New Bar chief keeps up anti-LSB rhetoric

Print This Post

12 December 2012


McGowan: direct access forms an increasing source of work

The new Bar Council chairman has pledged to work towards proving that the Legal Services Board (LSB) is not needed.

In a stinging attack on the LSB – continuing a Bar Council campaign of recent months – Maura McGowan QC warned that “it is not the function of a regulator to seek the total dismantling and restructuring of the system”.

In her inaugural address to the Bar Council earlier this week, Ms McGowan said: “Recently I was asked to suggest names of members of the Bar who might become members of the Legal Services Board, the request was couched in terms that I nominate barristers ‘committed’ to change in the provision of legal services. My reply, that surely what they wanted was people ‘open’ to change, was met with stunned and continuing silence.

“The LSB is with us for at least the next two years. Its second term was granted after its first review. There is support both in government and in general for the view that regulation should not be too heavy a burden. As a profession which was recognised for the efficacy of its self-regulation, surely we can work towards meeting the next review by being able to demonstrate that one external regulator is enough.”

Error, group does not exist! Check your syntax! (ID: 14)

In a speech that was notable for not referencing either alternative business structures or the Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates – especially as she is a criminal law practitioner – Ms McGowan highlighted the role of direct access in opening up the Bar to foreign lawyers.

“[Direct access] forms an increasing source of work to certain areas of practice; it is thriving but must be further encouraged. Almost half the self-employed Bar has trained and is now qualified to accept instructions in this way. That cannot simply be as a result of the difficulties which the publicly funded Bar faces, it must mean that there is a need on the part of clients, domestic and international, to instruct counsel by this route.

“Further there is a willingness, possibly even enthusiasm, on the part of barristers to receive work in this way. It is a supplementary format; it is not designed nor should it replace the traditional provision and acceptance of instructions.”

Ms McGowan said that for direct access to be effective in producing work for the publicly funded Bar, the Bar Standards Board needs to change the rules to allow a barrister to accept direct instructions in cases where the client is eligible for legal aid. She also called on barristers to join in a new project to design a new model for legal aid.

“It may well have many aspects of the old, it may be completely new, we must see and seize an opportunity for changing the system for the better,” she said.

 

Tags: , ,



2 Responses to “New Bar chief keeps up anti-LSB rhetoric”

  1. I would have thought the Bar Council had more important things to worry about, like increased competition and cuts in publicly funded work threatening the livelihood of some of its members. Obviously not.

  2. Louise Restell on December 12th, 2012 at 11:30 am
  3. This is a very fair point made by Ms McGowan QC?Why do we need the LSB? What does it do? How much does it cost? More regulation and red tape which Cameron is supposed to be committed to removing? The general consensus amongst the PI profession is that our esteemed PM has a grudge against solicitors and is determined to drive us all out of business, which means loss of VAT, PAYE, TAX whilst insurers are busy toadying up to him and siphoning off the profits offshore. These MoJ reforms will batter part of middle income taxpayers and will be very influential in voting trends at the next election. We are educated Mr Cameron and remember who has driven forth these reforms resulting in a denial of access to justice, significant further redundancies, and loss of revenue to HMRC. Please do not even think that insurance premiums will decrease pro rata to the savings made by insurers on not paying damages and costs. The government will pay for their behaviour at the next election.

  4. Martin Coyne on December 12th, 2012 at 9:46 pm

Leave a comment

* Denotes required field

All comments will be moderated before posting. Please see our Terms and Conditions

Legal Futures Blog

Know your client checks – A lesson from BHS

Paul-Bennett for Legal Futures

As you will be aware, it is a legal requirement for advisory firms to carry out ‘know your client’ checks. The purpose of doing so is to confirm your client’s identity and to seek to provide protection in respect of anti-money laundering (AML) and terrorist financing laws. The BHS experience before the House of Commons’ work and pensions committee and business, innovation and skills committee shows that firms need to think beyond AML obligations.

September 29th, 2016