The Legal Services Commission's stance on reaccreditation is to be greatly welcomed. and it is perhaps the first clear evidence of Sir Michael Bichard's promise to listen to the profession and work in partnership with its suppliers (see (2006) Gazette, 17 August, 4).



At the same time, the entire debacle over reaccreditation illustrates that post-Clement review regulation may be conducted in a climate of aggression towards the legal profession, instead of being founded on clear evidence-based risk. It is sad that the Law Society Regulation Board failed to recognise that criminal lawyers in this country provide first-class legal services that are the envy of every other civilised nation. That we do so for rates of remuneration set as low as they are is nothing short of a miracle.



Andrew Keogh, Tuckers, Manchester