The return of Parliament for a new session marks the start of another political year.

It is not likely to be a year with heavy legislation directly affecting the profession.

I do welcome the commitment to establish a review body for criminal cases.

But it seems, if press reports are accurate, that we shall see activity in respect of legal aid and possibly divorce reform.

Last year we had a green paper on divorce and the next stage would normally be a white paper setting out the government's proposals having considered the responses.

Thos e of us who have experience of dealing with divorce cases will welcome proposals which will reduce bitterness and conflict.Mediation and conciliation can often help, but it is essential that before starting this process, advice from experienced lawyers should be available.

So often it is necessary to make enquiries about income and capital, mediation is pointless until there has been full disclosure.

It is equally important that advice is also taken after the mediation process.

Too often one party will give way due to the overbearing character of the other party.

The result may be 'an agreement', but it will increase, not reduce, bitterness and do nothing to ensure justice.

It is easy to find solutions which will reduce the involvement of lawyers, but at what cost to justice?Legal aid too is all about access to justice.

What use are rights if there are no means of enforcing and defending them? We should concentrate our powers on reducing the complexity of cases.

This will help all clients equally.No doubt in support of changes to legal aid we shall be told the cost is spiralling out of control.

Is this correct? There has always been control, the Legal Aid Board and courts have always had the power to fix rates and to disallow unnecessary work.

Lawyers do not grant legal aid certificates, that is for the board or court.

Nor do we have power to incur disbursements without the authority of the board.

So how could it be said that the bill is out of control?The truth is that courts and the board, which broadly follow the decisions of the courts, fixed rates which they believed were fair and reasonable but which the Lord Chancellor's Department did not like.

So now all rates are fixed by the LCD.

This, together with the impact of standard fees has led to a reduction in the unit cost of criminal cases in the magistrates' courts.

Similar results will follow in civil cases due to the reduction in average rates in February.

These will take time to come through due to the long time from the start of a case until payment.

There is no case for looking for further controls to solicitors' costs.Unless the Lord Chancellor wishes to restrict legal aid eligibility further, he would best reduce the cost of his budget by consulting his colleagues.

Actions on their part can increase the legal aid budget, for example, the changes to the right to silence will lead to more police station calls and more arguments in court and hence increased cost.

Closure of courts also leads to increased travelling time and expenses.

Recovery from recession and reduction in unemployment will reduce the cost.Our Council and committees are now into their cycle of meetings.

The standing committees of the Council are concerned with major policy issues, such as conveyancing and legal aid.

We also have specialist committees concerned with all major areas of practice.

The standing committees generally have a majority of Council members, but the specialist committees a majority of non-Council members.The work of these committees is mainly law reform.

The revenue law committee produces a report each year, very often highly technical, for the chancellor of the exchequer.The company law committee, having pressed successfully for a review of company law, is working with the DTI and other professions and interest groups to carry this out.The family law and criminal law committees are more visible because the work they do is more likely to attract media attention.

But what these and the other committees have in common is a commitment to improve and simplify the law.

We s hould not underestimate the public demand for this, as exemplified by members of a business club I addressed last week.These were intelligent men and women who understood that we lawyers were not responsible for the law and procedures we have to operate.

They were asking us to use our experience to bring about improvements.

I was able to tell them that we try to do this.Politicians should listen to this.

There are votes in improving the law if that means making it more understandable.

MPs should also note the anger of this group at the complexities of legislation and the failure to find time to enact non-party political Bills which would make a businessperson's life easier.We, the members of the Law Society, will have the opportunity next year to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the grant of our royal charter.

We must use this to tell the public, in co-operation with the Bar and Lord Chancellor's Department, more about the legal system and how it works.

We are planning a national law week in May (22 to 28) which will be the focus of our plans.

I hope that in the spring the Galleries for Justice in Nottingham will be opened.

This project deserves our support.

The exhibition in the Old Shire Hall in Nottingham will not only be a museum where historical objects connected with the law can be seen, it will be a living display of the law today as well.This autumn also sees the start of visits to local law societies, sometimes for formal dinners, sometimes for informal discussions.

I am discerning a change in the mood of the profession.

Recession is still a problem, conveyancing is in a trough, there is still anger about the legal aid cuts.

But I also see a determination to succeed.

We have survived the recession better than many other businesses, firms have moved into new areas of law.

We have a good service to offer, it should be priced accordingly.In national law week we have good news for the public: this profession works to simplify the law, to improve access to justice and fights to obtain justice for its clients.