There is no right way to go shopping. Some people will visit the supermarket before the delicatessen. Others will not. There is no right way to seek financial services. Some will see an independent financial adviser. Others will speak to their accountant or bank. There is no right way to access medical services. Most people will go to their GP. Others may go straight to Harley Street.

Likewise, with the advent of the bar Public Access scheme, there is no right way to purchase legal services. Most people will probably use a solicitor first. Others will not. It is all about freedom of choice.

Since July 2004, members of the public and businesses have increasingly been instructing the bar first. Now the bar Public Access scheme has begun to generate real interest and gather momentum. There is considerable public take-up and much better knowledge of the scheme among barristers, solicitors and the judiciary.

The recent Access to the Bar Day (A2B), held on 27 November last year, comprised three events targeted at opinion-formers from politics, business, the bar, the judiciary and at organisations which may qualify under the Licensed Access scheme. Its success means that it may well become an annual event.

But is all this a threat to solicitors? Far from it. Public Access creates a two-way street of referral of work between barristers and solicitors, as research by Professor John Flood of the University of Westminster, published on A2B day, now reveals.

Of all the Public Access work I receive direct from clients for the purposes of advice and drafting, about half finds its way back to solicitors at some point. That is because I send it to them. I have to send it to solicitors. I cannot conduct litigation. I cannot interview witnesses. I cannot make disclosure. I cannot go on the court record. I cannot pay court fees. And I cannot issue process.

But I can and do advise clients who come to me direct. I do so orally and in writing. I negotiate settlements and draft consent orders. I arrange and conduct mediations. I help clients to write letters to their opponents. I draft and amend pleadings. I draft skeleton arguments. And I go to court. When my client needs a solicitor, that will be my recommendation. But when they do not do so, they will conduct their own case and effectively use me as a consultant.

There is no statistical evidence as to whether the bar scheme takes work away from solicitors. On the contrary, it seems highly likely that a more flexible market for legal services will, by reason of such flexibility, generate more work for all.

And there are other gains for solicitors. Barristers are not permitted to apply for civil public funding for their clients. The public rarely knows this. All intending direct access clients who approach the bar first but require legal aid are sent by us to solicitors.

It is the same with family, immigration and criminal work. As a general rule, this work cannot be done under the bar scheme. Many firms will therefore receive referrals from the bar in these spheres. Most barristers and their clerks welcome the opportunity, at least for commercial reasons, to send work to chambers’ solicitors. What better way of cementing a business relationship?

So, to Gazette readers I say: please do not be threatened by the bar Public Access scheme. In fact, by befriending a Public Access barrister, there may be unexpected advantages. It may not be long before sets of chambers invite tenders for solicitors to be on chambers’ Public Access panels, so that they are in pole position to receive referrals of clients who have initially come direct to the bar on Public Access. I already operate such a panel. Such solicitors are badly needed to assist in the conduct of Public Access cases. Nor will it be long before such panels evolve into legal-disciplinary partnerships, with barristers and solicitors maintaining their differences of function, while cooperating and coexisting in a way which is to the benefit of the public.

Marc Beaumont is vice-chairman of the Access to the Bar Committee of the Bar Council and chairman of the Public Access Bar Association (See www.paba.org.uk)