*/
Regulation is not about consensus, Sir David Clementi told the audience at the second annual Clementi Debate.
The debate, which took place in front of an invited audience in Inner Temple Hall on 2 April, was entitled “Quality at what cost?” It might also have been called “embracing change”.
Sir David, who was the panel chairman, gave credit to the Bar for bringing his scheme into being before the Legal Services Act 2007. However, he stressed that the independence of the regulator needs to be demonstrated.
The discussion was lively. Derek Wood QC, who chaired the working party on the BVC, said that many students did not meet the exacting standards of temperament and talent. Patricia Robertson QC looked to individual responsibility as the key to ensuring quality. “Change is with us,” she warned; barristers will seek employment with LDPs and be regulated other than by the BSB.
There was a difference of opinion on how best to define good regulation. Chris Graham (retiring lay member of the BSB and Information Commissioner designate) thought the key was “finger on the pulse regulation”. He pointed warningly to the coat of arms of Lord Halsbury, who had been willing to “die in the last ditch” in opposition to the Parliament Act 1911. He said he was happy for the BSB to be judged by the fruits of its labour. David Edmunds, Chair of the LSB, thought on the other hand that “proportionate regulation” was the right phrase. He reminded everyone that the Legal Services Act was about “opportunity”, not “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
There was also a warning from Sam Stein, a new Silk, who sombrely reminded the gathering that what is happening in publicly funded work is not consistent with access to justice.
The discussion was opened and closed by Baroness Deech, Chair of the BSB, who knows about the “reasonable man”: born in Clapham, she spent her early childhood taking the local omnibus.
The debate, which took place in front of an invited audience in Inner Temple Hall on 2 April, was entitled “Quality at what cost?” It might also have been called “embracing change”.
Sir David, who was the panel chairman, gave credit to the Bar for bringing his scheme into being before the Legal Services Act 2007. However, he stressed that the independence of the regulator needs to be demonstrated.
The discussion was lively. Derek Wood QC, who chaired the working party on the BVC, said that many students did not meet the exacting standards of temperament and talent. Patricia Robertson QC looked to individual responsibility as the key to ensuring quality. “Change is with us,” she warned; barristers will seek employment with LDPs and be regulated other than by the BSB.
There was a difference of opinion on how best to define good regulation. Chris Graham (retiring lay member of the BSB and Information Commissioner designate) thought the key was “finger on the pulse regulation”. He pointed warningly to the coat of arms of Lord Halsbury, who had been willing to “die in the last ditch” in opposition to the Parliament Act 1911. He said he was happy for the BSB to be judged by the fruits of its labour. David Edmunds, Chair of the LSB, thought on the other hand that “proportionate regulation” was the right phrase. He reminded everyone that the Legal Services Act was about “opportunity”, not “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”.
There was also a warning from Sam Stein, a new Silk, who sombrely reminded the gathering that what is happening in publicly funded work is not consistent with access to justice.
The discussion was opened and closed by Baroness Deech, Chair of the BSB, who knows about the “reasonable man”: born in Clapham, she spent her early childhood taking the local omnibus.
Regulation is not about consensus, Sir David Clementi told the audience at the second annual Clementi Debate.
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
Giovanni D’Avola explores the issue of over-citation of unreported cases and the ‘added value’ elements of a law report
Louise Crush explores the key points and opportunities for tax efficiency
Westgate Wealth Management Ltd is a Partner Practice of FTSE 100 company St. James’s Place – one of the top UK Wealth Management firms. We offer a holistic service of distinct quality, integrity, and excellence with the aim to build a professional and valuable relationship with our clients, helping to provide them with security now, prosperity in the future and the highest standard of service in all of our dealings.
Is now the time to review your financial position, having reached a career milestone? asks Louise Crush
If you were to host a dinner party with 10 guests, and you asked them to explain what financial planning is and how it differs to financial advice, you’d receive 10 different answers. The variety of answers highlights the ongoing need to clarify and promote the value of financial planning.
Most of us like to think we would risk our career in order to meet our ethical obligations, so why have so many lawyers failed to hold the line? asks Flora Page
If your current practice environment is bringing you down, seek a new one. However daunting the change, it will be worth it, says Anon Barrister
Creating advocacy opportunities for juniors is now the expectation but not always easy to put into effect. Tom Mitcheson KC distils developing best practice from the Patents Court initiative already bearing fruit
Sam Townend KC explains the Bar Council’s efforts towards ensuring a bright future for the profession
The long-running fee-paid judicial pensions saga continues. The current cut-off date for giving notice of election to join FPJPS is 31 March 2024, and that date now gives rise to a serious problem, warns HH John Platt