-
of Dalston
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have
made of recent proposals by the Solicitors Regulation
Authority to reform the qualifications for admission to the
solicitors’ profession.
-
of Dalston (CB)
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name
on the Order Paper. In doing so, I declare my interest as
chair of the University of Leeds School of Law advisory
board.
-
The Advocate-General for Scotland (Lord Keen of Elie)
(Con)
My Lords, as the legal profession in England and Wales and
the bodies that regulate it are independent from government,
we have not made any assessment of the Solicitors Regulation
Authority’s recent proposals. As set out in the Legal
Services Act 2007, it will be for the Legal Services Board to
determine whether to approve changes to the qualification
arrangements for solicitors, should the Solicitors Regulation
Authority seek to proceed with its proposals.
-
of Dalston
My Lords, I thank the noble and learned Lord for his reply.
However, is he not aware of the widespread concern that the
Solicitors Regulation Authority’s proposals will mean that
universities have to teach to the solicitors qualifying
examination if they are to remain competitive, potentially
constraining the breadth of the curriculum that can be taught
as part of an academic law degree and stifling innovation in
curriculum development?
-
My Lords, we do not believe that if these proposals were
taken forward it would have such a stultifying effect upon
the university law schools to which the noble Lord refers. I
observe that there are currently 110 qualifying law degree
providers, 40 providers of the graduate diploma in law and 26
providers of the legal practice course, and no consistency of
examination at the point of qualification.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, given the massive cuts in legal aid, the rising
costs of tribunal and court proceedings, and the difficulties
resulting from the consequential growth in the number of
unrepresented litigants, should not any qualification
programme include a requirement to provide pro bono advice
and representation?
-
My Lords, as I have already indicated, the question of what
qualification requirements there should be is a matter for
the Solicitors Regulation Authority and for the Legal
Services Board. However, of course they are concerned to
pursue their statutory obligations, which include a
requirement to have regard to the demands upon the
profession.
-
(LD)
My Lords, we are seeing something of a turf war between the
SRA and the Law Society. One can of course see the case for
separation, with the SRA as regulator and the Law Society
governing the profession. There may even be a case for a
single legal services regulator. But the position at the
moment is that the SRA wants to control standards for entry
into the profession and the Law Society’s concern is not to
lower those standards. Do the Government have a view on how
those issues can be resolved, given the public interest in
maintaining standards of legal practice?
-
My Lords, the Solicitors Regulation Authority has no desire
to see any diminution in standards. Its concern is to
increase access to the profession in order that we have a
more effective and diverse profession. As regards the test of
what would be appropriate for the regulation of access to the
profession, the Legal Services Board will make a
determination in light of the SRA’s submission.
-
(CB)
Has the Minister noticed the distinct lack of guidance for
the Legal Services Board? Barristers are taking this
opportunity to upgrade the qualifications while solicitors
are going in the other direction. Given that there are very
few jobs for new solicitors, this ought to be the moment to
upgrade their qualifications as well. Does he agree that it
is high time for a review of the Legal Services Board, which
seems to have failed to produce over the past 10 years any of
the reforms and improvements that were promised at the
outset?
-
My Lords, we do not consider that there is a need for a
further review at this time. As the noble Baroness will be
aware, the Legal Education and Training Review was undertaken
jointly by the Solicitors Regulation Authority, the Bar
Standards Board and the Chartered Institute of Legal
Executives, which resulted in a report that was published in
June 2013. The review did find weaknesses in the current
system of legal education, and the SRA is seeking to address
them in its submissions to the Legal Services Board.
-
(Lab)
My Lords, I draw attention to my interests as set out in the
register. Perhaps I could tempt the Minister to reflect on
the question raised by the noble Lord, , about the narrowing of
the curriculum. I accept entirely that the SRA and the Legal
Services Board are independent, but would it not be of
national concern if family law, disability rights and social
welfare law were to be squeezed out in the narrowing of that
curriculum?
-
My Lords, I understand the point made by the noble Lord and I
agree that we should not see a narrowing of the curriculum,
but, with respect, where people undertake to study at a
university, whether it be for a law degree or another
subject, they do not do so for the sole purpose of passing a
professional examination; they study in order to broaden
their understanding in general and to extend their education
and their understanding of the law. For example, the study of
jurisprudence may not be regarded as absolutely essential to
passing examinations set by the Solicitors Regulation
Authority, but nevertheless it is appropriate for anyone
expecting to pursue a career in law.
