There is not much of London you cannot see from Matthew Ives' old 15th-floor office in Westminster City Council.

There is even a tabloid telephotographer's dream view of Buckingham Palace's back garden.But this month he left his eyrie to become director of professional conduct at the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Moorgate, succeeding fellow lawyer Brian Harris QC.Mr Ives was articled at the London borough of Waltham Forest, and stayed for seven years before filling the deputy borough solicitor's shoes at Haringey Council in 1980.He moved to Westminster two years later, and was promoted to city solicitor in 1985, taking the additional duties of secretary in 1987.

During Mr Ives' time with the authority, Lady, now Dame, Shirley Porter, leader of the city council from July 1983 to March 1991, kept Westminster in the news.

Among council policies that drew media and public attention was the sale of three council-owned cemeteries in north London for 15p.

How does a big-name authority like Westminster find itself in a tight spot over such issues?'I think the problems come where perhaps the planning has not been as thorough as it might have been,' explains Mr Ives.

'Therefore you are not able at the outset to have the overview that is necessary to give that sort of [comprehensive legal] advice, and I think probably the cemeteries issue is one of those.'Ironically, the sale of the cemeteries was one of the council's first experiences of using external lawyers.

The council has now negotiated the repurchase of the cemetery sites.

'I don't think it is something that will come back to haunt us.'One issue which, only last week, came back to haunt them is the council's 'designated sales' policy of allegedly putting vacant council properties in marginal wards on the market to encourage home ownership -- and, the theory went, Tory votes.

The preliminary findings of district auditor John Magill, of accountants Touche Ross, were that the six councillors and four officers, including former deputy city solicitor Robert Lewis, were guilty of gerrymandering at an estimated cost of £21 million.Speaking about the designated sales policy before the publication of Mr Magill's findings, Mr Ives said: 'In legal terms, there is absolutely no reason why the authority, properly directed, could not have done all of the things it has done.

The allegations are based fundamentally on the suggestion that certain councillors directed themselves to irrelevant considerations, to the exclusion of important housing and planning issues.'Mr Ives says 'strong nerves' are needed to cope with the City solicitor post: 'The very fact of being located at the heart of the capital city is bound to produce legal issues which are not met elsewhere.'Indeed, Westminster has acted as something of a lead authority for the London Boroughs Association, frequently testing legal points in the High Court on behalf of boroughs across London, as well as promoting local government legislation for London.The legal department has moved from being, in management terms, one of the most antediluvian in local government to being one of the most advanced.

It was the first to take the LEXIS legal information service, is on its third set of office software, and led the way in implementing IT-based fee charging.

'That has actually become a management tool, and we now have a proper caseload management system, which I think any authority of any size will find vital if it is going to continue to provide legal services.'A major factor for change is the announcement that 45% of legal departments' work will have to be subjected to compulsory competitive tendering (CCT).

Particularly controversial has been the recent report of consultants Coopers & Lybrand on the subject (see [1993] Gazette, 24 November, 8).To an extent, Mr Ives accepts Coopers' central message of a diminishing role for in-house departments.

But he insists that is not a counsel of despair.'There are some areas where local authorities do have particular skills, for which, certainly as yet, there is no developed mar ket in the private sector...I am confident that there is certain to be a future for local government lawyers...I don't think it will ever be the case that local authorities will be able to do without in-house counsel at a high level...being creatures of statute, it seems to me that that role is an essential one, and will continue to be so...'Westminster City Council has already put itself through several rounds of voluntary competitive tendering for legal services? What tips does Mr Ives offer for authorities limbering up for CCT?'Don't delay.

There is no substitute for making sure that the systems are effective and that steps have been taken to ensure that quality is of the required level...it is very important to keep your client departments involved in the process, and to ensure that you know where elements of dissatisfaction exist so that you can correct weaknesses.

Without doing that, I think you are on a losing wicket.'Legal departments could consider implementing BS5750, but Mr Ives doubts whether spending council taxpayers' money on full blown accreditation is worth it.

As to the future legal structure of local government, he foresees a growing tendency towards cabinet style political management from a number of quarters.

The development, he argues, reinforces the point that quality, in-house legal advice is going to be at a premium for some time to come.

'There are real dangers...If you take the view that lawyers need not be part of the decision-making process, that is how you build in the very problems of the sort that we would all want to avoid.

It reinforces my point that lawyers need to be at the centre of events to be able to tender advice -- not to dictate how the authority should go, but to be sure that it keeps on the tracks.'Of his move to the chartered accountants he says: 'The job is an almost unique opportunity to blend legal and managerial skills other than in a local authority environment.'