Throughout my legal career I have taken a keen interest in legal education and training. I was chairman of the governors of the College of Law until recently, and the Solicitors Regulation Authority has a pivotal position in the development of legal education and training.

Law, seen by many as a vocational subject, is a popular course for university students. It is not expensive to teach and, accordingly, it is also attractive to universities and government. In 2008, 19,020 students were accepted onto law degrees, more than 14,000 places were available on the Legal Practice Course and 5,809 trainees were registered. Over 20% of admissions to qualification were from foreign lawyers though the Qualified Lawyers Transfer Scheme (QLTS).

The mismatch between those seeking to enter the profession and available trainee places produces considerable strain. Students can arrive at that watershed having incurred substantial debt on their university and LPC courses. The number of trainee places outside the major commercial firms continues to be inadequate. LPC courses are increasingly tailored to the destination of the prospective trainees, and can produce a narrow range of skills for those who later decide that they wish to embark on a different area of practice. Our colleagues in other jurisdictions express surprise that a two-year conversion course for non-law graduates can be an adequate legal education – but of course it facilitates access to the profession.

The SRA recognises the overriding need to ensure that training and development support the provision of high standards of service for clients. We wish to facilitate flexibility over routes of entry into the profession and to achieve fair access. We strive for consistency of standards and effective continuing education.

As is now well known, next year the SRA is introducing a transformational system of outcomes-focused regulation (OFR), and in the process we will review education and training to ensure they are aligned with this new approach.

In a speech earlier this year, Lord Neuberger, master of the rolls, stressed how important it was in the changing regulatory environment to maintain standards of entry for those coming into the profession. He said that with a move from rule-based regulation to OFR (principles) regulation it ‘becomes all the more important that only those with principles are permitted entry into the profession’.

I agree wholeheartedly. The SRA is focused on maintaining, and indeed enhancing, the standards of those coming into, and practising in, the profession.

Robust entry standards are pivotal to the success of OFR, as are standards for continuing practice. Formal pre- and post-qualification requirements have long played an important role in trying to make sure only suitable individuals are allowed to practise as solicitors, and that individuals continue to be well qualified. However, most would acknowledge that there is still much to be done to move away from a qualification system still tied up in prescription about ‘how’ people qualify as opposed to ‘what’ they need to demonstrate. The bottom line is that clients should be confident that the solicitors they use will be competent to do the work instructed, wherever and by whatever route they qualify.

Three areas where significant progress is already being made are the introduction of a new QLTS, a pilot of alternative ways to qualify called work-based learning and changes to the LPC.

From September, our new QLTS will replace the current transfer scheme which was introduced 20 years ago, with the first assessments being available in January 2011. We recognise that the scheme we inherited required more rigour and the process needed greater scrutiny. The new scheme will ensure that all entrants achieve similar outcomes to those used in the domestic route to qualification, and they will be assessed using practical exercises, rather than relying on experience. International applicants will also need to demonstrate that they can meet a demanding English language requirement.

Work-based learning is another outcomes-focused approach already in progress. The two-year pilot concluding in September has been examining alternative routes to the traditional training contract to qualify as a solicitor. It too focuses on assessing competence in key skills before qualification. Last but not least, from September, there are new requirements for all LPCs, again setting out the essential outcomes for each course, but not prescribing the structure of the course.

All three of these focus on parity of standards and consistency, using outcomes to enable robust entry standards, while encouraging flexibility and innovation.

So what else will change? The answer is, plenty. We are considering whether our approach to qualifications will meet the needs of firms and consumers in the new legal services environment brought in by the Legal Services Act. In particular, we are reviewing whether there is sufficient emphasis on principles, ethics and financial management during the qualification process. Post-qualification, we will require better identification of training needs and better continuing professional development. Where risks are identified this may include targeted compulsory training.

There are several further questions to ask, including: how we use CPD, accreditation and other education and training ‘tools’ to maintain and enhance standards; whether a ‘qualification for life’ is a sustainable proposition; and whether activity-based licensing of practitioners is a good idea. Throughout this we will look to see whether we can build more flexibility into the qualification process, including routes of entry and accommodating different career patterns, without compromising entry standards, and, if so, how far we should take this. There will be many other decisions to consider, such as how we authorise, supervise and monitor firms wishing to take trainees.

We look forward to engaging with you on these important issues.

Charles Plant is chair of the board of the Solicitors Regulation Authority