Proposals to require all local authorities to appoint a chief legal officer have run into opposition from groups representing senior council staff.

The Law Society and Solicitors in Local Government (SLG) argue that the new post should replace the role of monitoring officer.

Although monitoring officers are responsible for reporting legal breaches and maladministration and investigating misconduct by councillors, they do not have to be legally qualified. The Society and SLG is proposing that the 20-year-old post be replaced by that of a chief legal officer – a solicitor, barrister or legal executive with ‘substantial practical legal experience’, regulated by an independent body.

In a consultation document published last week, SLG and the Society said that, as legal issues in local government become more complex, it is ‘critical’ that monitoring officers should be able to ‘exercise fine legal judgement’ rather than depending on advice they are given.

SLG vice-chair Guy Goodman said: ‘Twenty years on and a lot has changed. If we feel there is a sufficient argument we plan to ask the government to change the law.’

However, the Association of Council Secretaries and Solicitors (ACSeS) and the Local Government Group (LGG) say they oppose the move and the way it is being proposed.

ACSeS president Andrew Frosdick said: ‘We would have welcomed the Law Society to have discussed this matter with us before launching this consultation formally. ACSeS does not support the proposal.’

LGG, which is the training arm of SLG and ACSeS, is looking into accreditation and qualification schemes for monitoring officers.

Maria Memoli, chair of LGG, said: ‘Not all monitoring officers are legally qualified, and that is why we are looking at a ­monitoring officer qualification/accreditation which the Standards Board for England would accept.

‘I have serious doubts as to the timing of the consultation with elections around the ­corner.’

The consultation ends on 27 March.