With the Clementi review outlining a possible shake-up of the way legal services are regulated, Peter Williamson calls for a positive reaction from the solicitors' profession

The media is currently awash with commentary on Sir David Clementi's so-called 'spring clean' of the profession, prompted by the publication of his consultation paper last week (see [2004] Gazette, 11 March, 1).

The Law Society has taken a proactive approach to the Clementi review.

In many ways, it accords with work the Society already has in hand - such as developing new business models and reviewing our governance structure.

We recognised early the importance of ensuring that the profession makes a powerful contribution to the debate.

Sir David's review is addressing six main areas:

- The objectives and principles that should underpin a regulatory framework;- Potential models of regulation;- Complaints and discipline;- Governance, accountability and related issues;- Regulatory gaps; and - Alternative business structures.

Meanwhile, the Law Society's own 'spring clean' progresses.

We continue our drive to modernise the regulation of solicitors, maintain high-quality service within the profession, and promote access to justice for all.

Over the last few decades, the role of solicitors, the needs and expectations of consumers and the functions of professional bodies have all changed dramatically.

The review is a tremendous opportunity to reshape the regulatory system fit for the demands of the 21st century.

Sir David has proposed two main models for the future regulatory structure for legal services.

The first is a Legal Services Authority that might operate similarly to the Financial Services Authority, replacing existing regulatory bodies - such as the Law Society and Bar Council - and regulating lawyers directly.

The second is to leave regulatory functions with the professional bodies, subject to oversight by a new body that might be called the Legal Services Board.

He has pointed out that different models can be adopted for different aspects of regulation.

For example, consumer complaints might be dealt with under the first model, while other regulatory functions are dealt with under the second.

To the extent that the professional bodies continue to have regulatory powers, a key issue will be the need to address how the separate roles of regulation and representation can be managed in any new framework.

It is immensely important for the Law Society not to jump to any immediate conclusions on the way forward, but to reflect, consult and engage in dialogue with the profession and public on what is best for the public interest and access to justice.

I hope that we will explore ways of liberalising the regulation of legal services, so that solicitors are able to deliver the services that business and the public want in new ways, while maintaining the very high standards of ethical practice and consumer protection that mark the profession.

It also will be important to build on existing strengths.

Profession-led regulation is vital because it underpins the independence of the legal profession from the state, but we want to find ways of increasing the role of the public in the regulation of solicitors, so consumers can have confidence that the Law Society regulates in the public interest.

I recognise that there is a legitimate question about regulatory bodies also having representative roles.

In my view, if properly organised, the functions can complement each other to the benefit of the public.

But we will need to demonstrate that the Law Society can achieve this outcome.

Therefore, we will have to consider whether changes to our present arrangements are needed to achieve this effectively.

Sir David is also canvassing new modes of practice, such as legal disciplinary practice, and perhaps in the longer term multi-disciplinary practice, and in a way that would allow for firms to be owned by non-professionals.

Again these options will require extensive analysis and discussion to find the best way forward to protect clients' interests and guard against conflicts.

There are undoubtedly some difficult regulatory issues to overcome, particularly in relation to multi-disciplinary practice.

We need to retain the professional core values - independence, integrity and confidentiality - regardless of the mode of practice.

The Clementi review is an opportunity for the profession to work on finding solutions to the regulatory challenges.

To gather views from the profession, the Law Society is holding a series of roadshows over the coming months in each of the English regions and Wales.

The chief executive and one of the office-holders will lead the consultation sessions.

We are also sending a questionnaire to every practising certificate holder and we will publish a draft response to the consultation paper - probably around the end of March - that will be on our Web site.

To help us to formulate a response to the Sir David's paper, I encourage you all to participate fully in the consultation process.

It is a time for us all to be open- minded, courageous and principled, so that we can achieve the best possible outcomes from the Clementi review process.

It is a time to think big - beyond our immediate interests to the collective well-being of everyone who depends on legal services in our jurisdiction, whether or not they can afford to pay for them.

Over the three months of the consultation, I hope that the Law Society and the profession will work to put forward the best, and most compelling, vision for the future development of legal services in England and Wales.

Peter Williamson is the Law Society President