Steven Burkeman is right to call for a formal separation between the Law Society's public regulatory responsibilities and its obligations as a private representative association (see [2004] Gazette, 5 February, 4).

Some years ago, as a newly elected Law Society Council member, I campaigned to bring about such a split.

A referendum in 1995 showed that almost 40% of the profession was in favour of separation.

But we lost the vote.

I suspect that the position today would be different and that a majority would no longer support the status quo.

Public interest requires that the solicitors' profession is properly regulated in an open and transparent way.

Professional interest deserves enlightened representation so that practitioners can have confidence in their future.

Too often the council becomes confused when considering major policy issues.

The referral fee debate is a case in point.

Was the vote taken by members acting in the public interest or in furtherance of sectional interest and undue influence on the part of the Office of Fair Trading?

It is to be hoped that the Clementi review will examine the institutional schizophrenia that has hindered the proper governance and legitimate representation of the profession in recent years - so that we can build a structure that will have the support of both the public and their lawyers.

Anthony Bogan, Law Society Council member, Surrey