With the government’s controversial Public Bodies Bill promising a ‘bonfire of the quangos’, lawyers working in the sector are facing an unsettled future, with increasing demands to do more within shrinking budgets. The bill, currently making its way through parliament, will allow ministers, by order, to abolish, merge or transfer the functions of scores of public bodies.

Lawyers in this sector tend to work in small teams, or as sole practitioners, and in very different areas in terms of both work and geography. Over the last 18 months, an informal network has grown up as a means of sharing sector-specific practical legal know-how within a trusted and supportive environment.

The Non-Departmental Public Bodies (NDPB) Lawyers Group, which has about 40 members from 30 different organisations, has already won Law Society recognition with a voice on the Council and CPD accreditation for its training days.

Bruce Macmillan, general counsel of the Legal Services Board since 2009, started his career in private practice before moving into industry. ‘My original interest in getting the group up and running was that a problem or confusion shared is often one more easily resolved,’ he says.

‘In previous roles, I was involved with the Commerce & Industry Group, including chairing the corporate governance committee, and have seen the value of discussing ideas non-competitively. For instance, talking about how to deal with back-office functions is both a practical help as well as a ‘sanity check’ on your own thinking - in-house legal teams are often very small, so you may not have anyone to test out your ideas.’

One of the bodies facing possible change is the Human Tissue Authority (HTA). Its head of legal, Helen Holmes, says there is talk that the authority and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority may be merged into the Care Quality Commission, but there would have to be a consultation.

She welcomes the opportunity the group gives for sharing thoughts on the coalition’s approach to public sector changes and assessing when some of these may have unintended consequences for the nature of the NDPB’s legislative remit.

‘The bill is adding a dynamic to the group,’ she says. ‘In-house lawyers like myself would otherwise have no immediate home group to discuss how we should respond to these changes.

‘It is enormously supportive to be able to talk through issues where you have to advise your chief executive or board. We had some discussions last year over a proposal that there should be fewer websites, so members of the public could have a one-stop shop. But for some NDPBs, having an independent website is at their very heart, particularly those with a consumer focus. Members grappling with that found it very helpful to talk through how others were negotiating to keep something as straightforward as a website separate.’

So far the group has held several general meetings and specific briefings. It has also arranged two full training days with chambers and law firms (including 39 Essex Street, Baker & McKenzie, Herbert Smith, Field Fisher Waterhouse, Bates Wells & Braithwaite and Bevan Brittan), giving lectures and venues for free. Topics discussed include ‘purse strings and apron strings: the role of the accounting officer and relations with sponsor departments’; the ‘duty of candour’ in JR proceedings; and the Bribery Act 2010. The training is tailored to NDPBs but is open to anyone with an interest in these subjects.

The group is experimenting with storing useful but not sensitive materials and know-how on a secure controlled access extranet called OnRamp.

It is also trying to foster engagements outside London. Colleagues in Birmingham are looking for a suitable venue to start running training events, while the group is also investigating greater use of conference call and webinar content to reduce geographical difficulties.

In November, the group has a slot at the Law Society’s In-House Counsel Forum on a toolkit for in-house public sector lawyers, including how to maximise a network of one.

Law Society Council member Simon Harker is representing the group’s interests alongside the Government Legal Service. ‘The NDPB Group definitely adds value to lawyers working in this area,’ he says.

‘It has also helped lawyers working in central government by giving us a point of contact with our NDPB colleagues. We were able to hear from them at a public sector lawyers’ efficiencies workshop at the Ministry of Justice on how they are responding to the efficiency challenges facing their organisations, and have a chance to discuss with them specific tips and best practice for particular areas.’

So what attracts lawyers to NDPBs and what distinguishes their legal role? Robert Higgins joined the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) two years ago as head of legal from his role as legal director (projects) with an engineering and design consultancy.

The attractions were ‘going into nuclear and being based in Cumbria - apart from the weather’, he says. ‘As a lawyer you can do really boring work or work that you are personally interested in. My background is as an engineer, so the combination of very large projects and interaction with government offered a new challenge.’

With a team of seven, including four lawyers, he is also responsible for knowledge management, information governance and freedom of information.

‘What distinguishes a legal role in this sector,’ he says, ‘is the need to navigate through regulation, especially if you are in a heavily regulated industry, which a lot of NDPB lawyers are, where the regulation and the way things are done aren’t always obvious or written down’.

The profit motive is also replaced by value for money, which is a harder concept to define. ‘You do a job which makes a profit and everyone slaps you on the back,’ he says. ‘In the public sector, there are a lot more factors which contribute to knowing whether you have generated value for money.’

The degree of control over the destiny of a project can also be less than in the private sector. ‘You have to put up with the fact that a policy change can stop an entire stream of work dead and there is nothing you can do about it,’ he says.

There is no collective definition of an NDPB, he notes. ‘Your status may differ and you have to realise that, as well as your CEO and accounting officer, you may have another "dad" out there - a regulator who is just as powerful and has just as much sway over your projects.’

Public and regulatory lawyer Nick Glockling joined the LSB as legal adviser 18 months ago with a background in economic regulation. ‘It was very timely,’ he says. ‘This is a period of great change for the profession and to be part of delivering the new regime was too good an opportunity to miss.’

NDPBs are a very broad church, he notes. What distinguishes them is some nature of a public function combined with independence.

‘We all operate in political environments, typically with a sponsor department,’ he says. ‘In our case that is the Ministry of Justice but we are not paid for out of taxation but by a levy on every practising lawyer. So, while we have many frequent and broad policy contacts with the MoJ, we have to balance that with being independent and not being seen as an instrument of government policy.’

Scott Pugh has been head of legal with Sport England for two years. He came over from Australia 10 years ago and has worked for the BBC, in professional regulation with Field Fisher Waterhouse and with the Arts Council.

Sport England, which supports grassroots sport, was established by royal charter and its sponsor department is the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. It is due to merge in 2013 with UK Sport, which deals with elite events, including the Olympics and Paralympics.

‘One of the biggest things about working in an NDPB is you have to be a jack of all trades,’ he says. ‘Generally speaking, we work in quite small teams and we don’t have a great deal of resources to maintain elaborate systems. Consequently, you have to be resourceful and prioritise work - you haven’t time to do everything.’

The attraction for him of working in this sector is ‘you have much more ability to work, dare I say it, like a hybrid. You become a generalist and you have the ability to get involved in all sorts of things - consequently, you develop broad and wide-ranging skills. If you aren’t sure whether you want to be a lawyer forever, this is the sort of job to come into and test yourself and cut your teeth on more managerial skills.’

Vijay Parbat joined UK Sport as legal adviser in 2008 from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. ‘It is my dream job as I always wanted to work in sport as a lawyer. It is a very intense time - you can feel the build-up to next summer.

‘Working here has opened me up to more management and corporate governance issues, which are all good skills to be exposed to as a lawyer - though it can be a double-edged sword as you can end up spending more time on those than on your role as a lawyer. But if you embrace the processes it keeps you level-headed and able to advise your organisation better.’

Helen Holmes joined the HTA as head of legal in 2010 from the Royal College of Nursing, where she was the trade union in-house solicitor for 15 years. She describes the newly created post as a ‘wonderful and fascinating mix of activities. It is not only that no two days are the same, no five minutes are ever the same’.

Attracted to the job because of her interest in health care and public law, she was curious to see judicial review from the other side. ‘I have been very struck through my involvement with the group that, while all these bodies are arms-length from government, the length of the arm varies quite considerably. Some are very short, practically within their home department, while others are at very long arms-length and practically independent.

‘The HTA is probably halfway. We have to report to government and work closely with the Department of Health, but we also make independent decisions about licensing and approvals of transplants.’

So what do members see as the most valuable part of the group? Anthony Rich became general counsel to the Legal Ombudsman (LeO) in 2010 in its start-up phase, after a background in private practice and local government.

He is part of a small enforcement team with two investigators who act as paralegals. His role includes advising the LeO and the Office for Legal Complaints, the LEO’s board, on legal risk and mitigation, contracts, information law and dealing with litigation, notably judicial reviews. Enforcing LeO decisions through the courts is also a key component.

‘Sharing insights and experience with other NDPBs and learning from their experiences as well as your own is at the heart of what the group is all about, along with a healthy dose of peer support,’ he says. ‘The group allows me an informal way of benchmarking our approach and ensuring we meet good practice.’

Parbat says working in an NDPB has a different feel to local government. ‘When you are the sole in-house lawyer you have no one to bounce ideas off. This is where the group is so important - it is great to know you can send out an email and be pointed in the right direction for documents or resources. It can be a lonely job and having a network of colleagues prepared to help is so valuable.’

For Higgins, the group is particularly valuable in ‘giving insight into knowledge management, perhaps more so than on the legal side. What we have to do in the public sector is preserve and protect information - there are all sorts of rules about compliance that don’t exist in the private sector. The real bonus is that if you manage something properly, you generate knowledge which can be used by others - it is the elixir that comes out of good practice.’

One interesting thing about the group, says Holmes, is how many ‘characters’ there are. ‘It doesn’t feel as though we are corporate mandarins - we have some wonderfully eccentric views put forward which is a reflection of the fact that all of us are in this slightly unusual position where we are not like TSol or the CPS, which have thousands of lawyers, and we are not like private practice where the bottom line is maintaining clients and profit.’

One of the group’s biggest successes has been its training days, says Glockling. ‘We have sufficient critical mass so we can attract law firms and chambers to talk to us, and we have thrown ourselves on the generosity of the profession, so firms have let us use their venues. This has enabled us to run training days without cost to our members. As funding for training is very tight, this is a big help.’

For Higgins, achieving CPD accreditation for the training days is a ‘sign that the group has arrived’. It is also very well targeted, he says, highlighting a session on the Bribery Act. ‘The act wasn’t written with us in mind but it still has a huge impact in terms of putting in place adequate measures and setting up a corporate defence. The knee-jerk reaction is to go away and make everything perfect but that is not a proportionate response.’

Another issue which the group has focused on is recruitment. Suzie Parsons, senior recruitment consultant with interim legal recruiters LAW Absolute, specialises in placing locum lawyers and paralegals in central government and regulatory bodies.

She says there are many locums on the market with substantial experience in the public sector following redundancy schemes and mergers, or closures of departments, as well as Australian and New Zealand lawyers with expertise in their own government systems.

She talked to the group at its training day in the summer about how to make use of locums to cover spikes in work, maternity leave and long-term sick leave, or to bring in additional expertise for a particular project. She explains: ‘Public sector placements tend to run for more than a month. There are professional locums who move around departments, so they bring particular expertise with them, and can hit the ground running with experience in areas such as FoI and JR.’

Their hourly rate averages at about £17 to £25 for qualified lawyer roles, which would equate to a permanent salary of £38,000 upwards. Recruiting for permanent posts is very difficult. Higgins recalls recruiting for one post with the NDA earlier in the year when it received a large number of applications, with 60 having the relevant experience to go on a shortlist. Three-quarters were from private practice and nearly half had been made redundant. So what does the future hold for the group?

Glockling says about half a dozen individuals are giving a lot of time to the group and they have to plan for ‘new blood’ to come in and share the work. ‘However, we are really keen for this not to develop a large centralised bureaucracy,’ he says.

‘We have so far resisted having titles because that tends to go with layers of administration and cost. We are still trying to keep things informal.’ Holmes agrees. ‘There is a tremendous advantage in keeping this as an informal network,’ she says. ‘We have recognised that the minute you start becoming a committee, there is a real risk the committee does the work and decides the strategy and everyone else drifts away.’

The nature of the legal world, the financial crisis and the government’s new approach to public services all highlight the importance of being able to respond to the different needs of members at different times.

‘Every government department, for instance, is looking at a shared services agenda - including the extent to which legal services can be shared,’ she continues. ‘lf there is a consultation on this, then our group would be very well placed to pull together frontline intelligence to feed into and assist the government in terms of policy development and any implementation issues.’

The principle, she says, is to maintain flexibility. ‘Does that sound very radical?’ she laughs. ‘It reflects the fact that most of us are on our own or in very small teams. We have to be very hands on and work with different committees, so we are all instinctively shying away from the group becoming too formal in case it stifles what is over the horizon.’

  • More information can be obtained from Matty Grant, c/o The Legal Services Board, tel: 020 7271 0065, or email.

Grania Langdon-Down is a freelance journalist