1

SPEECH: UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA PROFESSIONALISM SPEECH DATE: WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 2014 LOCATION: OTTAWA PRESENTED BY: TREASURER CONWAY GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.

THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO JOIN YOU TODAY. IT IS A

PLEASURE TO BE ASKED TO SPEAK TO YOU AS PART OF

PROFESSOR ADAM DODEK’S CLASS ON LEGAL ETHICS AND

PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY.

MERCI DE VOTRE INVITATION. C'EST UN PLAISIR POUR MOI DE

VENIR VOUS PARLER SUR LE SUJET QUE LE PROFESSEUR

DODEK M'A SUGGÉRÉ DE PARLER, C’EST A DIRE “LA PROMOTION

PAR LE BARREAU DE L'INTÉRÊT PUBLIC ET DES DÉFIS D'UN

MONDE JURIDIQUE EN ÉVOLUTION.”

PROFESSOR DODEK SUGGESTED THAT MY PRESENTATION

TODAY BE ABOUT: “THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA:

2

PROMOTING THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND FACING THE

CHALLENGES OF A CHANGING LEGAL WORLD.”

AS SOME OF YOU KNOW, I AM NO STRANGER TO SOCIAL MEDIA.

I AM AWARE THAT THERE HAS BEEN MANY CONVERSATIONS ON

THE NEW LAW PRACTICE PROGRAM AND THE RECENTLY

ANNOUNCED FEES FOR THIS YEAR'S LICENSING CANDIDATES.

SO I WILL BE SURE TO ADDRESS THOSE TWO TOPICS DURING

MY REMARKS TODAY.

I HOPE THAT MY REMARKS WILL PROVIDE THE CONTEXT AND

THE RATIONALE FOR BOTH. AND LET ME ALSO ASSURE YOU

THAT AT THE END OF MY REMARKS THERE WILL BE TIME FOR

QUESTIONS.

I THINK THAT IN ORDER TO GET THERE, HOWEVER, AND IN

ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE CHALLENGES OF A CHANGING

LEGAL WORLD, WE MUST START WITH A BRIEF REVIEW OF

WHERE WE ARE TODAY, HOW WE GOT HERE, AND HOW BEST TO

3

MOVE FORWARD AS A PROFESSION, TO WHOM SELF-

REGULATION HAS BEEN GIVEN AS A PRIVILEGE.

LET ME FIRST REMARK THAT WHEN WE DISCUSS THE STATE OF

THE LEGAL PROFESSION THESE DAYS, THE DISCUSSION

REMINDS ME OF THE CLIMATE CHANGE DEBATE OF THE LAST

DECADE OR SO. THERE WAS A TIME WHEN COMMENTATORS

AND OBSERVERS OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION WERE

SOMEWHAT SKEPTICAL OF THE PREDICTIONS THAT THE

PROFESSION OF LAW WAS ABOUT TO EXPERIENCE PROFOUND

CHANGES IN A WORLD, SOME SAID, THAT NO LONGER

DEPENDED ON THE SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE THAT ONLY

LAWYERS COULD FORMERLY PROVIDE.

LIKE THE CLIMATE CHANGE DEBATE, THERE NOW SEEMS TO BE

A BROAD CONSENSUS THAT THE LEGAL PROFESSION, NOT JUST

IN ONTARIO BUT IN MOST WESTERN DEMOCRACIES AS WELL, IS

EXPERIENCING PROFOUND, RAPID, STRUCTURAL CHANGE.

EVERYTHING, FROM HOW LAWYERS ARE EDUCATED AND

4

TRAINED TO HOW AND WHAT THEY PRACTICE, IS APPARENTLY

FAIR GAME FOR FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT REGULATORY REFORM OR

AT LEAST FOR FAIRLY SIGNIFICANT CALLS FOR REGULATORY

REFORM.

WE ARE WITNESSING THE BEGINNING OF A MAJOR

TRANSFORMATION IN THE PROFESSION AND IN ATTITUDES OF

THE PUBLIC THE LAWYER PROFESSION HAS TRADITIONALLY

SERVED.

IN TURN, LEGAL REGULATORS IN CANADA HAVE HAD TO RE-

THINK THEIR TRADITIONAL MODELS OF REGULATION TO

ADDRESS NEW REALITIES AND TO ENSURE THAT THE PUBLIC

INTEREST IS PROTECTED FROM UNETHICAL OR INCOMPETENT

LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDERS. IN A FEW MOMENTS I WILL

ELABORATE ON SOME OF THE APPROACHES AND MODELS THAT

THE LAW SOCIETY IS ASSESSING AS PART OF ITS REGULATORY

RESPONSE TO SOME OF THESE CHANGES.

5

TO BE FAIR TO YOU, I NEED A MINUTE HERE TO EXPLAIN A FEW

OF THE STRANGE TERMS I AM APT TO USE REFLEXIVELY,

FORGETTING THAT NOT ALL OF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE

ARCANE LEXICON OF LAW SOCIETIES. THE LEGAL PROFESSION

IS SELF-REGULATING. WE ARE GOVERNED IN ONTARIO BY THE

LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA, FOUNDED IN 1797 BY AN ACT

OF THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF UPPER CANADA. WE

INHERITED MANY TRADITIONS OF THE ENGLISH COMMON LAW

AND THE ENGLISH INNS OF COURT, INCLUDING THE NAME OF

TREASURER FOR OUR PRESIDENT, AND BENCHERS FOR THE

ELECTED MEMBERS OF OUR BOARD OF GOVERNORS.

TODAY THERE ARE 40 LAWYERS AND 5 PARALEGALS ELECTED

BY THE PROFESSIONS TO OVERSEE THE REGULATION OF THE

LEGAL PROFESSIONS. THE GOVERNING BOARD MEETS ON A

MONTHLY BASIS MOST MONTHS OF THE YEAR, AND WE CALL

THAT MEETING CONVOCATION. CONVOCATION INCLUDES 8 LAY

BENCHERS, NEITHER LAWYERS NOR PARALEGALS, APPOINTED

BY THE GOVERNMENT. THE LAWYERS AND PARALEGAL

6

BENCHERS ARE ELECTED EVERY FOUR YEARS BY THEIR

RESPECTIVE PROFESSIONS. THERE ARE ALSO A NUMBER OF

VOTING AND NON-VOTING BENCHERS, MADE UP OF EX-

TREASURERS, FORMER ATTORNEYS GENERAL, AND EX-OFFICIO

MEMBERS.

IF I DON’T REMIND MYSELF TO TELL YOU THIS AT THE

BEGINNING, I’M LIABLE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SPEECH TO

LEAVE YOU WONDERING WHAT I MEAN WHEN I SAY

CONVOCATION IS GOING TO VOTE OR BENCHERS ARE GOING

TO DEBATE SOMETHING.

IN 2006, THE ONTARIO LEGISLATURE PASSED BILL14, THE

ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT. IN THIS AMENDMENT TO THE LAW

SOCIETY ACT, THE GOVERNMENT AMENDED THE LAW

SOCIETY’S MANDATE, EFFECTIVELY CHANGING US FROM THE

REGULATOR OF LAWYERS IN ONTARIO TO THE REGULATOR OF

LEGAL SERVICES AND LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDERS.

7

THIS WAS DONE IN PART TO ALLOW FOR THE REGULATION OF

PARALEGALS AS WELL AS LAWYERS, BUT ALSO, AS THE NAME

OF BILL 14 SUGGESTS, IT WAS AN OPPORTUNITY TO IMPOSE

THE EXPRESS STATUTORY DUTY “TO ACT SO AS TO FACILITATE

ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR ALL ONTARIANS.”

AS A RESULT OF THESE AMENDMENTS, THE LAW SOCIETY HAS

SPENT THE LAST SIX YEARS OR SO SUCCESSFULLY

IMPLEMENTING PARALEGAL LICENSING AND REGULATION. WE

ARE THE FIRST JURISDICTION IN NORTH AMERICA TO HAVE

ACHIEVED THIS STATUS. WE HAVE LEARNED A GREAT DEAL IN

THE PROCESS AND THE EXPERIENCE IS DRIVING FURTHER

REGULATORY CHANGE AS THE IMPLICATIONS OF REGULATING

LEGAL SERVICES, AND NOT JUST LAWYERS AS WE HAVE

TRADITIONALLY DONE FOR OVER 200 YEARS, BECOME CLEARER

TO US.

WE HAVE COMPLETED THE FIRST PHASE OF PARALEGAL

REGULATION. WE HAVE HAD SOME TIME TO REFLECT ON WHAT

8

THE LONG-TERM IMPLICATIONS MAY BE FOR THE LAW SOCIETY

NOW THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS GIVEN US THIS EXPRESS

STATUTORY DUTY.

IT IS LARGELY WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF CONSIDERING THIS

NEW STATUTORY DUTY THAT OUR REGULATORY PRACTICES

AND POLICIES HAVE BEGUN TO CHANGE, AND WILL CONTINUE

TO CHANGE, PERHAPS DRAMATICALLY, IN THE NEXT FEW

YEARS.

I WILL SPEAK MORE ABOUT ACCESS TO JUSTICE IN A FEW

MINUTES, BUT I ALSO WANT TO TOUCH MOMENTARILY ON THE

GLOBALIZATION OF THE BUSINESS OF LAW, THE IMPACT OF

TECHNOLOGY ON THE PRACTICE OF LAW, CHANGES TO THE

LICENSING PROCESS IN ONTARIO FOR LAWYERS, THE GROWTH

OF THE PARALEGAL PROFESSION, AND THE RECENT CHANGES

TO THE NATIONAL MOBILITY AGREEMENT – SINCE EACH OF

THESE ARE SIGNIFICANT DRIVERS OF CHANGE.

9

THESE ISSUES PLAY OUT AGAINST A BACK DROP OF AN OFTEN

CRITICAL PUBLIC WITH INTERNET ACCESS AND NEW WAYS OF

CONSUMING INFORMATION, WHICH SEEM OUT OF SYNC WITH

MANY OF OUR EXISTING PROCESSES AND PRACTICES.

TRADITIONAL WAYS OF ACCESSING THE JUSTICE SYSTEM ARE

BREAKING DOWN OR HAVE ALREADY BROKEN DOWN. CLIENT

DEMANDS AND THE DEMANDS OF THE PUBLIC ARE CREATING

NEW PRESSUES NOT ONLY ON EVERY ASPECT OF THE

PRACTICE OF LAW, BUT ON OUR ENTIRE SYSTEM OF JUSTICE.

AND WITH EACH NEW DEMAND COMES THE NEED FOR US TO

RE-EXAMINE OUR REGULATORY PROCESSES, POLICIES AND

PRIORITIES.

ONTARIANS NEED LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO CAN HELP

THEM NAVIGATE IN AN INTERCONNECTED WORLD. AS THE

REGULATOR OF LEGAL SERIVCES WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND

AND PROVIDE AN APPROPRIATE REGULATORY RESPONSE TO A

WORLD IN WHICH ONTARIONS ACCESS LEGAL SERVICES THAT

ARE NOT BASED IN ONTARIO AND WHERE ONTARIO LEGAL

10

SERVICE PROVIDERS ARE OFTEN PROVIDING LEGAL SERVICES

TO INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES WHO DO NOT RESIDE IN ONTARIO

AND HAVE NO PHYSICAL PRESENCE HERE.

AS WE ALL KNOW, SINCE THE EARLY 1990S, CANADIAN LAW

FIRMS HAVE EXPANDED OUTSIDE THEIR CITIES AND PROVINCIAL

JURISDICTIONS TO FORM NATIONAL LAW FIRMS, PROVIDING

THEIR CLIENTS WITH LEGAL SERVICES ACROSS THE COUNTRY

AND AROUND THE WORLD.

IN RECENT YEARS, WE HAVE SEEN CANADIAN LAW FIRMS

MERGE WITH LAW FIRMS FROM BEYOND CANADA’S BORDERS

TO FORM INTERNATIONAL AFFILIATIONS AND PARTNERSHIPS.

THESE PARTNERSHIPS ARE NOW MANAGED AND DIRECTED BY

LAWYERS WHO ARE NOT REGULATED BY ANY LAW SOCIETY IN

CANADA.

IN RECENT DAYS, WE HAVE SEEN THE VERY SUDDEN AND

COMPLETE COLLAPSE OF A MAJOR, NATIONAL CANADIAN LAW

11

FIRM. KEEP IN MIND THAT IT’S BEEN LESS THAN 25 YEARS SINCE

THE SCC ALLOWED LAWYERS TO FORM INTERPROVINCIAL

PARTNERSHIPS.

IT IS FAIR TO SAY THAT CANADIAN LAW SOCIETIES HAVE SEEN

MORE CHANGE IN THE LEGAL PROFESSION AND IN THE WAY

THEY REGULATE LAWYERS IN THE LAST DECADE THAN THEY

SAW IN THEIR FIRST 200 YEARS OF EXISTENCE.

THESE DRAMATIC AND ABRUPT CHANGES IN OUR LEGAL

LANDSCAPE HAVE CAUSED CANADIAN LAW SOCIETIES TO

REEXAMINE THEIR REGULATORY FUNCTIONS AND TO

COOPERATE IN REGULATING LAWYERS WHO NOW PRACTICE IN

MULIPLE PROVINCIAL JURISDICTIONS, WHO ARE MEMBERS OF

INTERNATIONAL LAW FIRMS OR WHO WORK AS LAWYERS IN

GOVERNMENT.

AS A RESULT OF THIS COLLABORATIVE REGULATORY

APPROACH, WE NOW HAVE IN PLACE A NATIONAL MOBILITY

12

AGREEMENT, WHICH ALLOWS LAWYERS, WHETHER THEY ARE

TRAINED IN THE COMMON-LAW TRADITION OR IN THE QUEBEC

CIVIL LAW TRADITION, TO PRACTISE FREELY IN EVERY

CANADIAN JURISDICTION TEMPORARILY AND TO TRANSFER

PERMANENTLY, WITHOUT HAVING TO REQUALIFY IN EACH

JURISDICTION. THE NATIONAL MOBILITY AGREEMENT IS THE

PRODUCT OF A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT ON THE PART OF ALL

THE LAW SOCIETIES OF CANADA TO ADDRESS THE NEW

REALITY THAT MANY CANADIAN AND ONTARIO LAWYERS DON’T

PRACTICE IN LIMITED GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS OR JUDICIAL

BOUNDARIES.

THE NATIONAL MOBILITY AGREEMENT ALSO MEANS THAT

FRENCH-SPEAKING ONTARIANS WILL HAVE BETTER ACCESS TO

LEGAL SERVICES IN THE FRENCH LANGUAGE.

FINALLY, THE NATIONAL MOBILITY AGREEMENT IS ALSO A

RECOGNITION THAT CANADA’S BIJURIDICAL SYSTEM HAS

EVOLVED TO THE POINT WHEN WE CAN NOW ACKNOWLEDGE

13

THAT THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN THE COMMON LAW

JURISDICTIONS AND THE CIVIL LAW SYSTEM OF QUEBEC ARE

GREATER THAN THEIR DIFFERENCES. IT IS A RECOGNITION

THAT IT NO LONGER MAKES SENSE IN THIS CENTURY TO

MAINTAIN ARITFICIAL DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN CANADIAN

LAWYERS TRAINED IN ONE TRADITION OR THE OTHER.

THE WORLD WIDE WEB AND TECHNOLOGY ARE ALSO

FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGING HOW LEGAL INFORMATION IS

ACCESSED BY BOTH THE PROFESSION AND THE PUBLIC. IN

SOME WAYS THIS IS DEMOCRATIZING THE LAW. ONLINE LEGAL

RESEARCH, SUCH AS SERVICES PROVIDED THROUGH CANLII

WERE UNIMAGINABLE JUST A FEW YEARS AGO.

HOWEVER, CERTAIN TECHNOLOGIES ARE, AS NOTED LEGAL

FUTURIST RICHARD SUSSKIND SUGGESTS, MORE “DISRUPTIVE”

TO THE LEGAL PROFESSION THAN OTHERS.

WE ALL KNOW GLOBALIZATION AND TECHNOLOGY ARE HAVING

A PROFOUND IMPACT ON THE TRADITIONAL WAYS IN WHICH

14

LEGAL WORK IS UNDERTAKEN AND COMPLETED. CERTAIN

TASKS PREVIOUSLY PERFORMED BY LAWYERS AND

PARALEGALS IN CANADA ARE BEING OUTSOURCED TO SERVICE

PROVIDERS IN OTHER COUNTRIES. FILES WHICH WERE

TRADITIONALLY HANDLED EXCLUSIVELY BY LAWYERS ARE

BEING SEPARATED OUT INTO THEIR CONSTITUENT PARTS, WITH

CERTAIN TASKS BEING ASSIGNED TO TECHNOLOGY

COMPANIES, PROJECT MANAGERS OR OTHERS. SOME OF

THESE TASKS ARE EVEN BEING AUTOMATED NOW, AND

HANDLED BY A POWERFUL HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE THAT

EMPLOY SOPHISTICATED ALGORITHMS FOR ANALYZING THE

CONTENT OF DOCUMENTS. A RECENT NEW YORK TIMES

ARTICLE REPORTS THAT SOFTWARE DEVELOPERS ARE MAKING

CLAIMS THAT THEIR SOFTWARE CAN REVIEW AND ANALYZE

THOUSANDS OF DOCUMENTS MORE ACCURATELY THAN A

ROOM FULL OF HARVARD-EDUCATED LAWYERS.

15

MEANWHILE THE NUMBERS OF ONTARIANS WITH UNMET LEGAL

NEEDS CONTINUE TO CLIMB, APPARENTLY WITHOUT

ABATEMENT.

THESE PROFOUND CHANGES IN THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL

SERVICES AND IN THE INCREASING GAP BETWEEN THOSE WHO

CAN AFFORD OR HAVE ACCESS TO LEGAL SERVICES AND

THOSE WHO CANNOT AFFORD OR DO NOT HAVE SUCH ACCESS

PRESENT SPECIAL CHALLENGES FOR THE REGULATOR OF THE

LEGAL PROFESSIONS.

LAWYERS AND PARALEGALS HAVE ALWAYS PLAYED AN

IMPORTANT PART IN A STABLE AND WELL FUNCTIONING

PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL ECONOMY. IN A WORLD THAT NO

LONGER RESPECTS PROVINCIAL BOUNDARIES DRAWN UP IN

THE 19TH CENTURY, WE NOW NEED TO CONTEMPLATE HOW WE

REGULATE LEGAL SERVICES THAT ARE OR WILL BE DELIVERED

THROUGH A GROWING ARRAY OF ALTERNATE BUSINESS

STRUCTURES EMERGING IN OTHER COUNTRIES.

16

IT IS NO LONGER ENOUGH TO ENSURE LAWYERS ARE

REGULATED INDIVIDUALLY IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST, WITHOUT

REFERENCE TO WHAT IS REALLY GOING ON IN THE WAY LEGAL

SERVICES ARE ORGANIZED AND DELIVERED TO THE PUBLIC.

LET’S LOOK FOR A MINUTE AT SOME OF THE EVOLVING

REGULATORY SCHEMES IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS, WHICH ARE

LIBERALIZING RULES AND REGULATIONS ON HOW LEGAL

SERVICES CAN BE ORGANIZED AND DELIVERED AND BY WHOM.

IN AUSTRALIA, INCORPORATED LEGAL PRACTICES CAN NOW

TRADE ON THE STOCK EXCHANGE. IN ENGLAND, SMALL LOCAL

SOLICITORS’ PRACTICES HAVE BEEN ORGANIZED UNDER THE

BRAND NAME “QUALITY SOLICITORS”. GO ON THEIR WEB SITE –

IT IS WORTH A LOOK AT WHAT THE FUTURE MIGHT HOLD FOR

US. IN THE UNITED STATES, LEGAL ZOOM AND ROCKET LAWYER

ARE TWO INTERNET-BASED LEGAL SERVICES THAT HAVE

17

EXPANED INTO PRACTICE AREAS TRADITIONALLY, FORMERLY

AND EXCLUSIVELY OCCUPIED BY LAWYERS.

THE FOUNDERS OF EBAY AND PAYPAL ARE INVESTING IN ON-

LINE LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDER STARTUPS BECAUSE THEY

HAVE SEEN THE ONLINE DESPUTE RESOLUTION SERVICES

OFFERED BY EBAY AND PAYPAL SUCCEED IN ALLOWING THEIR

CUSTOMERS TO RESOLVE TRANSACTION DISPUTES QUICKLY

AND WITH A PROFIT TO THEM.

THE LAW SOCIETY OF ENGLAND AND WALES ISSUED ITS FIRST

LICENCES TO 30 LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDERS WHO WILL

PROVIDE THIER SERVICES IN ALTERNATE BUSINESS

STRUCTURES. AMONG THE FIRST LICENSES WAS ONE ISSUED

TO THE BRITISH “CO-OP”CHAIN OF STORES WHICH WILL BEGIN

TO PROVIDE LEGAL SERVICES ALONG WITH THE FOOD,

BANKING, INSURANCE, PHARMACY, TRAVEL AND FUNERAL CARE

SERVICES IT ALREADY PROVIDES. THE 7.5-MILLION MEMBER CO-

OP NOW EMPLOYS 550 PEOPLE IN PROVIDING LEGAL SERVICES

18

TO ITS MEMBERS AND HAS GENERATED 42 TO 43 MILLION

POUNDS PER YEAR IN REVENUES FROM THAT ENDEAVOUR.

LAW SOCIEITES IN AUSTRALIA, THE UNITED KINGDOM, AND

ELSEWHERE HAVE ANTICIPATED AND RESPONDED TO THESE

DEVELOPMENTS BY CREATING REGULATIONS THAT ENABLE

LEGAL SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED BY BUSINESS STRUCTURES

THAT ARE VERY DIFFERENT FROM THE TRADITIONAL MODELS

OF LAW FIRM PARTNERSHIPS AND SOLE PRACTICE

PROPRIETORSHIPS. THEY DO THIS BOTH TO IMPROVE ACCESS

TO LEGAL SERVICES, AND TO ENSURE THAT THEIR LEGAL

SERVICE PROVIDERS BECOME AND REMAIN GLOBALLY

COMPETITIVE.

WHAT WILL WE DO ABOUT THIS? DO WE FOLLOW THE UNITED

KINGDOM AND AUSTRALIA? IN WHOLE OR SELECTIVELY? OR DO

WE FOLLOW THE U.S., AND RESIST ALTERNATIVE BUSINESS

STRUCTURES FOR ORGANIZING THE DELIVERY OF LEGAL

19

SERVICES TO THE PUBLIC? THESE ARE QUESTIONS WE WILL

ANSWER FOR OURSELVES IN THE COMING YEAR.

AS I HAVE ALREADY SAID, WE WANT TO BE SURE THAT LEGAL

SERVICE PROVIDERS IN ONTARIO WILL BE COMPETITIVE AND

RELEVANT IN WHAT IS A RAPIDLY EMERGING WORLD MARKET.

ALTERNATE BUSINESS STRUCTURES MAY HELP US DO THAT.

THEY MAY ALSO HELP US SUSTAIN AND ENHANCE THE SUPPLY

OF LEGAL SERVICES TO GEOGRAPHICAL AREAS AND PRACTICE

AREAS THAT ARE CURRENTLY UNDERSERVICED.

SO WE LOOK TO THE FUTURE, BUT WE LOOK WITH

APPROPRIATE CAUTION. CONVOCATION HAS THEREFORE

CREATED AN ALTERNATE BUSINESS STRUCTURES WORKING

GROUP TO CONSIDER THE THORNY ISSUES RELATED TO

ALTERNATE BUSINESS STRUCTURES, AND WHETHER AND HOW

TO RESPOND TO THEM. ITS MANDATE IS TO CONSIDER THE

MODELS THAT ARE OPERATIONAL IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS,

20

AND TO RECOMMEND TO CONVOCATION AREAS FOR FURTHER,

MORE DETAILED EXPLORATION AND EXAMINATION.

AS I MENTIONED AT THE OUTSET OF MY REMARKS, THE LAW

SOCIETY HAS HAD A SPECIFIC MANDATE SINCE LEGISLATIVE

CHANGES OF 2006 TO “FACILITATE ACCESS TO JUSTICE.”

SO WHY IS THAT IMPORTANT IN 2014 AND WHY IS IT IMPORTANT

TO YOU AS A FUTURE LAWYERS?

I RECENTLY SAY AN ITEM ON THE NEWS THAT I THOUGHT

PRESENTED A PRETTY GOOD ANALOGY OF THE PRESENT

PLIGHT OF OUR JUDICIAL SYSTEM.

THE CITY OF DETROIT IS BANKRUPT. THERE ARE NO MORE

MUNICIPAL SERVICES BEING OFFERED, BECAUSE THERE IS NO

MONEY TO PAY FOR THEM. THE WHOLE INFRASTRUCTURE HAS

COLLAPSED. THEY’RE NOT PLOUGHING SNOW, PICKING UP THE

GARBAGE, CLEARING THE STREETS, ETC.

21

AND WHAT’S HAPPENED IS THAT ORDINARY CITIZENS HAVE

DECIDED THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE THINGS INTO THEIR OWN

HANDS. THERE’S THIS WHOLE MOVEMENT IN DETROIT WHERE

THE CITIZENRY IS TAKING BACK THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT

HAD BEEN GIVEN OVER TO THE MUNICIPALITY WHO WAS

OBVIOUSLY PROVIDING SERVICES AT A PRICE THE CITY

COULDN’T AFFORD.

OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM HAS BECOME FAR TOO COMPLICATED

AND EXPENSIVE, AND IT’S JUST COLLAPSING DOWN ON ITSELF.

PEOPLE ARE INCREASINGLY UNABLE OR UNWILLING TO RESORT

TO IT, AND ARE SIMPLY STARTING TO DO THEIR OWN THING; IF

THEY DO ANYTHING AT ALL TO ADDRESS THEIR LEGAL

PROBLEMS.

IT’S NOT A QUESTION OF HOW CAN WE GET THE OLD SYSTEM

BACK, THE QUESTION IS HOW ARE WE GOING TO ADAPT TO THE

NEW REALITY OF TODAY? AND HOW ARE WE GOING TO MAKE

22

SURE THAT THE CITIZENS OF ONTARIO DON’T HAVE TO

MAINTAIN THEIR OWN STREETS, PICK UP THEIR OWN GARBAGE,

ETC.?

SO WHEN WE’RE MAKING CHANGES AT THE LAW SOCIETY, IT’S

BECAUSE WE’RE ADAPTING TO CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCES, IN

WHICH THE REALITY IS THAT MANY PEOPLE WON’T OR CANNOT

AFFORD TO RETAIN LEGAL PROFESSIONALS TO ASSIST THEM

WITH THEIR LEGAL ISSUES.

WE ARE EXPERIENCING HUGE SEISMIC SHIFTS IN OUR JUSTICE

SYSTEM, AND WE’RE NOT GOING BACK. REFORM ON EVERY

LEVEL IS IN THE CARDS. AND THE LAW SOCIETY WILL PLAY A

SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN THAT REFORM PROCESS.

THE DAY IS COMING WHEN PEOPLE IN THIS PROVINCE WILL

HAVE GREATER ACCESS TO A BROADER RANGE OF LEGAL

SERVICES PROVIDED BY A BROADER RANGE OF SERVICE

23

PROVIDERS. AND WHERE THEY NEED REPRESENTATION BY A

LAWYER, PERHAPS THEY’LL BE REPRESENTED AT LEAST IN

PART BY A LAWYER ON A LIMITED SCOPE RETAINER, A LAWYER

WHO HAS BEEN TRAINED AND EDUCATED IN A DIFFERENT WAY

THAN TODAY, AND WHO OFFERS LEGAL SERVICES THROUGH A

DIFFERENT BUSINESS MODEL THAN THE TRADITIONAL ONES WE

KNOW TODAY.

RECENTLY I HOSTED A SYMPOSIUM ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE. WE

HEARD FROM JUSTICE THOMAS CROMWELL AND THE NATIONAL

ACTION COMMITTEE ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE. WE DISCUSSED

SELF-RERESENTED LITIGANTS AND THE GROWING GAPS FOR

MANY ONTARIANS TRYING TO NAVIGATE THE JUSTICE SYSTEM.

WE CAME AWAY WITH AT LEAST SOME OF JUSTICE CROMWELL’S

PRINCIPLES ECHOING IN OUR HEADS: ENGAGE THE PUBLIC,

COLLABORATE, SIMPLIFY, TAKE ACTION, FOCUS ON OUTCOMES.

I AM CONVINCED THAT THE LAW SOCIETY IS UNIQUELY

POSITIONED TO PROVIDE NEEDED LEADERSHIP – FACILITATIVE

24

LEADERSHIP – THROUGH ESTABLISHMENT OF A STANDING

FORUM FOR DIALOGUE. THROUGH SUCH A FORUM, WE CAN

CONTINUE TO BRING THE DIVERSE PARTIES TO OUR JUSTICE

SYSTEM TOGETHER – TO IDENTIFY PRIORITIES, COMMIT TO

SPECIFIC ACTIONS AND WORK PLANS, AND FACILITATE THE

COLLABORATION NECESSARY TO BRING THOSE PLANS TO

FRUITION. SUCH A FORUM HAS THE POTENTIAL TO BECOME AN

IMPORTANT DRIVER FOR FURTHER POLICY DEVELOPMENT AND

REFORM ON ACCESS TO JUSTICE ISSUES, A DRIVER THAT IS

FOCUSED ON THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

THIS EXTERNAL FORUM WILL HELP TO ENSURE THAT THE LAW

SOCIETY’S ACTIVITIES ARE COMPLEMENTARY AND SUPPORTIVE

OF THE WORK OF OTHER KEY PARTNERS AND, IMPORTANTLY,

INFORMED BY USERS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS MOST FAMILIAR

WITH ISSUE-SPECIFIC CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES. THE

LAW SOCIETY RECOGNIZES THAT BROAD SUPPORT OF THESE

PARTNERS AND ONTARIANS GENERALLY IS ESSENTIAL TO

ACHIEVING AND SUSTAINING MEANINGFUL CHANGE.

25

THIS TYPE OF COOPERATION AND COLLABORATION HAS BEEN

REPEATEDLY IDENTIFIED AS A NECESSARY PRECURSOR TO

PRACTICAL AND LONG-LASTING CHANGE. THE LACK OF A

SINGLE DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY WITH SOLE RESPONSIBILITY

FOR THE DELIVERY OF JUSTICE IN CANADA HAS BEEN

IDENTIFIED AS A KEY “IMPLEMENTATION GAP” OR IMPEDIMENT

TO MOVING FORWARD WITH SYSTEMIC CHANGE. REPORTS OF

THE LAST YEAR HAVE RECOMMENDED VARIOUS STRATEGIES

AND STRUCTURES TO FOSTER THE LEADERSHIP AND

COLLABORATION ALL AGREE IS NEEDED.

THIS PROPOSAL SHOULD BE SEEN AS A FIRST STEP IN

REALIZING THE STRUCTURES THAT THE ACTION COMMITTEE

AND CANADIAN BAR ASSOCIATION HAVE RECOMMENDED. NO

OTHER BODY IN ONTARIO HAS YET STEPPED FORWARD TO

PROVIDE THE INFRASTRUCTURE NECESSARY TO THE

COLLABORATIVE FORUM ALL HAVE RECOMMENDED. THE LAW

SOCIETY IS UNIQUELY POSITIONED TO DO SO AND TO CONVENE

26

MEETINGS OF A BROAD CROSS-SECTION OF SYSTEM PARTNERS

AND BEYOND.

WE WILL NOT WAIT. THERE IS MOMENTUM NOW AND WE MUST

SUSTAIN IT. I HAVE DEVELOPED A COMPREHENSIVE PROPOSAL

REGARDING A LAW SOCIETY ROLE FOR CONVOCATION’S

CONSIDERATION. WITH THEIR SUPPORT, I HOPE TO HAVE THE

INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE BEFORE THE END OF MY TERM TO

ENSURE THAT WE BETTER FULFIL OUR STATUTORY MANDATE

TO FACILITATE ACCESS TO JUSTICE FOR ONTARIANS. IF I AM

SUCCESSFUL IN PROPOSING MAJOR INFRASTRUCTURE

REFORM WITHIN THE LAW SOCIETY, YOU WILL SEE A LAW

SOCIETY THAT HAS THREE-LEGS OR PILLARS OF REGULATORY

ACTIVITY: ENSURING COMPETENCY IN THE DELVERY OF LEGAL

SERVICES, ENSURING THAT LEGAL SERVICE PROVIDERS

BEHAVE ETHICALLY AND FACILITATING LEADERSHIP ON ACCESS

TO JUSTICE IN A PUBLIC-FIRST APPROACH.

27

FINALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO TOUCH ON ANOTHER KEY

REGULATORY CHANGE THAT WE ARE IMPLEMENTING. THAT IS

THE INTRODUCTIONSPECIFICALLY OF A NEW PATHWAY TO

BECOMING A LAWYER IN ONTARIO. I’M SURE MANY OF YOU

KNOW THAT THE ARTICING YEAR REQUIRED FOR LICENSING

HAS BECOME A BARRIER TO SOME OVER THE LAST DECADE.

FOR THE MOST RECENT GRADUATING CLASS, AS MANY AS 12

TO 15 PER CENT OF THE LICENSING CANDIDATES HAVE BEEN

UNABLE TO SECURE AN ARTICLING POSITION. CONVOCATION

APPOINTED AN ARTICLING TASK FORCE, OF WHICH I WAS THE

CHAIR BEFORE BEING ELECTED TREASURER. WE CONSULTED

EXTENSIVELY WITH THE PROFESSION AND ALSO REVIEWED THE

BEST PRACTICES FOR EXPERIENTIAL TRAINING FOR LAWYERS

IN OTHER JURISDICTIONS.

IN NOVEMBER OF 2012 CONVOCATION VOTED TO CREATE A

LEGAL PRACTICE PROGRAM AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO ARTICLING.

28

IN 2013 WE ACCEPTED PROPOSALS FROM RYERSON AND THE

UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA TO PROVIDE THAT LAW PRACTICE

PROGRAM IN ENGLISH AND FRENCH RESPECTIVELY. THIS

SEPTEMBER THE FIRST PARTICIPANTS IN THE LPP WILL BEGIN

THE PROGRAM.

THIS IS A VERY EXCITING PROSPECT, AND A GROUND-BREAKING

ONE. IT MEANS THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN ONTARIO THERE

WILL BE AN ALTERNATIVE TO ARTICLING IN THE FORM OF A NEW

PATHWAY AVAILABLE FOR LICENSING CANDIDATES – ONE

WHICH ENSURES THAT ALL QUALIFIED APPLICANTS ENTERING

THE LICENSING PROCESS CAN EXPECT TO BE CALLED TO THE

BAR AND TO PRACTISE LAW IN ONTARIO.

THE PATHWAYS PILOT PROJECT IS ESTABLISHING THE LAW

SOCIETY LAW PRACTICE PROGRAM (LPP) AS ONE PATHWAY TO

LICENSING. PATHWAYS IS PROACTIVELY RESPONDING TO THE

CHANGING LEGAL LANDSCAPE AND REMOVING UNFAIR

29

BARRIERS TO LICENSING CREATED BY THE ARTICLING

PLACEMENT SHORTAGE.

WITH THE LPP IN PLACE, ALL QUALIFIED CANDIDATES HAVE THE

OPPORTUNITY TO COMPLETE THE LAWYER LICENSING

PROCESS AND BE CALLED TO THE ONTARIO BAR.

THE LPP AND ARTICLING PATHWAYS WILL BE EVALUATED OVER

THE THREE-YEAR PILOT PROJECT TO DETERMINE THE MOST

EFFECTIVE MEANS OF TRANSITIONAL LEGAL TRAINING.

IMPROVEMENTS AND ADJUSTMENTS MAY BE MADE TO THE LPP

AND ARTICLING PROGRAM DURING THOSE THREE YEARS.

THE LPP IS AN EXPERIENTIAL LEGAL TRAINING PROGRAM

CONSISTING OF A 4-MONTH TRAINING COURSE AND A 4-MONTH

WORK PLACEMENT. THE ENGLISH-LANGUAGE LPP WILL BE

PROVIDED BY RYERSON UNIVERSITY. THE UNIVERSITY OF

OTTAWA WILL PROVIDE THE FRENCH-LANGUAGE LPP. THE LPP

30

WILL BE IN PLACE FOR THE 2014-15 LICENSING PROCESS AND

WILL BEGIN THIS SEPTEMBER.

THE LAW SOCIETY HAS ALSO APPROVED AN INTEGRATED

PRACTICE CURRICULUM AT LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY IN THUNDER

BAY.

BEGINNING WITH THE INAUGURAL CLASS, GRADUATES OF

LAKEHEAD’S JD PROGRAM WILL ONLY NEED TO PASS THE

LICENSING EXAMINATIONS AND SATISFY THE GOOD

CHARACTER REQUIREMENT TO COMPLETE THE LAWYER

LICENSING PROCESS AND BE CALLED TO THE BAR IN ONTARIO.

THEY WILL NOT NEED TO ARTICLE OR COMPLETE THE LAW

PRACTICE PROGRAM OR PAY THE ARTICLING/LPP PORTION OF

THE LICENSING PROCESS FEE.

STUDENTS ENROLLED IN THE JD PROGRAM AT LAKEHEAD WILL

COMPLETE INTEGRATED PRACTICE TRAINING AND DO WORK

PLACEMENTS WITHIN THEIR THREE-YEAR DEGREE. THE

31

CURRICULUM INTEGRATES LEGAL SKILLS WITH SUBSTANTIVE

LEGAL KNOWLEDGE. IT IS THE FIRST PROGRAM OF ITS KIND IN

CANADA TO INTEGRATE LEGAL PROFESSIONAL TRAINING INTO

ITS JD DEGREE. THERE WILL BE NO ADDITIONAL COST TO

STUDENTS.

IN SUMMARY, I THINK IT IS CLEAR THAT THE REGULATION OF

LEGAL SERVICES IN ONTARIO IS ALREADY BEING

TRANSFORMED. THE SCOPE OF CHANGE AND RATE AT WHICH

CHANGES ARE OCCURING CAN BE OVERWHELMING AT TIMES.

THE CHALLENGE IS TO EMBRACE THE CHANGE AND TO SHAPE

IT SO THAT OUR PROFESSION REMAINS VIBRANT AND

RESPECTED, AND CONTINUES TO PLAY A VITAL ROLE IN

ENSURING ALL ONTARIANS HAVE ACCESS TO JUSTICE.

MERCI DE VOTRE ATTENTION ET DE VOTRE INVITATION À FAIRE

PARTIE DE VOTRE CLASSE. JE SERAI HEUREUX DE RÉPONDRE À

VOS QUESTIONS.

32

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION, AND FOR YOUR INVITATION

TO BE PART OF YOUR CLASS. I’M HAPPY TO TAKE QUESTIONS.