The Gazette 1993

GAZETTE

I M N A GEM N JUNE 1993

newly qualified solicitors to set up in sole practice is a sensitive matter, and prefaces his comments by saying that the sole practitioner is the 'heart and soul' of the profession. But, given the enormous increase in numbers in the profession and the need to maintain standards, "the Society must be vigilant about whom it licenses to practise, and must, subsequent to admission to the Roll, enquire whether someone wishing to set up on their own has sufficient skills to run the business side of a practice. This might be by requiring a mandatory amount of CLE on these matters, or, perhaps, requiring that someone would have acquired a certain amount of experience in a firm after admission before they could practise on their own. However, I would be totally opposed to a general prohibition, because that would militate against many good, newly qualified solicitors who would be perfectly well able to manage on their own from day one." He pleads, as a lover of the Irish language, to be given space to air his deep conviction that it is wrong in principle for the Government to insist that solicitors should be competent and proficient in the Irish language. Under S 40 of the 1954 (Solicitors) Act, students are obliged to sit two Irish examinations yet the numbers who fail them are neglible. It is, he believes, a symptom of the "horrendous hypocrisy" about the (Continued on p. 139) Irish

be done in this area - but it would inevitably mean an increase in expense to students, as more teaching hours and more course materials would have to be paid for. There is another remedy he thinks: "Masters must allow apprentices more exposure to the management side of the practice, masters traditionally have not (maybe for good reason!) let apprentices see this aspect of the practice." Continuing Legal Education also has a role to play and he welcomes the plans to place increased emphasis on providing management courses for practitioners. Pat O'Connor is unenthusiastic about alternative models to the current apprenticeship system. The suggestion, for example, of an intensive one year long course in the Law School, would, he believes, merely defer the essential gaining of practical experience until after admission "You cannot just bring someone in and grill them in an intensive but purely theoretical way. Practical experience is essential during the training period; otherwise, you would have to allow for a period after being admitted to the Roll." "You cannot just bring someone in and grill them in an intensive but purely theoretical way. Practical experience is essential."

though, that "there may now be some slippage, a side effect of the pressure on numbers." He concedes, too, that the quality of apprenticeship can vary from one master to another, and thinks that apprentices should seek to change masters if they feel that they are not getting sufficient attention and experience, though he recognises that it is not an easy thing to do in a climate where apprenticeships are not that easy to come by. He rejects criticism that the system is too lengthy. "We are not particularly out of line here with the length it takes in other countries to become a qualified professional. In the EFTA States, for example, the average is 11 years, in Finland and Iceland it is eight." One aspect which he thinks is extremely difficult for apprentices is the lack of state assistance for third and fourth level students. "At least at third level the cost is less because the State intervenes and subsidises the fees' charged by third-level colleges" but he is "acutely conscious" of the lack of grant funding for students in the Law School and says that the Society is lobbying for a change in criteria for grants. Pat O'Connor says he is aware of a view that the Law School is not doing enough to train young professionals in how to manage the business sides of their practices, and accepts that, perhaps, more needs to

In the current climate he is aware that commenting on the right of

136