The Leveson Review: Impact on Police Station Representatives and Defence Solicitors

Introduction

Sir Brian Leveson's Independent Review of the Criminal Courts (Part 2, published 4 February 2026) devotes significant attention to the police station stage of criminal proceedings. For accredited representatives, duty solicitors, and criminal defence firms, several of the 135 recommendations have direct and potentially far-reaching implications.

This article focuses on the recommendations most relevant to those who work in and around the police station.

The Workforce Crisis in Numbers

Leveson presents data that paints a bleak picture of the criminal legal aid workforce:

Leveson warns that in 10 years' time, those currently aged 55 or above will be approaching retirement or will have retired. Without urgent action, the system faces a cliff edge.

"Unless there is a conscious effort to rebuild this workforce to meet this increased demand, I believe the criminal legal aid system is at risk of failure." — Sir Brian Leveson, Part 2

He notes that an under-resourced duty solicitor workforce can result in defendants going unrepresented in court, leading to longer trials and hearings — making the backlog worse, not better.

Remote Legal Advice at the Police Station

Perhaps the most controversial recommendation for police station practitioners is Leveson's proposal to allow remote (video) initial legal advice at the police station.

What Leveson Recommends

• The Legal Aid Agency should change its police station telephone advice contract to give defence solicitors the option to provide initial advice remotely (by video) where appropriate
• This is framed as an option, not a requirement
• Leveson stresses that remote advice would not be appropriate for:
  • Under-18s
  • Vulnerable people
  • Indictable-only offences

Leveson's Reasoning

Leveson's reasoning is practical rather than ideological:

• There are too few available defence solicitors, especially outside working hours
• Delays caused by solicitors travelling between multiple police station callouts are significant
• Remote initial advice could reduce the time detainees spend waiting in custody
• It could allow a solicitor to provide advice promptly while physically attending another station

The Opposition

The Law Society has strongly pushed back:

"We disagree with some recommendations that may compromise the fairness and safety of the justice system, including providing legal advice by video link to people detained in police stations." — Law Society response to Part 2

Concerns centre on:

• The difficulty of building rapport and trust with a client via video, particularly someone who has just been arrested and may be distressed, intoxicated, or confused
• The risk of conversations being overheard by custody staff
• The inability to properly assess a client's condition or vulnerability remotely
• The danger that what is introduced as an "option" becomes the norm through cost pressure
• Potential negative impact on the quality of pre-interview consultations

What This Means for Accredited Representatives

If implemented, this could affect how and when accredited representatives are deployed. Firms might use remote initial advice for straightforward matters while reserving physical attendance for more complex or sensitive cases. There is a concern within the profession that this could ultimately reduce the volume of physical police station call-outs and change the nature of the work.

However, it is important to note that Leveson does not recommend abolishing in-person attendance — he frames remote advice as an additional option in limited circumstances.

Rebuilding the Defence Workforce

Leveson makes several recommendations aimed at reversing the decline in criminal legal aid practitioners:

1. Match-Funded Qualifications

Leveson recommends the government match-fund the Police Station Representative Accreditation Scheme (PSRAS) qualification and the magistrates' court duty solicitor qualification, mirroring his Part 1 recommendation for match-funded pupillages for criminal barristers.

This is significant for the accredited representative community. If implemented, it would reduce the financial barrier to entry for those seeking to qualify. Currently, the cost of the portfolio, CIT, and accreditation process can be a significant hurdle.

2. Trainee Grants for Law Firms

Echoing the 2021 Bellamy Review, Leveson recommends trainee grants to help cover the cost that criminal legal aid firms incur when training junior lawyers. Many firms have told the review they simply cannot afford to take on trainees, which is strangling the pipeline of new entrants.

3. Annual Fee Reviews

Leveson calls on the government to commit to annually reviewing legal aid fees, warning:

"It is not sustainable to retain the current approach whereby only a crisis triggers a reactive response."

Historically, criminal legal aid fees have been subject to long freezes punctuated by crisis-driven increases (such as the post-Bellamy uplift and the 2022 bar strike settlement). An annual review mechanism would provide predictability and prevent fees from falling behind inflation.

4. Financial Incentives and Recruitment Campaigns

Leveson draws parallels with successful recruitment campaigns in education (Teach First, "Get into Teaching") and recommends:

• Financial incentives such as student loan reimbursement schemes for those entering criminal legal aid
• Active recruitment campaigns to highlight the value and importance of criminal defence work
• While acknowledging that criminal legal aid solicitors are not public sector workers, he argues more should be done to support recruitment

Reducing Police Bureaucracy

Leveson found that police are spending excessive time on pre-charge file preparation that goes beyond what the law actually requires. His recommendations include:

• Cutting unnecessary file-build requirements — removing bureaucratic processes around redaction and rebuttable presumption material that have developed through practice but are not legally mandated
• Streamlining charge notification
• Freeing police time to pursue more out-of-court resolutions (OOCRs)

For police station practitioners, this could mean:

• Faster charge decisions (less time waiting in custody suites)
• More cases resolved through OOCRs (fewer cases going to court but potentially more advisory work)
• Changes to the file-build process that solicitors and reps interact with

Remote First Hearings After Arrest

Leveson also recommends that first hearings in the magistrates' court should be conducted partially remotely by default for defendants appearing from custody, on a "test, learn and cost" basis.

The Chartered Institute of Legal Executives (CILEX) warned:

"We run the risk of defendants in criminal proceedings not having adequate opportunity to ask questions of their legal advocates beforehand. This is valuable time when outcomes are explained to clients, changes of plea occur, and probation and bail decisions are discussed. Limiting this vital engagement could prove counterproductive." — Simon Garrod, CILEX

This could affect the flow of work from police station to magistrates' court and how defence lawyers prepare for and attend initial hearings.

Practical Implications — Summary Table

What Happens Next

The government has said it will respond to Part 2's 135 recommendations "in the coming weeks." Some recommendations could be implemented relatively quickly through changes to LAA contract terms or police guidance. Others — such as annual fee reviews or match-funded qualifications — would require Treasury approval and sustained funding commitments.

The more controversial proposals from Part 1 (restricting jury trials, the new Bench Division) are already being taken forward by the government through planned legislation, despite strong opposition from the profession.

Key Sources

• Independent Review of the Criminal Courts: Part 2 — GOV.UK
• Overview document (PDF) — GOV.UK
• Part 2, Volume 1 (PDF) — GOV.UK
• Law Society response — lawsociety.org.uk
• Bar Council response — barcouncil.org.uk
• Law Gazette in-depth analysis — lawgazette.co.uk
• BBC News report — bbc.com
• Written Ministerial Statement (4 Feb 2026) — parliament.uk

This article was compiled from primary sources including the published review documents, the Law Gazette's in-depth analysis, and official responses from the Law Society, Bar Council, Criminal Bar Association, and CILEX. All statistics are taken directly from the review. Last updated: February 2026.