Someone once said that a week is a long time in politics.

The three meetings I attended on con secutive days a few weeks ago highlighted the various challenges of a week in the life of a Law Society President.The first event, was the special general meeting at Chancery Lane to deal with the next stage of the efforts the Law Society Council has made this year to deliver the reforms that will make a difference to the Society for the benefit of its members.The issues were so important that, at the outset of the meeting, I announced a postal ballot of all members of the profession.

About 100 members turned up to discuss and vote on the issues that have taken so long to get this far.

The first two resolutions -- to increase the size of council to 100 (maximum 120) and to introduce up to 5% lay membership of council -- were both passed but not quite with the sufficient two-thirds majority.

However, they are still live resolutions that the profession will be able to decide on by postal ballot.The third resolution -- to allow representation on the council for trainee solicitors and legal practice course students -- was passed by a two-thirds majority.

The postal ballot on these resolutions will be conducted shortly and I hope that you will take the time to vote in favour of the motions so that we have a truly representative council that, in particular, enfranchises trainee solicitors and legal practice course students, who have a future stake in the profession.After lengthy debates on resolutions one to three, numbers had dwindled as the afternoon progressed and the debate on resolution four -- proposing changes to arrangements for electing officeholders -- was not put to a vote as the meeting became inquorate.

These changes would have enabled the enlarged council to act as an electoral college for the election each year of a deputy-vice president, who would normally go on to serve as vice president and then president, rather than having an annual ballot of all members for the officeholder posts.I am, naturally, disappointed that it is unlikely that we will be able to make this change this year.

However, I intend to bring it forward again at the earliest opportunity.

In the meantime, I ask for your vote in favour on the other aspects of reform.After that disappointment, it was a breath of fresh air the next day to give the welcome address to the first World Women Lawyers Conference held in London and organised by the International Bar Association, whose president is Dianna Kempe QC.

Some 900 women lawyers from around the world gathered to discuss the global issues that affect lawyers in all jurisdictions, particularly the role of women lawyers involved in the fight for fundamental freedoms in countries where the rule of law depends on lawyers fighting oppressive regimes.What an unfortunate advertisement it was for our legal system that I had to apologise to the delegates that their arrival in London had coincided with a stinging attack by our own Home Secretary, Jack Straw, on criminal defence lawyers.

Luckily, like the rest of the audience, I was then able to listen to a most inspiring speech from South Africa's Ambassador in London, Cheryl Carolus, who told us she had been at the prison gates when Nelson Mandela was released, and that until 1994 she did not even have the right to vote.Ending the week on a crescendo, the next day saw the national meeting of 1,000 criminal defence solicitors at the NEC in Birmingham.

Not surprisingly, Mr Straw's remarks had intensified the anger of hard- working criminal defence solicitors, frustrated by a pay freeze for the past eight years, and struggling to decide whether the complex proposed contract was a good or a bad deal for their firms.The strength of feeling was palpable and, as expected from criminal advocates, the speeches were impressive.

Having been a criminal defence advocate for nearly ten years, I know well that this is a group of practitioners that has a strong collective bond.

They stood fast on the day and passed a resolution, reaffirming the Law Society Council's advice not to sign the contract.Anyone who suggests that the Society is incapable of exercising its trade union role on behalf of the profession should have been at the NEC.

For several weeks, the Society through its negotiating group in conjunction with the Criminal Law Solicitors Association, the London Criminal Courts Solicitors Association, the Legal Aid Practitioners Group and the officeholders had held the line.

The resolve of the NEC meeting precipitated further crisis negotiations last week, leading to last-minute concessions.

As a result, the negotiating group then unanimously decided that, although not perfect, the best terms possible had been extracted and that the 'don't sign' recommendation should be withdrawn.Now many firms that were worried about losing their police station duty rota slots and about their cash flow during April can sign the contract knowing that their collective stand has helped produce the best possible deal, with the additional safeguard of a new Law Society/Legal Services Commission/Lord Chancellor's Department joint monitoring committee to keep the contract terms and funding structure under constant review.Even though I was disappointed with the pace of progress at the SGM, I was buoyed by the atmosphere at the women lawyers' conference and the high note that ended the criminal contracts meeting.