Peter Goldsmith, at 44, will be the youngest Bar Chairman and, if the commentators are to be believed, one of the brightest.

'He has a 150 watt brain - one of the sharpest minds at the Bar,' said one City solicitor who has seen him in action.Mr Goldsmith certainly excelled academically: a double first in law from Cambridge followed by a first in Bar finals in 1972.

And he is regarded as one of the foremost commercial silks, best known for his role in the landmark House of Lords decision on liability of auditors, Caparo v Dickman, where he represented the successful accountants.'Serious' and 'meticulous' are other words that crop up to describe him.

And those who have watched his political ascent at the Bar are impressed with his integrity.

'He is a person who doesn't play political games and manages to hide the [Bar's] intellectual arrogance most of the time,' said one observer.

Dynamic and forward-thinking in many ways, Mr Goldsmith has nonetheless a strongly conservative streak, leaning away from liberal policies like direct access and partnerships.Mr Goldsmith sees himself as a doer rather than a talker and intends to spend his term of office seeing through some fundamental changes.

Last year the Bar went in for a major soul searching session with a working party under Lord Alexander of Weedon looking at standards, and a 'think tank' under James Munby QC looking at working practices.The upshot of all this was a raft of recommendations ranging from a new complaints-handling procedure to an end to the monopoly held by the Inns of Court school of law in providing the one year vocational course for future barristers.Mr Goldsmith is particularly committed to introducing a system to deal with shoddy work although he has no illusions about the potential level of resistance to this within the Bar.

'These will be controversial proposals to get accepted but my strong belief is that we have to introduce a system which provides some redress for work which is not of the standard we expect, but which falls short of disciplinary misconduct.'The Bar faces a particular challenge in setting up a complaints-handling structure because of the cost burdens it could impose on a tiny profession and because it is largely concerned with contested litigation.

For a body whose total income is less than the surplus run by the Law Society last year, a complaints-handling system along the lines suggested by Lord Alexander (akin to the Solicitors Complaints Bureau) could be an intolerable load.The second problem stems from the contested nature of the Bar's work: 'On the law of averages, 50% of clients are always going to be dissatisfied and [it must be] considered to what e xtent there would be a disproportionate number of complaints from people who are simply unhappy because they have lost their case,' says Mr Goldsmith.However, despite the difficulties, his goal is to have a new system in place by January 1996.The Bar's period of frank introspection was in response to the competitive challenges it faces from all sides - from solicitors, accountants and, perhaps, other new breeds of legal adviser in the future.

One observer described Mr Goldsmith as 'the epitome of the sort of barrister who has nothing to fear from the changes [because his Fountain Court Chambers] has responded to the demands of modern legal practice.'But Mr Goldsmith believes that, with the right approach, any barrister can thrive.

'I don't believe that any barrister who does the job that barristers do, and does it well, has anything to fear.' Over and over again during this interview, Mr Goldsmith spoke of the Bar having to be 'effective, efficient and competitive'.The problems facing the young Bar were brought home to him forcibly as chairman of a special working party on the subject in 1993.Three things must be done to help, he says.

The first is to ensure competition is fair.

Mr Goldsmith points out that the Bar won the day to level the field with solicitors in relation to standard fees in the magistrates' courts and will hold out for the same in the Crown court.

The two other things to be done are to let clients know what the choices are when selecting an advocate.

And to inform both solicitors and clients about the services provided by the Bar and what it charges for them.

Mr Goldsmith hopes that more flexible charging methods will become more common before long.As far as choice of advocate is concerned, Mr Goldsmith also hopes solicitors will act scrupulously fairly when making recommendations to clients.Professional sloppiness and rudeness have been cited as the two main reasons why solicitors blacklist barristers.

And Mr Goldsmith is the first to admit that some amongst his brethren take too cavalier an approach to the delivery of their services, turning up late for conferences and failing to deal promptly with paperwork.Taking the magistrates' court example, Mr Goldsmith acknowledges that solicitors are turning increasingly to freelance solicitor advocates rather than barristers.

'To the extent that it may be because they are more experienced and doing a better job [freelancers] are entitled to get the work.

But we shouldn't let them get the work simply because they are offering the service on a more convenient basis.'Mr Goldsmith believes the Bar can improve through better work systems, and this week he will unveil a management training scheme specifically tailored for chambers.

Work will also begin on devising practice management standards early next year.In the same vein, Mr Goldsmith attaches great importance to establishing clear working relationships with solicitors.

'We need to understand what they expect from us in terms of working practices and they need to know what we expect from them.'