In April 1966 Sir Thomas Lund, my illustrious predecessor, set out his vision of the future in a lecture published in the Gazette.

Sir Thomas foresaw a shift in the solicitors' profession from non-contentious to commercial work, increased specialisation, multi-disciplinary practices, the demise of the sole practitioner, and an increase in the number of solicitors involved in foreign legal work and the survival of the independent Bar.Although the profession has changed in many of the ways that Sir Thomas predicted, it has done so in a piecemeal and fragmented fashion, with no great confidence about where it is heading.

Thirty years later, what Sir Thomas regarded as natural and beneficial developments are still viewed with suspicion, hostility, even incredulity by many practitioners.I do not claim Sir Thomas' formidable powers of prediction, but over the next ten years I foresee:-- a gradual reduction in high street outlets, especially among those unable to invest in new technology and new services, those who attempt to compete solely on price, those who do not embrace modern management standards and those who do not take seriously client care;-- that legal aid work will continue to be worthwhile for those who organise themselves properly;-- that efficient high street lawyers will do well from greater freedom to associate with surveyors and accountants if a relaxation occurs in professional rules;-- that the major City firms will thrive, but there will be a bleaker future for second and third-tier firms, unable to establish their excellence in specific areas;-- that major accountancy firms will make further inroads into legal services, but this will tend to improve the career prospects of individual lawyers.

The major City firms will not feel compelled to throw in their lot with accountants;-- that a minority of solicitors will acquire and use advocacy rights;-- that there will be comparatively fewer equity partners and more paralegals.Client careThe Law Society's attempt to encourage quite basic client care behaviour has met considerable resistance.

Giving more information about charging and explaining how to take up complaints within a firm are ideas which are taking considerable time to catch on.

Practice management standards dealing with modern business planning are regarded as intrusive forms of unnecessary regulation, albeit they are voluntary, and would be treated as a sine qua non in any successful business.There are respects, however, in which the solicitors' profession is different from most businesses.

Its members underwrite for clients' losses caused by the negligence and dishonesty of others, including their competitors.I foresee in the next few years a gradual alignment of the cost of providing indemnity cover with the risk that different types of practice, with varying track records, present.Legal aidI have no reservations about the need for legal aid reform.

This means that some practices, unwilling to change their ways, lose out, and we should not be surprised.

The number of outlets must not be reduced so as to give the public no real convenient choice: equally, the criteria for be ing able to conduct legal aid work must be reasonable.I can see the case for there being standard tariffs for certain types of cases, adjusted to take into account regional variation in cost, for most work.

Firms would be required to conduct client satisfaction surveys, viewable by the board, and would be subject to random peer review checks on a very small sample of cases to ascertain whether there were any clear deficiencies in the quality of legal advice offered by the firm.

There would be awards for firms which found innovative ways of meeting the need for legal services.Multi-disciplinary practicesSir Thomas Lund's suggestion in 1966 that solicitors might form partnerships with members of other professions alarmed members of the Law Society's Council.

His early retirement from what he had regarded as a job for life quickly ensued.

The debate is now back on the agenda.

The Labour party says that once in power it would introduce legislation to permit multi-disciplinary practices.My own view is that this highly complex area should be treated as a question of consumer protection and professional development.

I do not think that professional bodies should be forced into underwriting the activities of non-members, especially where Parliament has said that some activities must be reserved to members of recognised professional regulatory bodies.

I can see, however, members of different professions and institutions working together to provide other services, providing it is made clear to clients that those entities are not regulated by any professional body, and that they are not underwritten by statutory forms of consumer protection.AdvocacySince Sir Thomas made his predictions, the Bar has expanded from 2239 members in 1966 to 8727 in 1996.

I do not believe that the future of the Bar would be that much threatened by opening up rights of audience in all courts to all solicitors.

I would oppose it, however, unless it was accompanied by stricter requirements, with regard to the initial and continuing education of all solicitor advocates.Partners and paralegalsMy view is that the current obsession with reaching and retaining equity partnership status undermines the sensible use of resources and a more realistic order is now painfully needed.

New technology will inevitably cause some job losses, as will a reduction in transactional work.

Paralegals will have an enhanced role.Foreign workWe estimate that more than 1300 solicitors practise abroad while English solicitors contribute around £500m to the country's invisible earnings.

Moreover, this success has been achieved while operating a liberal regime for lawyers coming into this country.All this makes more galling the snail-like progress of the European Directive on the rights of lawyers from one European country to establish their firms in another.

I estimate we would now do well if our case went to the European court in Luxemburg.