Chair's Column

The encouraging and disappointing aspects of QASA and the need for ongoing input into designing the final scheme; the importance of the appointment of the new Lord Chief Justice and the fight to preserve the Criminal Bar; and January’s FSA approval of BARCO 

Contributor
Maura McGowan QC, Chairman of the Bar 

QASA. The BSB issued an announcement jointly with the other regulators just before Christmas on the form which the scheme will take when the two year trial period begins. 

The challenges faced in maintaining the profession’s cohesion; the importance of protecting the Bar’s high standards of skill and integrity in the environment currently developing; and a plea to get involved and to have a say in the future of the profession 

Contributor
Maura McGowan QC, Chairman of the Bar 

Successive chairmen have started the year wondering why their term promises to bring such problems for the profession. I’m no different. 

The merits of joining forces with the Law Society and CILEx; the need to help facilitate the transition to the new world, even if its flaws are readily apparent; the Bar as guardians of the Rule of Law; and a fond farewell. 

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar 

This last year, I have come to realise, even more clearly than before, that you cannot please all people all of the time, and you cannot please some people any of the time. Add to that the fact that messages can be misconstrued and you have a recipe for misunderstandings. I have been portrayed as “calling for” the abolition of the Legal Services Board. I have not. In answer to a direct question, I did say that I thought it should be abolished and I said why. It is something to desire an outcome, it is another actively to pursue it. To “call for” the LSB’s abolition, so soon after its existence was extended following the MoJ’s triennial review of the LSB, would be pointless. Someone recently suggested that I am “anti-solicitor”. Nothing could be further from the truth. After all, I have been married to a solicitor for several decades. I have the highest regard for what solicitors do, and how they practise. 

Examining what the Bar stands for; fighting to maintain our standards and the Bar’s independence and integrity; and the dangers of change for change’s sake brought in too quickly and by those who do not understand what is at risk 

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar 

In my inaugural speech last December, I encouraged members of the Bar to invest in their futures and marshal the resources available to them to secure their futures. I never anticipated that they would rush headlong unseeingly down a particular course. After all, what is the rush. The Bar as a profession has been around for some 800 years. Its reputation for ethical standards and for providing the highest quality services is second to none. It has a wealth and depth of experience in the provision of legal services, which is the envy of the common law world. 

Preface
The damaging effects of LASPO and Government cuts; SRLs;  a call to all at the Bar to support and maintain the Bar’s Pro Bono Unit;  and welcoming the new Lord Chancellor

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar

The damage has been done: cuts in criminal defence fees by the last Labour Administration in its dying days of 13% over a three-year period on fee rates set in 1997; cuts to the CPS budget of 25% in the Comprehensive Spending Review, resulting in cuts to prosecution fee rates; the announcement earlier this year by Danny Alexander MP, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, that Government spending departments would have to find further cuts of 5% for contingencies; the enactment of LASPO; whole swathes of legal services have been removed from the scope of legal aid for family work. Apparently, we have had a ‘Rolls Royce’ legal aid system; apparently we spend more on legal aid than any other country in the West, if not in the world. As Shami Chakrabati, Director of Liberty, said at the Bar Conference in 2007, if that is the case, it is something of which we should be proud.

Call to respond to the fourth consultation on the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates; communications between the Bar Council and the Bar; Bar Council elections

Contributor
Michael Todd QC , Chairman of the Bar  

The deadline for responses to the fourth consultation on the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA) is 9 October 2012.  The consultation was issued by the Joint Advocacy Group (JAG) in July. The scheme continues to contain objectionable elements, some expected, others not; plea-only advocates; grading of cases by solicitors; the inclusion of Silks within the scheme. The objections have been made, but those elements remain. Many of those issues are of importance to the due administration of justice, to proper access to justice, to the public interest, others to the Bar as a whole. The Bar Standards Board (BSB)
has made it clear that it intends to introduce over time quality assurance schemes across all areas of legal practice. This is the last consultation before the proposed roll out of QASA across the Circuits, starting with the Western and Midland Circuits. If any objectionable elements become embedded in this scheme for criminal advocates, we can expect to see them in future schemes for other practice areas. The pass will have been sold. How will those elements affect your practice area? 

A tribute to outgoing Law Society President, John Wotton; a welcome to his successor, Lucy Scott-Moncrieff, defender of the High Street law firm; examining the aims of Price Competitive Tendering and the likely results both for the Bar and for justice

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar  

I would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to John Wotton, the outgoing President of the Law Society, and, of course, to welcome his successor, Lucy Scott-Moncrieff. John has been an outstanding leader of the solicitors’ profession, acting as he always has to promote access to justice and in the public interest. An extremely able and skilful “City” practitioner, specialising initially in corporate law and latterly in competition law, he brought to the office not only his considerable intellect but also a very pragmatic, no-nonsense approach. 

The plight of the criminal Bar; the independence of the Bar threatened by fee cuts, referral fees and price competitive tendering; and such developments under scrutiny from the rest of the common law world

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar  

It’s a funny old world. For years the criminal Bar have thought of themselves as the “real barristers”; and, in a sense, justifiably so. Traditionally the Bar was the profession of Advocates. And the criminal Bar have always prided themselves as being the true advocates at the Bar. Whilst other practitioners at the Bar undertake advocacy services to a greater or lesser extent, it is the criminal Bar who are on their “hind legs” in Court, day in and day out, prosecuting, defending, protecting the vulnerable, exercising their advocacy skills more in the public interest than for the money it brings in. 

Examining the LSB’s commitment to standards and to quality; the LSB decision to continue to permit referral fees; and a meeting with the new Chief Executive of the Legal Services Commission

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar 

In his address to the Russell Cooke Forum on Quality and Standards in a Liberalised Market, David Edmonds, the Chair of the Legal Services Board (LSB) gave the unremitting commitment of the LSB to standards, to quality and to upholding the rule of law. Easily said, but a little less easy to discern, I suggest. 

Lawyers worldwide look to the UK as leading the common law world in terms of its jurisprudence; the challenges to this position; the Bar must fend off consultation fatigue and become part of the debate; education, training and the quality assurance scheme for advocates

Contributor
Michael Todd QC, Chairman of the Bar  

Of all the major dispute resolution centres, including New York, London, Hong Kong and Singapore, US corporate clients prefer to have their disputes litigated in London; the reason given is the quality of the judiciary. New York’s elected judges, without the commercial experience derived from years in practice at the Bar, come second to English judges. Or so I was told on my recent trip to the American Bar Association, Section of International Law Conference in New York, at a roundtable discussion we had with the New York State Bar Association.