So, farewell then LSCP. Another set of initials is about to bite the dust, namely those of the Legal Services Consultative Panel. To continue in initials mode, the LSCP followed on from ACLEC (the Lord Chancellor’s Advisory Committee on Legal Education and Conduct) and will be succeeded by the LSB (Legal Services Board), all doing some of the same things, but with different mandates. The LSCP will expire at the end of this year, when the LSB will be fully up and running.I have been a member of the LSCP for several years. Our principal role has been to give advice to the secretary of state for justice on those regulatory changes concerning legal services in England and Wales that required government approval. Well, we were never quite sure whom we were advising – not just because ministers rarely came to see us, but because the title kept changing. When I was first appointed we were advising the lord chancellor, then the secretary of state for constitutional affairs, then the secretary of state for justice, as if we had stumbled into a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta.

Based on my experience, government by quango – so heavily criticised in the popular press – is a good thing. We were very cheap. As members of the LSCP we were not paid; we received only travelling expenses. We also had no back-room policy wonks in the ministry to write our policy papers. We were a mixed group of practising solicitors, barristers, academics, consumer representatives and other experts. Our committee was happy and effective. The members broke into small working groups to consider applications in detail, and put in great personal effort to produce advice in the public interest. It was a way for government to engage with the legal services sector and consumer representatives (or, in Euro-terms, the industry and civil society) in a way that improved the act of governing.

It is worth reflecting on the fact that the LSB will be different in two respects: it will pay its members a fee for their time, and the members will have policy support from LSB staff. I think they are right to have made the changes. If I have a criticism of the LSCP’s structure, it was that it was good government, too much on the cheap.

Without breaking any confidences, our discussions over the years entailed interesting issues of principle on which there were often strong differences of opinion, such as:

  • Is there such a thing as a sophisticated client with lower consumer protection requirements than an unsophisticated client?
  • If an area of practice is expressly not regulated by law, is it proper to require its regulated practitioners to have certain standards?
  • Should different standards be permitted between professions providing a service in the same area of law?
  • Should there be a pre-test before being allowed onto a professional qualifications course if the educational level is otherwise met?
At the last meeting there were LSB officials present to ask for our tips about how to take forward this area in future. There is no continuity at member or staff level between the LSCP and the LSB. But an LSB member has sat in our meetings for the last few months, and it was a good sign that the LSB staff were eager to find out how we had operated. I, of course, advised them to have an eye on the European and international scene. Two of what are now called the frontline regulators in the legal profession, the Law Society and the bar, have offices in Brussels to monitor what is going on here and act when necessary – and for a reason, since there are continuing regulatory developments at EU level. I do not have a sense that the LSB has yet taken this seriously enough.

On a personal note, as of January next year I shall be sorry not to have an excuse to come to London around once a month. When you live abroad, there are always small items that you cannot find locally on which your life depends, and the meetings gave me the opportunity to stock up. If and when I leave Belgium now, I will have to come back here to buy chocolate.

Jonathan Goldsmith is the secretary general of the Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe, which represents more than 700,000 European lawyers through its member bars and law societies