Power to the practitioner

Most solicitors will
be aware that the current system
of continuing professional development (CPD),which requires all solicitors to undertake 16 hours of CPD
per year, ends from November 2016 (with the option to opt
out from November 2015).
This reflects a new approach
to training and education with a focus on the standard of service offered by solicitors, rather than a bureaucratic process.

Many of us will have heard anecdotes about individuals desperate to 'clock-up' their mandatory hours, attending courses of no real value to their professional role, or registering for courses and spending the session on their smart phone.

The reality is that it is impossible for us to prescribe centrally what type of CPD is appropriate for different solicitors at different stages of their career. The CPD needs of a newly qualified solicitor working in a City insolvency practice will be very different to those of a 20-years-qualified local authority child protection specialist.

Annual declaration

Our focus has now changed. Instead of prescribing a minimum time requirement and accrediting certain training, we have prepared a high level description of the key competencies that solicitors must demonstrate, regardless of their area of practice. Solicitors are obliged to consider their learning and development needs in the light of these competencies, then make an annual declaration that they have done this and taken measures to maintain their competence.

This will give rise to three key differences from the current regime:

• the standard of service, rather than ticking procedural boxes, is at the heart of the new system;
• there are no specified annual hour requirements, in some years more than 16 hours might be appropriate, in other years, less; and
• the emphasis is on professional development rather than formal training. In some cases, traditional courses and lectures will be the right way to go, in other cases online training, reading and discussing experiences with colleagues may be the best approach.

Is this, as one or two have suggested, a 'soft option', which will lead to the abandonment of CPD and the lowering of professional standards?
We know that the current system is not working. We do not have the resources to monitor compliance with the 16-hour requirement and, even if we did, we are in no position to second guess individuals and firms about what is the best form of CPD for each speciality at particular stages of a solicitor's career. To try to do so would be costly and ineffective - the worst type of nanny state regulation.

Solicitors will need to think seriously about whether the quality of their work meets their obligation to provide a proper standard of service.

One concern raised over abandoning the 16-hour requirement was that it may result in some firms ending CPD entirely, to the detriment of the solicitors and their clients. This did concern us. However, we concluded that, as a regulator, we cannot and should not impose costs and restrict innovation on the basis of the lowest common denominator.

Regulatory action

Firms and individuals will continue to have a clear regulatory obligation to maintain their professional knowledge and standards.
If they fail to do this, we shall take appropriate regulatory action. If a solicitor believes that they have no learning and development needs, we will expect them to be able to show us, if required, how they arrived at that conclusion, and, if a solicitor is involved in a regulatory procedure and is shown to have been incompetent, any failure to undertake appropriate CPD could be an aggravating factor.

Another concern was that while larger firms will have the time and resources to ensure that training can be appropriately tailored to the needs of their practitioners and clients, smaller firms would find this difficult. We recognise that guidance will be helpful and shall be publishing an online toolkit in the spring that will identify a range of cost-effective approaches to continuing competence. In fact, we anticipate the flexibility of the new approach will be of benefit to smaller firms; for example, they would be able
to arrange training at a time
andin a form that reflects
their resources.

This new approach to CPD is part of a wider programme of change in which we move away from prescribing particular processes and instead focus on outcomes and standards of service, leaving it to practitioners to assess how best to achieve those outcomes. The next stage of this process for the Education and Training Committee will be to consider the skills and knowledge required of newly qualified solicitors, and how these are best acquired and assessed. This will be our priority for 2015. SJ

Martin Coleman is chair of the SRA Education and Training Committee