Almost the first problem the President Martin Mears and I had to deal with after the election was whether or not the new President should follow tradition by attending the American Bar Association's annual conference in Chicago.

We were strongly advised that some representative of the Law Society should attend and failure to go would probably cause adverse comment if not offence.

Mr Mears' view was that starting work on reforming the Society had to take priority and that it would be wrong for him to desert his post.

And so, at the beginning of August, I found myself in a hot humid city surrounded by 12,500 US lawyers.

Was it worth going to? I am undecided so here are the facts, judge for yourselves.The ABA conference is the biggest such meeting in the world.

During the week there were some 2500 different discussion groups, seminars and other events covering virtually every legal topic under the sun.

Apart from the huge local contingent, lawyers from about 30 other countries also attended including over 40 solicitors from England and Wales.

To avoid confusion I must make clear that those 40 paid their own expenses.The Law Society sent three people.

Emma Donaldson who organised the trip and acted as co-ordinator for the English/Welsh group, John Hayes, the Secretary-General and myself (cost for our flights and hotel about £6000).

My role was mainly ceremonial, acting as the representative of our profession at a series of receptions and functions.

On the Sunday the Law Society hosted a reception for 400 of the international great and good and guests invited by the English/Welsh group, (cost £6000).

During most of the week the Society also ran a hospitality room just off the main conference area (cost £2000).Arguments in favour of the Law Society being there are that international law is a growth area and that the UK must fight to preserve its market share.

If we don't we will lose out to the Americans and other Europeans and end up marginalised.

The Law Society's presence helps those firms attending by providing advice and contacts and the reception and hospitality room act as aids to networking.Arguments against attendance are that it is of no interest to the vast majority of UK solicitors, such outings benefit only a small minority of firms and the Law Society has better things to do with its members money.Personally I enjoyed it.

I had not attended such a gathering before and came back with some new ideas I was particularly impressed by the lengths the ABA went to help its members master new technology.

These included a permanent demonstration room complete with most types of legal software and free telephone assistance to overcome teething problems.

It was the kind of practical help we should be giving to our members! The firms which sent representatives seem to be reasonably content with the contacts they made and I guess the argument that the Society should help all its members extends to those who deal with international law as much as it does to those on the High Street.

Despite that I still feel uneasy.

A one-off cost of £20,000 is probably acceptable though would I feel the same if it was coming directly out of my pocket? If the Law Society's backing is so important to them perhaps the firms attending might reasonably be asked to contribute something towards the cost of the reception if nothing else.

Throughout the year there are a stream of smaller international conferences.

My instinct is that we should avoid them where possible and concentrate on our problems at home.

Is that reasonable or unduly insular?