doing police work for which they are untrained and now 'paralegals' doing legal work for which they are untrained. In each of these cases the 'assistant' was supposed to support the professional by performing admin tasks, but in each case the roles seem to have been perversely reversed, largely due to government tampering with things they nothing about. Incredible but true!

Stephen Cavender, BEDFORD, Bedfordshire

Another mess caused by this incompetent Labour Government. When oh when will we be rid of them ?.Soon I hope.

Simon, London, UK