BarTalk June 2004
Volume 16, Number 3

Defining the future of BC's legal profession

By Robert C Brun

On June 1, voting members of the Law Society will have the opportunity to set the practice fee for 2005 by referendum. The real question being asked is whether the CBA fee will be included in the practice fee as it has been for 55 years.

In other jurisdictions, self-regulation of the profession is being questioned and threatened. In Australia and England, the state has intervened to the detriment of self-regulation when law societies have been perceived to be promoting lawyer interests and compromising their primary role as defender of the public interest.

B.C. is unique in that as far back as 1947, the separation between the regulatory and advocacy functions of the legal profession was established. The Law Society resolved that members would fund the Law Society as regulator in the public interest, and the CBA as advocate for lawyers’ interests. Subsequently in the 1970s, bar leaders such as Charles Locke, QC, later Mr. Justice Locke, and J.D. Taggart, later Mr. Justice Taggart, led the way in refining this arrangement. This separation of roles is even more vital today, but it requires resources to make it work.

The profession in B.C. has evolved in ways that make it different from every other province. Universal funding allowed the CBA to support and work with the Law Society to create a strong CLE Society (other CBA Branches have kept CLE and its revenues, to supplement membership fees). Universality in B.C. has ensured that staff and funding are dedicated solely to services that directly benefit all members.

Universality has allowed the development in B.C. of the most extensive network of Sections in the country. In all other provinces, Sections are fewer, less resourced, and more expensive. In B.C., 74 Sections meet around the province, providing networking, professional development, and legislative review on all aspects of the law. Their minutes are posted on the Web site, allowing members who cannot attend to access up-to-date news.

Nationally, the B.C. Branch has the clout of more than 10,000 members. We influence national decisions taken on issues such as money laundering and anti-terrorism legislation, legal aid, anti-no fault programs, lawyer “whistleblowing” (Sarbanes-Oxley) and national media and ad campaigns.

People ask “Other provinces survive without universality, why can’t B.C.?” It’s not simply a matter of survival, but of strength. Unlike other provinces, B.C. doesn’t have the luxury of CLE revenue. Nor do we have any history of voluntary payment by governments, corporations, municipalities and other employers who currently pay universal CBA fees. Unlike other provinces, we have built a more extensive network of services and direct benefits to members by virtue of not pouring resources into member recruitment.

For those who support a strong, independent organization that will advocate on behalf of lawyers, with the necessary resources to promote law reform, Section activity and lawyers rights and economic interests around the province, the choice on the Law Society’s ballot is clear: I will be voting ‘yes’ for a universal CBA levy.

This article was published in the June 2004 issue of BarTalk and is subject to the copyright by the British Columbia Branch of the Canadian Bar Association, 2004, all rights reserved.