SRA accuses Law Society of taking 'very narrow view' of regulation

The SRA has accused the Law Society of taking a "very narrow view" of regulation in its response to the Ministry of Justice review, as the battle between regulator and representative body continues.

The SRA called for full independence in its response, while the society demanded that regulation be returned to Chancery Lane through an 'arm's length division'.

In a paper for today's board meeting, Richard Collins, SRA executive director, said that in advancing the argument that responsibility for the regulation of solicitors should be returned directly to the society, Chancery Lane took no account of "established regulatory best practice, or of the issues that led to the requirement for independent regulation in the LSA 2007".

Collins said this included the society's own performance before 2007 and the issues "well articulated" by Sir David Clementi in his report.

"In addition, the response takes a very narrow view of the issues raised by the MoJ's call for evidence - for example it takes little account of how such an approach could address the issues arising from an increasingly diverse market with multiple, and overlapping, professional title regulators.

"Given this narrow view, it may well be weakened as a contribution to the wider debate on the future of regulation in this sector.

"Viewed overall, and undoubtedly unintentionally, the response is a relatively powerful argument for structurally independent regulation."