There is no doubting the impact caused by the publication of David Clementi’s Review of the Regulatory Framework for Legal Services back in December 2004. Since then, commentators have sought to examine the opportunities for those outside the legal profession to enter into arrangements where they hold a share of a firms equity alongside solicitors and barristers in multi-disciplinary partnerships (MDPs). Attention has focused almost exclusively on the benefits for such firms in having professionals, like accountants working in conjunction with more traditional partnership structures.

The Bar Council has cautiously welcomed the government proposals for reform. Former Chairman of the Bar, Guy Mansfield argued that: “it should be as easy as possible for lawyers with different professional qualifications to work in the same legal practice”. Nevertheless, reaction from the profession as a whole has not been uniformly positive. Last month in this publication, Ian West, a barrister with Fountain Chambers, argued that the introduction of a multi-disciplinary approach to legal services may be “clutching a viper to our bosom”.

Against this backdrop, I feel it is an appropriate juncture at which to consider an area, which has received scant attention. The role of political lobbyists in the legal profession is of huge potential benefit to both groups. The deregulation of the legal services market has raised a number of questions and opportunities for solicitors and barristers to expand upon the range of services they offer. Nonetheless there are a number of obstacles that stand in the way of closer integration.

The main barrier between lawyers and lobbyists is the lack of mutual understanding between the professions. Mark Adams is a board member of the Association of Professional Political Consultants (APPC), and the Managing Director of Foresight Communications. He is the most senior former civil servant working in the public affairs industry, and is pessimistic about the current level of knowledge within the legal sector about the work of lobbyists. “It is a sad fact that on the whole law firms don’t recognise the potential that the lobbying industry has to offer.” This problem is not restricted to lawyers and Mark feels that some blame should be apportioned to lobbyists. “It is partly the fault of the public affairs industry in failing to take advantage of the opportunities to link up with firms.”

The problem is partly a historical one. The UK public affairs industry is relatively young. Many of the biggest players in today’s market only started up in the wake of Labour’s 1997 election victory. The common public perception is of an industry characterised by brown envelopes and backhanders. Since the early nineties, a number of scandals have dimmed the reputation of the industry in the public’s mind, and the Committee on Standards in Public Life recently announced an inquiry into the role and influence of the lobbying industry. This malaise is not unique to the UK however, as recent media coverage of the Abramhoff scandal in Washington has demonstrated. In addition to this wider perception, there is a sense of an identity crisis within the public affairs industry itself as to whether it should exist independently of the public relations industry, or whether it should form part of an additional service offered by larger industries such as the financial services sector or law. Much of the problem lies with the perception that there is no defined body of professional knowledge in the same way as accountancy and law. The public affairs industry has worked hard in recent years to shake off its somewhat tarnished image. The APPC code of conduct now covers 80% of independent lobbyists. Having struggled to define their sense of identity, lobbyists are gradually becoming more professionalised. The Chartered Institute of Public Relations received its Royal Charter in February 2005, marking another step towards the formal recognition of lobbying as a profession in its own right

The legal profession in Brussels and Washington shows no such reticence. It has become almost de rigueur in Washington for law firms to provide a service to clients, which combine advice at all, stages of the legislative process. A brief glance at the top fifteen law firms ranked by highest lobbying revenues illustrates how far the domination of Capitol Hill extends. Washington has long led the way in this field, but Europe is close behind, and rapidly emerging as a serious rival with around 15’000 lobbyists working in Brussels alone. Lawyers in the UK are slowly catching on to the idea of widening the range of services they provide. DLA Upstream is the lobbying and public affairs arm of top international law firm, DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary. Founded in 2000, it has already become a major player in the lobbying industry, boasting major clients like BAA and Tesco. North of the border, McGrigors has been providing strategic advice on the Scottish Parliament for its clients since 1999. Law firms are increasingly seeing demand from their clients to provide advice on legislation before it is passed. Whereas barristers have traditionally felt able to give such advice to clients, there is now a greater focus on creating a broader strategy for engaging with government.

One example of this engagement with government came in 2004, when the Liverpool passenger transport authority Merseytravel made the decision to hire law firm Bircham Dyson Bell to advise on its strategy in relation to the Mersey Tunnels Bill. Bircham Dyson Bell won the account despite competition from more traditional public affairs firms. Neil Scales, Chief Executive of Merseytravel has said “It is helpful for public authorities to have a public affairs team with strong legal resources because everything we do has so many legal implications, not least since the introduction of the Human Rights Act”.

Politics and law have a long-standing and well-known association. One only has to glance at the green benches of the House of Commons to see the number of barristers and solicitors who populate the legislature. Up until now the flow from law to politics seems to have been a one-way street. However, the direction taken by Brussels and Washington coupled with the increasingly professional approach of the public affairs industry, seems set to change the picture in the UK, as both professions become increasingly becoming aware of the benefits that accrue from working in tandem. Only time will tell if Clementi has the effect of forging a fuller understanding between politics and law and releasing the untapped potential that lies with such co-operation.

The author is a trainee barrister and former lobbyist.
Law firms with highest lobbying revenues 2004

Firm 2004 gross 2004 gross +/-
($m) (£m) (%)
1 Patton Boggs 65.8 34.6 +13
2 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld 64.2 33.8 +8
3 Hogan & Hartson 51.6 27.2 +16
4 DLA Piper Rudnick Gray Cary 42.4 22.3 -3
5 Cassidy & Associates * 28.9 15.2 +1
6 Van Scoyoc Associates * 25.7 13.5 +15
7 Hunton & Williams 25.0 13.2 +16
8 Dutko Worldwide 23.8 12.5 +27
9 Covington & Burling 23.4 12.3 +4
10 Holland & Knight 23.0 12.1 +21
11= Swidler Berlin 22.2 11.7 -1
11= Greenberg Traurig 22.2 11.7 -33
13 Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds 21.4 11.3 +14
14 Mayer Brown Rowe & Maw 18.0 9.5 +131
15 Williams & Jensen 17.0 8.9 -16

* Professional lobbying organisations not law firms Source: Influence