Controversial changes to criminal legal aid have been passed, despite opposition from some at Holyrood and lawyers.
MSPs backed legislation that will mean people with a disposable income of £82 a week will have to make a contribu- tion towards the cost of their defence.
Defence solicitors had previously gone on strike over the changes, which will also see them collect the money instead of the Scottish Legal Aid Board.
About 40 solicitors gathered outside Holyrood yesterday to protest against the legislation.
For the Liberal Democrats, Alison McInnes said: "This bill is a blunt instrument – we could be faced with the prospect of more people being forced to represent themselves in court, lacking the crucial tools to do so effectively.
"We will risk sending more innocent people to jail. That is not in the best interest of justice or a fair society. The Justice Secretary has risked irrevocably harming access to justice in order to cut around £4 million out of a £150m budget. I don't think that's a price worth paying."
But Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill insisted: "The Scottish Government believes it is right and proper that those who can afford to pay towards the cost of their legal defence costs do so.
"While I would rather not be reducing the legal aid budget, expenditure on legal aid in 2011/12 was £157.3m, which was, despite savings, the second highest on record. There is no endless pot of public cash and the current legal aid scheme simply cannot be maintained without making savings."
Labour voted with the SNP on the new income limit despite concerns that the overall Bill remains "bad".
Malcolm Chisholm, Labour MSP for Edinburgh Northern and Leith, said the legislation was driven entirely by finance, adding: "The Cabinet Secretary has been forced to modify a very bad bill so it ends up simply as a bad bill. That doesn't alter the fact it still is bad."
Tory MSP Annabel Goldie said: "I'm glad the Cabinet Secretary has yielded to his metaphorical beating over the head and improved what was a poor situation and made it somewhat better."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article