The Legal Services Board argues that ‘effective access to justice is at the heart of the concept of a society that rests on a commitment to the rule of law’. That is entirely uncontroversial.

But is the LSB right to assert that ‘widening access to the legal market’ will provide access to justice? According to this argument, it is the provider who stands in the way of making available services that people want, and at prices they can afford. The answer offered encompasses the liberalisation of the market, deregulation, consolidation and commoditisation, with the aim of achieving a more transparent legal market.

The assumption seems to be that alternative business structures will drive change in liberating law firms from ‘unnecessary restrictions’ and ‘outdated rules on how lawyers practise, and from outmoded fetters on service’ delivery options and funding available to them.

But there is recognition that this does not mean a free for all. The LSB recognises that the provision of legal services still needs to be regulated and consumers need expertise and quality assurance, because legal advice has a ‘big impact on lives and people’. Lawyers carry out a ‘public good’ and ‘no one would deny the importance of lawyers’ ethics, their duty to the public, and their duty to justice above all’. Correct. Legal advice is special and it comes at a price if you want quality.

It is the overt professional commitment to the rule of law that marks out solicitors from others. Without it we fail. In the legal services market – complex, diverse and apparently irritating as it may seem – the commitment is real and rests will the individual, not an entity. In this sense, the entry of new entities will play no part in maintaining the rule of law. It is the people that count.

And where is the evidence that in the existing legal market solicitors and other providers stand in the way of providing necessary services at a reasonable cost? Where is the evidence that solicitors are not innovative? Where is the evidence that they have resisted best business practice? What are the unnecessary restrictions and outdated rules? The Law Society has no interest in maintaining them – quite the contrary. Will the LSB or the Solicitors Regulation Authority point them out and sweep them away?

Solicitors deliver conveyancing services at a fraction of the cost of an estate agent’s charge for selling a house; cover police stations at night for hours at a price which could not tempt a plumber from his bed; and conquer international markets, earning invisible earnings in excess of £1.9bn a year. It is not possible to provide these services at public or private expense unless your business practice is the best and is engaged in the business of law in highly competitive markets.

But no one should ignore change and many will wish to embrace it. The Law Society has supported what have come to be known as ABSs, provided they could be established in a way which matched the consumer safeguards offered by solicitors firms – since 2002, well before the LSB was even a twinkle in Lord Falconer’s eye. The Legal Services Act provides for ABSs and they will be a reality within two years or so. We need to ensure that consumers have clear choices against a regulatory background which fully meets the public interest. Those choosing to enter the legal services market will find tough competition from around 1,000 solicitor firms. There are two years to prepare.

Everyone anticipates a new market but from different perspectives. The cultural challenge for the Law Society and LSB is how to provide choice without unfair competition, or undermining consumer safeguards, including quality of service. All of us involved in this work need to work out how new entrants can ensure that the ethos of individual professional obligation as an officer of the court is maintained.

Maintaining the rule of law, and the role of independent lawyers in the rule of law, is not an optional extra. It is of fundamental importance. Let that be the legacy of the LSB.

Robert Heslett is vice-president of the Law Society