Spending big on a new it system is essential if the solicitors regulation authority is to stand a chance of discharging its duties over the coming years, writes Peter williamson


The annual renewal of practising certificates inevitably prompts many solicitors to wonder whether the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) gives value for money. While the fee also pays for the Legal Complaints Service and some of the running costs of the Law Society, it is undeniable that a significant chunk of your money – about £50 million – pays for the SRA.



Whether you are a sole practitioner with a legal aid contract struggling to provide a quality service, or a lawyer working for a big firm used to working on multi-million pound deals, I assure you that the SRA is acutely aware of its duty to use practising certificate fee income wisely.



In 2007, we held our budget at the same level as in 2006 – a real-terms cut of about 4% – to promote financial discipline and greater efficiency. We are coping with this budget freeze by rigorously challenging all the stages of our processes to determine whether they are essential, and eliminating unnecessary demarcations between departments.



Our policy of concentrating on the key issues of financial risk, solicitors’ legal competence and their ability to run their firms properly (described in my last column) is at the heart of our drive to do well all that we have to do, but not to spend time – effectively, wasting your money – on activity that is inconsequential.



However, significant additional capital spending in one area is going to be essential in the coming years if the SRA is to stand a chance of discharging its duties to both consumers of legal services and solicitors, let alone keeping its business methods reasonably up to date.



We are dependant on two IT systems, both dating back to the early 1990s. The first provides a limited platform for the management of investigations and complaints. The second holds the mountain of regulatory data we have about solicitors and their firms, and also provides data to the Law Society as your professional body.



Both systems are old, increasingly difficult to maintain and liable to collapse beyond recovery. At the same time, we are having to anticipate fresh demands in the next five years or so, many of them stemming from the Legal Services Bill, which we expect to become an Act in November. Increasingly, we will be moving from regulating individual lawyers to regulating both lawyers and the entities – or legal services bodies, as they will become known – in which they work.



We also need to progress from a situation where some of the information we use is on paper, and some is stored electronically. Increasingly, solicitors are expecting to be able to conduct all their dealings with us electronically. We hope to be able to achieve that by 2010. But until we get adequate systems, that will remain only a pipe dream.



Big IT projects have received little favourable publicity in recent years. The Passport Office, the Criminal Records Bureau, National Air Traffic Services, the Child Support Agency and magistrates’ courts all went through public crises with IT projects failing to deliver on time and grossly exceeding budget. And did the Law Society not spend a lot on IT in the early years of this decade? (Answer: yes, it did. But not on replacing the two systems described earlier.)



It has been argued that many of these crises were not caused by bad IT, but by absurdly excessive demands. This is one reason why we are scrutinising all of our processes and simplifying them whenever we can.



I must stress this is not a ‘want to have’, but a ‘must have, need now’ situation. Continually patching up the existing systems is no longer a viable option. Replacement really is the only alternative.



While increased spending by the SRA is not likely to prompt rejoicing among solicitors, the benefits should if the project is managed closely and delivered successfully.



Good regulation is the key to public confidence in your profession. By that I mean regulation in accordance with the principles laid down by the Better Regulation Task Force – that it should be proportionate, accountable, consistent, transparent and targeted. If the public can be confident that, when they consult a solicitor, they will be talking to a properly trained, thoroughly competent professional with high ethical standards who offers value for money, and that we act promptly and appropriately when things go wrong, they will be far more willing to use your services, and less eager to resort to a cheaper, perhaps unregulated alternatives.



Surely the only people who would have reason not to want an efficient and effective SRA are the minority who are dishonest, who flout the rules and who cannot provide good legal advice or represent their clients competently?



Conversely, the vast majority surely want the SRA to be enabled to do its job well. They want their profession to be respected and trusted. Those in competitive private practice know that if clients can be confident that they will get impeccable, value-for-money service when they use them, it will lead to recommendations, repeat business and enhanced prosperity.



In short, good regulation is good for your pocket.



Peter Williamson is chairman of the board of the Solicitors Regulation Authority