Q: What is your reaction to the government's announcement that it is to ask management consultants to assess how law firms might restructure their practices to fit in with the implementation of the Lord Chancellor's legal aid and civil justice reforms?A: What is astonishing about the government's approach to these proposals is that -- having announced the timetable -- it says that it intends to see whether there is evidence to support the assumption that the proposals will work.

It is also astonishing that no work has been done with the insurance companies.

There is no evidence to suggest that any insurance company is willing to take on these [conditional fee] cases.It is a matter of great concern that a policy programme which involves the dismantling of the legal aid scheme and a major restructuring of civil justice is being approached with such indecent haste.

The solicitors' profession has willingly acknowledged that change is inevitable and solicitors are prepared to view that change as an opportunity and not as a threat and to work to make that change successful.

After all, if something is good for the consumer, then it ought to be good for lawyers as well.But what I find disconcerting is the fact that these major proposals have been put forward without the necessary research being done.

It seems unfair to extend the range of conditional fees -- which is good news for the middle income groups, there's no doubt about that -- but at the same time almost certainly to exclude [from legal aid] the sort of people who would not be able to enter into those types of agreements with their solicitors.

Very often those are the most vulnerable people in society.

The point that must be made consistently is that this is not a debate about lawyers' fees, but about the rights of ordinary people.Q: The government's timetable is tight with implementation of two of the main proposals flagged up for April 1998.

How do you envisage the campaign against the reforms will develop?A: There will be a hard-hitting campaign.

It has to be high-profile and it will only work if the legal profession as a whole campaigns, not just those who have an interest in legal aid.

Anyone who has a view about a fair and compassionate society should want to ensure these proposals do not come into effect.I want the Law Society to ensure there is proper information and back-up provided to both local law societies and individual solicitors.

The important people to get the message across to are MPs.

They must understand what the impact of these changes will be on their own constituents.

That will involve solicitors speaking to MPs and encouraging their clients to speak to their MPs.

We need to have examples of cases which demonstrate just how dramatic the effects of these changes will be -- cases which couldn't have got off the ground without legal aid.Also, MPs need to understand that solicitors up and down the country are major employers.

If the result of these propo sals is that large numbers of firms go out of business, as I believe they will, then that is going to create unemployment.

And if you break down the network of solicitors' firms around the country, then what happens to access to justice?Q: Will there be a set-piece event to highlight the protest against the proposals?A: I would not exclude the possibility of a major conference.

It may well be that a major event held with the consumer groups will be an essential part of the campaign.Q: You and the Law Society policy committee have had early sight of the Appleby committee's recommendations for the future of the Solicitors Indemnity Fund.

When will the report be published?A: A hugh amount of work has been put into the report.

The review group has met 12 times and John Appleby, its chairman, estimates he has devoted about 500 hours to it.

Its recommendations will merit careful consideration.Mr Appleby told the policy committee that while an initial draft had been prepared, there was still some work required during December and that the final report would not be available for debate by the Council until its 22 January 1998 meeting.Q: Will the wider profession have a chance to contribute to the debate once the report has been published? And what are your views regarding recent suggestions by the 'November Group' of large commercial firms that they are seriously considering dropping out of the SIF and seeking cover on the open market?A: The proposals will go to consultation with the profession.

We will need to look carefully at the best method of consulting.

It might require more than a questionnaire and papers going out in the post.Instead we might have to be more sophisticated in our approach, perhaps by doing presentations around the country to inform the profession and receive feedback.

Regarding the November Group, I am pleased they are willing to await the outcome of the Appleby report before committing to any course of action.Q: Progress of the Human Rights Bill through Parliament has thrown a bright light on the issue of civil liberties.

Will incorporation of the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law impact on all solicitors?A: Firms need to have an awareness of the implications of the incorporation of the ECHR on every aspect of law on which they are advising.

It will add a new dimension to the way in which a number of cases is resolved.