Government plans to modernise legal services could be undermined by a potential threat to the profession's independence, the Law Society warned this week.

It came as Chancery Lane launched its 'Have your say' consultation, seeking solicitors' views on the future shape of its representative functions. A copy is in this week's Gazette.


While generally supporting much of the White Paper on the future of legal services - such as the office for legal complaints, alternative business structures and bringing unregulated providers within the regulatory net - the Society's response warned of the dangers of ministers making appointments themselves to key positions or changing regulatory objectives through secondary legislation.


Concern centred on the proposed legal services board (LSB), which would assume the oversight responsibilities currently spread around a number of bodies. It would have the regulatory powers now vested in the frontline regulators (FLRs), such as the Law Society and Bar Council, to delegate back down.


The response complained: 'As currently described in the White Paper, the powers and role of the LSB appear to be based on an assumption that the FLRs cannot be trusted. We do not think such an assumption is justified - particularly in the light of the separation of the regulatory from representative roles.'


Emphasising the importance of being clear that primary responsibility for regulation would rest with FLRs, and that the LSB should operate in a light-touch way, the Society said regulatory powers should be vested in the FLRs, and the LSB's ability to remove them limited.


Doing this would both ensure independence and avoid the costs of a potential duplication of regulation. It would also remove the risk that a perceived lack of independence could damage the profession's international interests.


The Society opposed appointments to the LSB being made by the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs alone, calling instead for a joint decision by the minister and Lord Chief Justice, based on advice from a high-level independent panel. The government, not lawyers, should foot the bill for the LSB, it added.


Despite an emphasis on consumers, it said the regulatory regime also had to cater for corporate and public sector clients, and warned that if it became too burdensome, clients may look elsewhere and some City-headquartered global law firms may even consider moving overseas.


President Kevin Martin said: 'We have long promoted the need for a more consumer-focused legal services market and greater flexibility for lawyers in running their businesses to meet consumers' needs. But we do not want the reforms to be overshadowed by disagreements over the level of government influence over the legal profession.'


On 'Have your say', Mr Martin added: 'It is an exciting time as we create a reinvigorated Law Society that represents the interests of members with fresh commitment and focus. We want to offer services that solicitors want and to make a difference on the issues that really matter to the profession.'


Links: www.haveyoursaylawsociety.org.uk or see the pull-out in this issue of the Gazette


www.lawsociety.org.uk for the full response to the White Paper