Ruthie recently wrote about the Vos Review of entry to the profession and modes of professional practice. An interim report has now been published and the results are much as expected. While Geeklawyer is intimidated and afraid of Geoffrey Vos QC given his recent inquisition he feels that has to risk a Trip to the Basement. Some of the report is crap and some manifestly good.
The report mentions the perception that the Bar is too posh and Oxbridge; that those from a working class background are not sufficiently represented and there should be more of them. Geeklawyer is going to be controversial here: frankly he regards this as twaddle. He’s resigned to sharing his profession with the middle classes, but doesn’t see why the flying fuck he should have to put up with chavs: good heavens, we have Cherie Booth isn’t that enough? The tearooms will be filled with young men discussing football; driving to chambers in hot hatchbacks or scooters; Glaswegians becoming barristers and buying large houses in the West Country. Brhhh. A chilling thought.
While equal access is all jolly nice inclusive and makes us all feel cuddly gratified and warm, Geeklawyer thinks that there is a qualitative distinction between discriminating against someone based on gender or race and that that arises as a result of ones family not having economic power. Geeklawyer says “sorry geeze tough shit, life ruff ‘innit, an’ all that? Djya kna wot I mean?”.
Geeklawyer is quite happy to have diversity and it’s a good thing but distorting a profession and its rules for no other purpose seems like pandering. If you are talented and you or your family can afford to get you through the process great, otherwise you’re owed nothing. Least of by Geeklawyer. Deal with it & drive a truck or get a Vos bank loan to finance yourself.
The rest of the report is eminently sensible. The current system is a screwup and both Ruthie and Geeklawyer have commented ad nauseum on its inadequacies: people are driven by ambition into wasting huge sums on BVC courses when they have little prospect of a pupillage. Throttling back entrants by setting a 2.1 minimum is a broadly good idea but with a caveat: some very capable people currently practicing at the Bar have only 2.2’s losing the likes of them would be a shame. Academic degree class is a reasonable indicator of academic capability but not necessarily so good as an advocacy indicator. A better metric is needed and testing would be ideal. Realistically this is unlikely ever to happen so so long as one is going to choose a near arbitrary selection criteria it’ll do: so long as people who have a decent excuse for a 2.2 get a crack of the whip — those supporting a family while earning a degree etc.
Geeklawyer has a slightly more radical suggestion: make it easier for people to qualify by opening up capacity at the Bar by easing tenancy and pupillage rule. Make it possible for newly qualified barristers to set up their chambers so if they can’t get a tenancy they can operate from home or new sets; widen the approaches to providing pupillage (while maintaining training quality — natch). Have faith in the market — crap new lawyers sets will die if they are no good — if they are good they will get instructions & be able to pay the exorbitant rent most sets pay.
Recent Comments