BC Proposes Changes that Would Undermine the Independence of Lawyers
b'
Many professions such as doctors, engineers, and architects are regulated to ensure that people providing services to the public are properly trained and competent to practice. The need for this is clear: you want to ensure people receive good medical care and the buildings and bridges don't fall down.
The regulation of lawyers has this objective as well: you want to know that you're getting competent legal advice when you hire a lawyer.
Because lawyers are often engaged in work that is in opposition to the wishes of the government it is also important that the regulation of lawyers is independent of the government.
If you hire a lawyer to defend a criminal case,\\xa0 prevent the government from apprehending your children, challenging the validity of a law, or pursue indigenous rights, you do not want the lawyer to be concerned about the professional consequences of acting in opposition to the government's wishes.
This independence is under threat in British Columbia as a result of a proposal to "modernize" the Legal Profession Act in such a way that the provincial government would be able to appoint an increased number of the benchers (directors) that govern the Law Society.
As discussed on the show, the government's immediate motivations to take greater control include a wish to avoid providing adequate funding for legal aid services by creating a system of paralegals with less training than lawyers to provide legal services for the poor.
The issue of adequate legal aid funding has been pursued by the Law Society for many years.
BC is the only province in Canada that imposes a special tax on legal services. The tax was introduced by an NDP government in 1992.
When the tax was introduced it was done for the express purpose of funding legal aid.
Quickly, however, the tax started collecting more money than the government was providing for legal aid and the extra funds were diverted to general revenue.
The government now diverts more than half of the funds collected pursuant to the special tax while dramatically underfunding legal aid services.
The diversion of tax revenue from legal aid has resulted in various challenges by the Law Society including a vote to censure a past Attorney General.
A history of the funding of legal aid in BC, the special tax, and the disproportionate impact the diversion of revenue from the special tax has had on women can be found here.
The government proposal has met with opposition from the Canadian Bar Association, the Victoria Bar Association,\\xa0 the Law Society, and others.
As discussed on the show, one of the elected benchers from Victoria, Paul Pearson gave up his position because he works as Crown Counsel and concluded he couldn't effectively oppose the government initiative while also working for the provincial government.
His statement outlining the import of what has been proposed can be found here.
Follow this link for a transcript of the show and links to the legislation discussed.\\xa0