Has the Solicitors Regulation Authority heeded what the Law Society rightly described as ‘widespread opposition’ to its plans to superintend legal executives? Curiously, we hadn’t been told at the time of going to press – even though the SRA’s board met on Wednesday to make a final decision. The regulator’s board meetings remain closed to the press and public, for no obviously legitimate reason.
Election purdah would be no excuse for the watchdog’s coyness. Legal regulators are supposed to be independent of government. But I won’t harp on about that again, having done so recently in this space.
Law Society CEO Ian Jeffery was notably outspoken in reiterating Chancery Lane’s opposition, which, it is worth recalling, is shared by the Legal Services Consumer Panel. ‘The SRA must seriously consider whether the time, resources and management focus required to integrate CILEX regulation into the SRA is wise, given the other priorities the SRA faces in light of the collapses of Axiom Ince, Metamorph, Kingly and the SSB Group,’ said Jeffery. ‘Now is not the right time for the SRA to seek to widen its regulatory scope or take on additional responsibilities.’
I suspect most Gazette readers will agree.
Jeffery also averred that the plan will confuse consumers. That is irrefutable. CILEX wants to change the title of its members from chartered legal executive (or CILEX practitioner) to the more upmarket-sounding ‘chartered lawyer’. Practically everyone who does not have an informed knowledge of how the legal profession works is going to think that a chartered lawyer regulated by the SRA is a species of solicitor. CILEX knows this only too well. It is not just the SRA that is moving its tanks on to someone else’s lawn.
Even if the SRA board approves the plan, CILEX has more than one formidable hurdle still to clear. Not only does the Legal Services Board have to wave through the land grab, the Council of the Law Society itself must also vote in favour. Why would it?
Underpinning all this is the SRA’s barely concealed ambition to become the single regulator of a sector currently overseen by nine. The events of recent months alluded to by Jeffery have not bolstered its case.
No comments yet