Thirty years ago I recall standing outside the Sheldonian Theatre in Oxford telephoning my parents to tell them that, after just one week of studying the subject, law was a discipline I wanted to drop in favour of German.

No one was impressed - neither my parents, nor the law tutors and nor, it must be said, the German tutor! Thus it was that I continued to read law and became a solicitor.This telephone call, is, I think, typical of many which reflect the strangeness which those previously unused to the subject at school feel on first encountering the study of law at university.

Yet what mechanism exists to enable a change of course for those who quickly realise at the age of 19 and 20 - or at a later stage - that the parental choice of a career perceived as stable is forcing them into something to which they are unsuited? (I should say my suitability to be a solicitor is for others to judge - the career is one I have consistently enjoyed.)In its support for the common professional examination, the Law Society goes out of its way to ease the path of entry into the legal profession of those qualified in other disciplines.

I believe the Society is absolutely right to do so, although it is not my purpose here to defend the common professional examination.What I query is the extent to which those who should never become solicitors are, in fact, positively encouraged.

I am not talking about dishonesty or a criminal record - checks on which the Law Society makes rigorously at the point of entry.

What I am talking about is the way in which school students are encouraged first by parents and then by teachers to believe that a legal career is for the m, only to find out - much later on and sometimes too late - that a career in law is one to which they are entirely unsuited.School students and university students should be made aware of the current shortage of training contracts.

The growth in the provision of higher education places since the beginning of this decade and the attraction of law as a subject for study mean that it is not simply the recession that is producing a shortage of training contracts.

There are too many people chasing too few places and it is for the Law Society, university teachers and careers services to tell aspiring lawyers the truth at the earliest stage possible.

Those who are able and keen should not be discouraged from a legal career but they should not embark on such a career with some starry- eyed vision of security, stability and a job for ever.

Life is no longer like that.Society just cannot sustain an increase in the size of the legal profession anything like that which has occurred in recent years.

Conveyancing, for instance, is an area where the public may no longer be prepared to pay for the cost of a qualified solicitor.

Increasingly, work of this type will be done by paralegals who, in the future, seem likely to be people well qualified academically but who have been unable to find training contracts.The recent Higher Education Funding Council for England quality assessment report stated: 'Undergraduate law degrees are no longer a guarantee of a career in the legal profession and therefore many courses aim to develop transferable skills and the knowledge and skills to find employment in a wide range of business and commercial contexts.

Established university courses are generally aimed at preparing the students for a career in the legal profession...The newer or more recently established courses tend to emphasise the development of a wider range of knowledge and skills.' This trend, in my view, must gather pace.Earlier this year, the Law Society's Council decided that there must be far more communication with students.

There must be far more communication, too, with parents, with careers advisers and with teachers.

The client interviewing competition, sponsored by the Law Society and organised by law schools, is a good example of the type of partnership that it is now so necessary to develop.Another matter of grievous concern to the profession and to students is the question of the increased cost of training, resulting from the ending of public subsidies for vocational law courses and the need for teaching institutions to invest in new accommodation, libraries and staff.

The growth of the paralegal cohort will be encouraged by the development of NVQs for the legal profession and the tax relief such routes attract.The part-time route into the profession is one that the Society is doing its level best to encourage and to some extent the low take-up of part-time legal practice courses and part-time training contracts is disappointing.

For some, however, the part-time route - working whilst you are learning - will lessen funding problems.In other respects, the position looks grim indeed.

The prospect of the mandatory grant being extended to the vocational course - by this and, as I understand it, any other government - seems non-existent.

The value of discretionary grants provided by local education authorities to law students continues to decline.

Against this background, there is great pressure for the Society to reduce the cost of training.There are aspects, of the cost of training for which I make no apology whatsoever.

I fir mly believe that monitoring the training contract and monitoring the quality of training are absolutely essential parts of the Law Society's job.Again, I make no apology for the cost of the legal practice course.

Recently I visited a conference of legal practice course providers in Chester and came away exhilarated by the enthusiasm of the teachers and, as is reported, by the enthusiasm of students too.I thank Paulene Collins, her colleagues and the legal practice course board for the work they have done to bring the course to its present position.

The course was conceived in an atmosphere of challenge and teachers are owed a large debt of gratitude by the Society.

Within the Society's Council, Peter Johnson and Tony Holland - to name only two - must be well pleased that they had the vision and courage to 'stick to their guns'.Where, however, I do feel a grave mistake has been made is in relation to the minimum salary.

I here express a personal opinion, for the retention of the compulsory minimum salary was confirmed by the Law Society's Council only 18 months ago.

There is substantial evidence to the effect that, if the financial burden on firms of the minimum salary at it present level were lifted, then more training contracts would be available.

Further, it seems to me to make little sense to espouse open free market policies in relation to institutions teaching the legal practice course only to adopt such a restrictive policy immediately before entry into the profession.There are powerful and compelling arguments raised in support of the compulsory minimum salary.

The expressed enthusiasm of so many would-be trainees for the abolition of the compulsory minimum salary has long persuaded me, however, that in the prevailing circumstances a suspension, albeit temporary, of compulsion would be appropriate.The plight of those unable for some years to obtain a training contract is distressing in the extreme.

It needs to be made clear, I think, that the Law Society cannot create training contracts and neither has it any responsibility to do so.

Further, law as a graduate profession has fared significantly better than other graduate professions in the provision of training places in the recession and its immediate aftermath.

The Law Society must, however, do everything possible to assist people unfortunate enough to be saddled with substantial debt and unable for a very long time indeed to find a training contract.Following the allegations of direct discrimination by firms of solicitors against would-be trainees from the ethnic minorities, a working party chaired by the Vice-President of the Society is due to report to the Council by the end of the year and I would not wish to pre-empt any recommendations.

However, I do draw specific attention to the amendment to reg 22 of the Training Regulations 1990.

This amendment gives considerably greater flexibility in dealing with legal experience gained outside a training contract.In the medium term, research is being undertaken to establish the impact of the legal practice course on firms, on trainees and on training contracts and it may be that a review of the length of the training contract will become appropriate or even, perhaps, a review of the necessity of the training contract itself.Such a review, however, lies a number of years away and will, I am acutely aware, be of little assistance to those now so impatient, so angry and so disillusioned.In the meantime, the Society's careers service will continue to provide information on current vacancies and workshops on job sear ch skills.

The Society has piloted graduate career workshops for law students and has encouraged local law societies to mount these with financial support from local TECs.

Research has shown that a 'clearing house' to act as a mailbox for training contract applications is feasible.

I would welcome readers' views on its acceptability.Ultimately, it is clear that, for all the reasons I have given, not all those who might wish to qualify as solicitors are going to be able to do so.

At the same time, it is right to emphasise that there are, and will continue to be, opportunities within the solicitors' profession for those who are able and committed.

So much depends, however, on properly informing attitudes and expectations.