‘It is no part of my function to defend lawyers’ fees,’ Lord Neuberger said recently, ‘although, unless you pay lawyers properly, you won’t attract able people to the legal profession, and if you don’t attract able people to the legal profession, you will undermine the rule of law’.

True, of course – but only up to a point. In one sense this echoes the classic pay argument favoured by senior bankers to defend their stratospheric salaries: you must offer good money to attract the brightest. The trouble with this is it reinforces the myths that clever people only work for money, and that well-paid people have innate integrity.

Law is a profession, and there are many reasons for wanting to be part of it. Money may be one; prestige another; an altruistic nature a third. Some might like the idea of bringing down a dodgy corporation in a courtroom, Erin Brockovich-style. Some might feel that their empathetic nature would make them a good family lawyer.

Many practising solicitors did not consider the size of their paypacket to be a primary motivation for entering the law; and some of the best of you earn relatively modest sums. This must not be forgotten – and nor should the fact that the rule of law can just as easily be undermined by well-paid lawyers whose acquisitive mindset detracts from their capacity to serve clients and the profession.