A better future

My aim today -- and for the rest of my period in office -- is to explode those myths that so distort the public's perception of us and expose the reality.

Not so that we can feel better.

But so that we can do better.

Because how we are seen by the public -- and thus by potential clients -- affects how well each of us will do -- particularly as the market-place becomes more crowded.I have spent a lot of time thinking about this huge difference between how solicitors are seen and what we are actually like.

And it seems to me that there are similarities between us and the National Health Service.

If you ask people about their own hospital, their own GP, their own experience of the NHS, they will tend to tell you how wonderful their doctor is, how helpful the nurses were in hospital, what a fantastic job their surgeon did.

But then ask them about the NHS as a whole - and what do they say? Under-funded.

Not enough beds.

Not what it used to be.

In crisis.In other words, their overall picture -- which they can only arrive at from national political and media cover age -- bears almost no relation to the millions of individual experiences.And so it is, I think, with lawyers.

We all know the kind of thing they say about us: greedy, rich, self-seeking, unscrupulous...and these are just the nicer things they come up with.

But wait -- ask them about their own solicitor, and you will tend to get a different answer.

After all, their own solicitor is the person they trust to sort out their house-move, draw up a will, handle their divorce -- in short, the person they trust with all the most private and sensitive parts of their lives.

The person who, Heaven forbid, might actually be a personal friend, someone they recognise and admire as part of the social and community glue in their local town or high street.

Only two weeks ago I was interviewed by BBC television for a programme which will be shown in November.

I am afraid that it was essentially hostile to solicitors.

I was grilled for an hour.

When the cameras stopped rolling the interviewer, David Rose, turned to me and said: 'But Tony, I do have to say that my own solicitor has been just wonderful.

We had a contract race and he pulled out all the stops -- and he sent us an excellent client care letter.

(We wouldn't have got the house without him)'.

And yet, the whole premise of the programme presented by him is that solicitors are not like that.Eighteen months ago the independent Harris Research Organisation carried out a survey commissioned by the Law Society.

It showed that 90% of adults who had used a solicitor had been satisfied with the service they received and 70% of them said that they were very satisfied.

An NOP survey commissioned by J Walter Thompson in May this year showed that the respect in which solicitors are held by ordinary members of the public continues to compare favourably with other professions -- doctors heading the list but solicitors comfortably ahead of accountants and bank managers -- with journalists and MPs fighting hard for bottom place, way behind the rest of the field.

(Maybe that explains why MPs and journalists are always attacking the professions -- they want to reduce everyone to their level!)But then we are guilty of recycling the commonly held belief that we are held in low esteem.

What was it I heard a solicitor saying at the Bar conference just two weeks ago? 'Two burglars were discussing their weekend's work.

One said to the other: "I broke into a solicitor's house last night." The other replied: "Oh yes, how much did you lose?"' And he offered Voltaire's description of a litigant: 'He gives up his skin in the hope that he may be allowed to retain his bones.'Yes, we can laugh at ourselves but should we? Why do we join in the chorus of self-deprecation? Why contribute to the self-fulfilling prophecy? It is time to start recognising that we do enjoy a good reputation with the great majority of those whom we serve.

Speak up for our reputation.

Let us rescue our pride in our profession and stand up and proclaim the power for good that we represent.But make no mistake, this claim to our rightful reputation carries with it a great responsibility - to live up to that reputation by improving still more the care of our clients and the quality of the service we offer.PRO BONOI spoke just now of the need for us to proclaim the power of good we represent -- and let me give just one example: pro bono work.

Is there another profession that does more pro bono work than solicitors? Why don't we hear about the firm in Kilburn that has just launched its own community legal service, about all the solicitors wh o give free advice at Citizens Advice Bureaux and advice centres across the country and at their own free evening and weekend advice clinics, about the City of London solicitors who help run a crisis line for battered wives?How many firms are doing some kind of pro bono work: 5%? 10%? 20%? No.

Research shows that 75% of firms are doing some kind of pro bono activity.So let us hear a little less about the meter ticking and a lot more about the charitable work being done by solicitors up and down the country, day in and day out.

But to those who argue that solicitors should be compelled to undertake pro bono work I say this.

Far better an army of volunteers than a band of unwilling conscripts.

But let's have more volunteers.And one other myth that ought to be nailed while we are at it: we are not a profession that is rooted in the past.

Year by year, we are getting younger and more representative of how society now is.

DISCRIMINATIONBut barriers of discrimination do still exist and must be broken down.

As regards women in the profession, how can anyone conceivably stand up and argue in this day and age that equality of talent does not justify equality of treatment? There are problems about partnership -- career breaks and all that -- some may say.

But surely those women who have made it to be partners or assistant solicitors are entitled to equal reward with their male colleagues.

But that is not what is happening.

Sadly and shamefully, I believe, I have to reveal the findings of a new survey -- a survey of a panel of 579 firms conducted for the Law Society by Coopers & Lybrand and Scantel Ltd.

Salaries were significantly higher for male rather than female solicitors, even after allowing for differences in the size and location of the firms in which they practised, and their individual age and experience.I will not be satisfied until there is not just parity of opportunity between male and female solicitors but parity of earnings.

How can we, as a profession that devotes itself to serving justice, accept anything less? It is time we learned to practise what we preach.CONSUMER POWERLadies and gentlemen, it often seems to be the case in this country that people abroad view us more clearly and favourably than we view ourselves.

I was reminded of this the other day when I was in Strasbourg at a conference of the combined Bar and Law Societies of Europe, when the President suddenly quoted with approval from the conference speech of my good friend David Ward when he was President of the Law Society.

David had been talking about the profession and what it is that binds us together.

He said: 'The duty solicitor at the police station at two o'clock is performing a vital role in society.

The City solicitor in his office dealing with a multi-billion dollar transaction also at 2am is also performing a vital role in society.

The City solicitor benefits in reputation and standing from being a member of the profession that will, sometimes at great inconvenience, fight for the civil liberties of the weak.

The duty solicitor at the police station benefits from the authority and standing which comes from being a member of a profession which also acts for the great and powerful in commerce and government.

Both types of solicitor are mutually interdependent.'As David observed, our reputation has always mattered, but it matters more and more as the voice of the 'consumer' becomes more strident.

And we should not delude ourselves: greater consumer assertiveness is here to stay.

Whether we have a Conservative government or a Labour gov ernment, they will both dance to the tune of the consumer lobby.

We might not always like it, but it is a fact of life with which we have to come to terms.

The trade unions have learnt it the hard way.

The privatised utilities are now learning it the hard way.

I do not want the same to happen to us.And if you doubt me, you only need to look at British Gas or the water companies to see how a poor reputation can leave you open to attack from populist politicians cruising for votes.

And they are quite cynical about it -- they will latch onto any suitable target that comes to hand.

And if you doubt that, just look at some of the recent headlines on legal aid.LEGAL AIDNowhere is the importance of our reputation more true, and the benefits of a united front more apparent, than in legal aid.Our reputation is what we can use to reveal the grotesque disparity between the myths spread about legal aid and the true story of the real benefit legal aid brings, through solicitors, to thousands of deserving people.

At that legal aid conference, Gary Streeter referred to 'people trying their luck with weak or trivial cases'.

What about the CJD cases, Mr Streeter? Child B? The asbestosis litigation? Are those weak or trivial? And if claims are really so frivolous, why is it that the vast majority of legally aided civil actions are successful? And if they are frivolous or trivial, why is the LAB granting certificates for them?Here is another myth.

Legal aid is a money spinner for lawyers.

Really? Then why does the latest panel survey research show that as the percentage of income derived from legal aid increases, overall income drops significantly.

Could it possibly be because legal aid work is not actually that profitable? Let us put it in context.

Legal aid solicitors earn, on average, considerably less than GPs -- and GPs are asking for a 53% pay rise.

So no, lawyers do not get fat on legal aid earnings.These myths about legal aid are driving the headlines and driving the government towards the ill-thought out proposals in the white paper.

We have set out to dispel these myths -- while at the same time attacking the abuses and putting forward our own, constructive recommendations, which could save 125 million.

When I saw the Lord Chancellor recently I made clear our wish to co-operate in seeking improvements to the legal aid scheme -- but not our willingness to stand by silently to witness the dismantlement of it.Within the next week or so, the Law Society will publish the results of a Gallup poll that follows the focus group market research.

This will demonstrate the real views of the public about legal aid -- not just the anecdotal comments which MPs tell us they receive from people attending their surgeries, no doubt, fuelled by media stories.

In fact, the research shows that 84% of people agree or agree strongly that 'expenditure should continue, at least, at current levels because justice is too important to ration'.

Hard statistical evidence of genuine popular feeling, not subjective scare-mongering.The independent research company Eldon Sandys carried out the focus group research.

What do individuals say about legal aid and the government's proposals? Comments from one group included: 'If they cap it they are changing the rules -- they can't say "we have run out of justice".''It is tampering with a fairly fundamental human right for the sake of a relatively modest amount of money.''If you can't afford to pay before the case and so you get legal aid, how are you supposed to pay if you lose?'CHANCERY LANEI move from leg al aid to the Law Society itself.I know there will be some who think that because I have been part of the establishment -- allegedly -- that I will somehow be a soft touch.

Well, I have to say to anyone who holds that view: think again.

Because I know Chancery Lane well, I know where the bodies are buried.

Because I know it well, I know what questions to ask.

But I also know where to praise.

As you will know from your own practices: you cannot expect to make progress by criticising, by denigrating, by undermining.There are going to be changes so that the Law Society itself gives the kind of service that it continually exhorts you to provide.

Everything I have said about reputation applies in double measure to the Law Society itself.Let me offer just two examples of why the Law Society needs to adopt the service culture towards its members.

Every year, you pay out a not insignificant amount of money for your practising certificate fee -- and what do you get from the Law Society? A curt letter of acknowledgement -- and a practising certificate, eventually.

The American Bar Association, by contrast, send a letter of genuine and profuse thanks and appreciation to the member for prompt payment and participation in the affairs of the profession.

When I conducted my first admission ceremony, I asked to see the terms of the letter that is sent to newly qualified solicitors pending admission.

It is a businesslike letter processing their admission but it does not even offer congratulations -- congratulations on the completion of what has been a very long hard struggle of study, examinations, searching for, finding and completing a training contract.You have a right to expect a better service.

And you will receive a better service.

And better value for your money.

Where mistakes are made -- and in every organisation they will be from time to time -- the Society must own up openly, not have it dragged out for us.

Then we must act promptly to learn the lessons for the future.

I am confident that with the help of the new Secretary-General the profession will see a very different approach from its professional body as the months go by.

We are already working to provide practical help and support for the beleaguered sections of the profession.

I have mentioned a number of examples in my monthly column in the Gazette.

Others include a regular newsletter for probate practitioners, for whom we are also setting up the first Law Society section; the excellent business centre and meeting rooms at the Law Society's Hall, for the use of out of London solicitors; and -- about to be announced -- a special loan facility for funding disbursements in all civil and family cases.The role of the Law Society is to train, to preserve the integrity and ethos of the profession, to support our members and promote our services - and to fight for fair laws and access to justice.It is not the Law Society's role to posturize.

Tilting at windmills gets us precisely nowhere -- except into unwelcome headlines -- let us leave that to Max Clifford and the Duchess of York.Let me touch on a few of our own headline initiatives.FRAUDWhether we are talking about reputation or about its effect on remuneration, the damage done to the health and wealth of the profession by fraud and dishonesty is immense.

The sheer cost of this cancer in our professional body was reduced dramatically last year.

However, as was reported recently in the Gazette, there is clear evidence that there remains a core of determinedly dishonest and unscrupulous solicitors for whom the res t of us must spare no sympathy.

Substantial resources have been committed to this cause; even more are likely to be necessary if we are to control a renewed spread of this disease.

I do not believe you will begrudge them.CONVEYANCINGWhat of conveyancing? What prospect of the introduction, south of the border, of the co-operative property-selling ventures pursued with recent marked success by solicitors in Scotland? Not the 1980s property shop concept, which appealed to a very limited number of firms, but an arrangement by which all local firms can participate to their advantage.

There are philosophical and practical issues concerning our practice rules that restrict property selling at present.

If we are to decide that we should act to encourage this activity and regulate with a light hand only, now is the time to do it.

The slump in the property market, from which we now appear to be emerging, means that consumers have less strong ties of loyalty with estate agents, so the opportunity to seek to be the first point of call for the house-buying public is there.

I believe that we must find the means to open the door to it.

We are moving with unaccustomed haste -- the Council will be asked to make decisions on this next week.As we all discovered last year, there is no easy answer on the troubled issue of conveyancing fees.

One approach is for us to attempt to put clear water between professional, high-service solicitors and low-cost, low-service operators.

To do this, we have to demonstrate to consumers that there is a difference between the two, and that the fee charged should recognise the value of the service provided.

The Society has to play an active part -- with the profession -- in educating the public and in ensuring transparency so that consumers understand exactly what they are paying for.

We continue to strive for agreement on this issue with the major lenders.ADVOCACY RIGHTSOur colleagues in the Crown Prosecution Service, local government and the employed sector generally see the extension of rights of audience to them as an essential confirmation of their equal status within the profession.

They have had the unswerving support of the Society in this cause and I am increasingly hopeful that the Lord Chancellor will soon announce a decision and that it will be the right one.

We have high expectations too that our recent representations to the Lord Chancellor's advisory committee will result in a relaxation of the unduly harsh criteria for solicitors who seek higher court rights of audience.LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIPSThe prospect of Armageddon-level claims is a real threat to the peace of mind of the individual solicitor -- whether the particular vision of Armageddon is represented by the odd million or a few billion! Since taking office, I have pursued a serious interest in the possibility of limited liability partnerships.

I would like to see the Society adopt a benevolent attitude -- not a restrictive one -- to this concept.CYBER SOLICITORSIn the international arena, I have met with European and north American Bar leaders in support of the activities of our international committee in pressing for greater freedom for solicitors to practise within Europe, across the Atlantic and in the Far East.

Few of you will be aware of the potential opportunity created by the new concept of cyber-solicitors.

The authentication and execution of international transactions to be conducted in cyber-space has important implications for us.

There are threats as well as opportunities and the policy committee last week grasp ed this issue and has accorded it the priority it requires.Property transactions in cyberspace! The industrial age is coming to an end.

The information age is upon us.

Are we, as a profession, prepared for it and is the Law Society doing enough to help? Since 1985, homes and offices in the UK have added 1.7 million fax machines.

In the same period, world-wide e-mail addresses have grown to a staggering 40 million.

Many in the profession have only just about caught up with the word processor and fax revolution.

As a profession that pre-eminently relies on communication, we cannot afford to be left behind.The Law Society must help those in the profession who are less able to adapt.

We are receiving enthusiastic reports from the first firm piloting the HSSK (the High Street Starter Kit) and five others are about to join the pilot project.

Now, for those of you sitting there glazing over at the very mention of the word 'technology' and thinking it has nothing to do with you, pause for a moment.

Have you seen the progress the Land Registry is making? It will not be long before you will only be able to conduct a conveyancing transaction if you are on-line to the registry.NEW MANAGEMENTThis magnificent hall is, of course, itself a temple to technology.

I have been here once before since it opened last month.

It was on the occasion of the annual gathering of the Lada Owners Club.

The invitations were 7.30pm for 11pm.But you notice that I use a Lada as the subject of that joke.

Whatever happened to Skoda jokes? Whether on television or an after-dinner speech, no stand-up comedian's routine was complete without a Skoda joke -- some repeatable, others not.

All that has changed.

Why?-- The company has undergone change at the hands of new management (Volkswagen).-- Customers perceive the need for, and results of, these changes.-- Skodas are not funny any more.Perhaps there is a parallel there for us.

The Law Society is under new management.

Our customers -- the profession and our clients -- see the need for change.

When they observe the results, the improved reputation of the Law Society -- and with it, of the profession -- will be the effective riposte to those anti-lawyer jokes.This is in many ways an odd and confusing time for the profession.

For some, the opportunity for reward and wealth has never been greater, yet for more it is a time of great stress and real financial difficulty.

What compounds the stress for those struggling hard to make a living is that we can no longer take for granted the respect traditionally given to the professions.

We have seen the end of the deference culture.UNITYTo overcome the challenges we face, one thing is clear: as a profession we have to work together.

I know that recent events have tended to drive the profession apart.

There has sometimes been a tendency for people to take sides; for the profession to be polarised into opposing camps; for those who like conflict it perhaps provides some amusement.

It certainly provides plenty of ammunition for those who want to attack the profession.

But it is madness for us to continue like that and it has to stop.

I believe that the great majority of the profession wants to see an end to it.

My job, I believe, is to represent the whole profession -- those who didn't vote for me as well as those who did -- and to work all the hours I can to improve the standing of the whole profession and to fight for the interests of the whole profession.This is of course a massive task, but I am extremely fortunate to have the support of Phillip Sycamore, the Vice-President, and Michael Mathews, the Deputy Vice-President, and I thank them for standing and serving with me.

I have inherited an administration in which, for a few months, some very experienced sources of advice are missing.

This is the first conference for a long time at which the President has not benefited from the counsel and support of John Hayes, Walter Merricks, Andrew Lockley and Sue Stapely.

I did not always agree with them on everything but I admired their ability -- I would like to take this opportunity to thank them publicly for all their work over many years for the profession.There are only three ways to deal with these new challenges we face.

One is to shrug our shoulders and hope they will go away.The second, which is in truth a variant of the first, is to shout and stamp, say it is not fair and to demand that the public look up to us and treat us with respect.

The third is to draw on the traditional strengths of the profession to earn that respect.

The third way is my way.

And it is to that end that I dedicate myself for so long as I remain in office.

I am proud to be a solicitor, I am very, very proud to be President of your Society.

I pledge myself to fight for the reputation of us all on behalf of the whole profession.

With a strong reputation we can approach the millennium with confidence.