The need for public affairs advisers has never been greater as law firms face unprecedented change within the legal services market. But, as Kate Hanley discovers, only the very enterprising have taken advantage


‘I spent rather a lot of time not being very complimentary about lawyers,’ admits Louise Restell, head of public affairs at national firm Russell Jones & Walker (RJW). The former chief of legal policy at consumer body Which? spent over two years campaigning for reform of legal services during the Clementi review. ‘There were a few raised eyebrows when I was brought in [to RJW].’



Five months on, her appointment remains an avant-garde move by a law firm, even for a progressive outfit such as RJW. Today, the number of firms employing a policy adviser to steer both the partnership and clients through external public affairs is surprisingly few, even among the City elite.



‘Policy advice is new for this firm and for a lot of firms,’ continues Ms Restell. ‘But much of lobbying is about law and regulation, so who better to advise than lawyers?’



In tandem with hiring Ms Restell, RJW has also announced the opening of a parliamentary and legal affairs department, focused on advising its heavyweight trade union client base.



Offering such a service to clients is another rare species: only Clifford Chance, DLA Piper and Bircham Dyson Bell major seriously in this field among UK firms, although lobbying is a more common activity for US practices.



However, it is the personal injury players, such as RJW, Berrymans Lace Mawer and Thompsons that have stolen a march on the benefits of an in-house policy adviser.



Alistair Kinley is head of policy development at Berrymans Lace Mawer, best known as an insurance defence firm. He joined in January 2006 after ten years working in policy development at the Association of British Insurers.



‘My role is to co-ordinate our response when we communicate with clients on reform issues, and to collect ideas from them and across the firm. It’s about understanding the challenges their businesses are going to face and shaping them from a policy perspective.’



Leading claimant firm Thompsons may sit firmly on the other side of the legal fence, but it too has a head of policy and public affairs in solicitor and partner Tom Jones. ‘Thompsons is a law firm with a deliberate political direction,’ he explains. ‘We act for trade unions, labour movements and working people. There are issues on a political level where we need to respond as a firm, and my role is to ensure presentation is appropriate for the firm’s direction. Trade union clients too will often have a view, and my role is to ensure that the firm’s stance ties in with what they say. We can also assist them in enhancing their argument.’



By way of example, last year’s House of Lords judgment in Barker v Corus Plc [2006] UKHL 20 ‘had a potentially huge, negative impact on victims of asbestos’, according to Mr Jones. Thompsons successively worked closely with trade unions to lobby the government and reverse the impact of the decision.



More recently, the government consultation on claims management regulation and professional indemnity insurance is currently being examined closely by the firm. ‘This has a fundamentally massive impact on the way trade unions operate legal services,’ says Mr Jones.



According to Mr Kinley, personal injury is an area that has attracted the need for policy advice because of the pace of change in recent years. ‘Personal injury has been such a fast-moving field in the past six years, post Woolf, such as “no win, no fee” arrangements and the problems that have arisen as a result,’ he explains. ‘So if you are involved in those processes, you need to have a very firm hand on where your policy is going.’



However, of even greater significance is the fundamental shake-up of the legal profession proposed by the Legal Services Bill, which will pave the way for greater commoditisation of legal services.

It is the large claimant firms, such as RJW and Irwin Mitchell, which handle huge volumes of claims, that have been the first to identify the need to shape up and step up a gear or else lose out to the likes of Co-Operative Legal Services, launched earlier this year.



‘There is so much change now in legal services, which up until now has been about grey hairs giving out advice,’ observes Neil Kinsella, managing partner of RJW. ‘Nowadays, it’s all about what consumers expect and what levels of service are coming from other sectors, such as the banks. We need to identify how we can preserve the high levels of ethics and service we already have with the need to give a quick, accessible service.’



It is this new emphasis on the consumer, heralded by the Legal Services Bill, which has prompted the likes of RJW to focus on public affairs and, in particular, to hire a consumer expert.



‘It is confusing for everyone at the moment. So to have some common sense from someone with a consumer’s point of view is a very useful thing,’ says Mr Kinsella.



Echoing this, Ms Restell explains: ‘A lot of the work is about shifting the traditional attitude of lawyers – from one that clients should be thankful they are working for them, to one where the lawyer should be grateful the client has chosen them to do the work. It’s also about looking at changes in legal services as a result of Clementi, such as alternative business structures, to see what we can do as a law firm to add value to clients and position ourselves successfully in the market.’



Rather ironically, working alongside lawyers for the first time has given her a taste of the frustrations consumers can face when dealing with the legal profession. ‘It is different dealing with a partnership. I’m used to working with a CEO, where it is more about taking a direction quickly. With a partnership, it is much harder to make sure you have everyone supporting what you are doing.’



While there is much to do for a policy adviser within a progressive law firm, the role differs wildly depending on whom you represent. ‘The job varies wherever you work,’ confirms Ms Restell. ‘I’m not sure what I do here would even be the same in another law firm’.



‘A partner in a left-wing law firm is obviously very different to a partner in a City firm, who would have a completely different agenda,’ concurs Mr Jones. ‘You need to identify with the firm’s objectives or else you are trying to sell something you don’t believe in.’



At Clifford Chance, partner Michael Smyth is head of the firm’s public policy and public affairs practice. Policy work for clients there – global corporations and international finance houses – could not be further from the needs of trade unions. But while the bulk of the work is a fee-generating practice in its own right, there are synergies between the policies and political needs of the firm’s major clients, and its own public affairs. It has been active in lobbying in its own right over the legal services reforms, for example.



‘As a very substantial business in our own right, there is an increasing advocacy role on behalf of the firm itself,’ says Mr Smyth. ‘It would be an odd month where the firm is not making some form of submission to Brussels or Westminster, or indeed Capitol Hill.’



It seems only fair then, that lawyers should encroach on the work of established public affairs houses; after all, it seems that the Legal Services Bill may allow every Tom, Dick or Harry to provide legal services in the near future. But what of those grey hairs in law firm boardrooms across the country? As firms such as RJW are demonstrating, it is time to reach for the hair dye and rejuvenate, or else those young upstarts at Tesco and the like – already masters of consumer communication and public affairs – may have your clients in the reusable, biodegradable bag.



Kate Hanley is a freelance journalist