Why does a person become a politician? Why do Margaret Beckett, John Prescott or Tony Blair want to be leader of the opposition? Why did John Major want to be our prime minister, and does he enjoy it?I assume all of them have a sense of duty, of service and a desire to be involved and contribute.

There may be a personal sense of fulfilment; it may be an ego trip.

Their families, no doubt, support them - at what cost? They have to work in a team made up of elected members and bureaucrats, they represent a local constituency in a national position.

Many find themselves out in the cold and have to build a new life.

A week in politics may be a long time.I am coming to the end of my year.

Is there an analogy between the President of the Law Society and the leader of a political party? Is it a conceit even to suggest there are similarities? Of course, the analogy breaks down, but I do feel there are similarities and lessons to teach one another.At the end of my year, I may feel less inhibited and may wish to contribute a little more to the debates that affect our profession.

After 11 months as President and two previous years as deputy and vice that occupied most of my time, I am tired and looking forward to a holiday without meeting too many fine solicitors.I am often asked if I have enjoyed my year.

I do not have the right to enjoy it.

Some Presidents have obviously enjoyed it.

I have found it stimulating and would do it again even with the benefit of hindsight, but I have found it difficult.

I do, however, have a tremendous pr ide in our profession and in the overwhelming numbers of solicitors who serve this country so well.Two weeks ago I attended the Pembrokeshire Law Society dinner.

A woman solicitor spoke to me about the great sense of honour she has daily in representing her clients and serving the community.

She was not British, left school at 15 and, as a single parent, set about qualifying as a solicitor.

A great desire was to do her job well and it showed.Last week I had lunch with three senior partners from one of the leading London firms.

Their social conscience shone through; one is a Council member who has one of the more onerous and difficult jobs on the Council.During the same week, senior Council members and I interviewed several candidates to fill the international seat on the Council.

They all had a great deal to offer and were prepared to assist the profession at considerable cost to their firms and themselves.I do not believe a year is long enough to be President.

I have no doubt my successors will improve on my contribution, but knowing your way around and having the knowledge and wisdom to contribute really only comes to fruition in the presidential period.

The fact is that any longer period would make it even more difficult to return to your practice.My partners have been marvellous.

I have been away during the three most difficult years the profession has experienced.

It is not just the loss of fee-earning for most firms which produce the President but, perhaps more importantly, the loss of their presence and contribution.When I became President there was already a decision to pay the President.

The subsequent debate suggested a backdating which, if correct, would have been abhorrent to me.

I and my colleagues indicated we would not, therefore, seek a payment this year.I can now say, therefore, with total disinterest, that if the firms of future Presidents are not paid, only the largest or most profitable firms are likely to allow their partners to occupy high office.

It is vital that we continue to have a mix of Presidents from the small as well as the large firms and these Presidents must feel able to give their whole attention to the profession.My wife, Patricia, has helped me more than most people can know.

It has been our daughter's GCSE year, so I have been living in London and my family in Manchester.

Patricia has turned up whenever the call has come.

How pleasant it will be to be together again after July.I have enjoyed going out to meet the profession and I thank the practitioners up and down England and Wales for their very great kindness, friendship and professionalism.It has been a confrontational year on a number of fronts.

Hardly an informed voice has been raised against the confrontation we and I have been having with the government.

This is not a party political confrontation, but the taking to task of a government that undervalues justice, access to it and the providers of it.I do recall one voice suggesting I have not been consistent in my attacks, which raised a wry comment from a senior member of the Law Society that we were all in danger of being repetitious.We have just had yet another example of Michael Howard's blindness and insensitivity over the CICB.

Thank heavens again for the House of Lords.

How I wish the Lord Chancellor would come with me along the road to Damascus.During the last 20 years or so I have wanted to see a number of legal changes.

many have come to pass, some of them during the last two years.I did not start this year with a number of goals that would be easily ac hieved.

That is not the way I work.

I did want to change a few things but, more importantly, I wanted the Law Society to identify and consolidate where it was going and I wanted to be part of that continuum.

The staff are committed to that process and under the Secretary-General and with the guidance of the Council and the profession are, I think, achieving a great deal.We must not be complacent, and I know the profession wishes to be very actively involved in its future.

My successors are very anxious to listen and also to lead.

I wish them and the profession every success.