Modernising silk

In its current form, the annual process of appointing Queen's Counsel is always going to involve a high degree of subjectivity.

The Office of Fair Trading recognises this, as does the Law Society.

Law firms acknowledge this and it is probably a good bet that most silks would recognise that whether some barristers are made up or some are not can be the result of many unmeasurable factors.

The only people who appear not to acknowledge this fact are the senior members of the Bar Council and the Lord Chancellor himself.

However, some progress is being made.

The secret soundings are not cloaked in as much darkness as they were a few years ago.

Now applicants can tap into the Lord Chancellor's Department's Web site and peruse the vast list of consultees who will be approached to give a thumbs up or down to their applications.

Law firms were only added to the list three years ago, which, in itself, is an indication of how outdated the system had become.

Heads of litigation at major litigation specialist practices are best placed to assess advocates, as they are barristers' main clients.

Law firms should not have been added as an afterthought.

We report this week that several obvious litigation specialist law firms have been left off the list of consultees.

That is important, but it is clearly not the main issue.

The QC system is now subject to the LCD consultation on the professions in the light of OFT criticisms.

The government and the legal profession still have to modernise the badge of silk so that it appears to the public - the lay clients - as more than just old boys' club reward.