Attorney General's Office

Keynote Address at Minority Lawyers' Conference 2009: Less Talk, More Action.

The Rt Hon the Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC
Attorney General


Thank you for inviting me to address you today. I would also like to thank, on your behalf, the Lord Chief Justice for his speech. Igor Judge is the Head of the Judiciary, but he is also an inspiration for the whole profession. His speech today combined insight and pragmatism, but I think most of all his fierce commitment to achieving the very best justice for all. Not only is he an inspiration to me, he is also an extremely hard act to follow.

At the outset, I would like to acknowledge all of the excellent work you carry out as the legal profession. Ours is a proud profession and one which luckily attracts some of the very best and the most gifted people in our country.

I also want to acknowledge that the legal profession is facing difficult times at the moment. My experience over the last 36 years has been that the legal profession has always experienced difficult times. I do not say this lightly, or to soften the bruising the profession is experiencing right now. You may feel that it is hard to contemplate taking action to improve diversity when there are such great uncertainties. I would say that now, more than ever, is the time for action.

Being a lawyer means having a hard and, at times, lonely occupation. It means being competent, tough and courageous. It means having integrity; we must often give difficult, distressing and unpalatable advice, advice that people would rather not hear and advice that they may sometimes refuse to accept.

This means that lawyers must always live in difficult times. We must always stand up on behalf of others. We must always embody all that we believe in; protecting rights, defending freedom of expression, or safeguarding life and liberty. This makes us visible, and it can also make us unpopular.

In Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 2, when trying to stir up anarchy and to depose the King, Dick the Butcher said: "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers". Now Shakespeare knew that lawyers were fundamental to maintaining order and a fair society. They were dangerous to those who wanted chaos. Shakespeare spoke an eternal truth; lawyers remain crucial to maintaining a fair society that protects the individual. This makes us dangerous and it can also make us unpopular.

Putting it in more modern terms, we are the salt that flavours the meal. Salt is an inherent part of virtually every sustainable piece of food we eat and therefore crucial. Because we are the salt, we must provide more flavour than others might. We must be the embodiment of all that we wish to see in others. And it is sometimes painful and bruising to have to hold ourselves up against such rigorous standards. But if any profession can achieve them, it is ours.

What does this mean for the diversity of the legal profession? We are fortunate enough to live in a diverse society, one that is valued precisely because it is multi-cultural and precisely because it is multi-talented. The legal profession and the judiciary need to be as diverse and as visibly diverse as all the people they might be called on to represent.

The title of this Conference is "Less Talk, More Action". It is time that we really prove ourselves to be the salt that flavours the meal. Talk is no longer enough. History will judge us, ultimately, not on our intentions, but on our actions and the impact of those actions. And before history judges us, we must judge ourselves. What better time to assess our performance than at the end of the first decade of the 21st century? We know of all the richness, goodness and value that a diverse legal profession brings. We have taken some action already. What we must now ask ourselves is: "Is it really enough?" and "What must we do next?".

So let's congratulate ourselves for a brief moment on being the trail-blazing profession, the challenging profession and the profession that holds a mirror up to society and scrutinises it. But I assure you that the moment can only be brief. For there is much more for us to do and we simply cannot allow ourselves to get too comfortable.

We have already come a long way. In 1973, when I started my degree as a law student, the legal world could never have imagined an Attorney General who was a woman, never mind one who also came from a Black and Minority Ethnic background. We have waited 700 years. I don't think the legal world in 1973 also contemplated that in 2009, both the US Attorney General and the UK Attorney General would be of Afro-Caribbean origins and that the President of the United States and his wife, the First Lady, would be the same. Imagine the bookmaker asked to calculate those odds in 1973. They would have been astronomical. Sometimes I wish I had laid a bet. Now, of course, no sensible bookmaker worth his salt would even take that bet.

We have undergone a huge change of culture to reach the point where a lawyer from a BME background could be appointed as Attorney General. To put that change in context, we should think about the Acts of Parliament passed over the last 40 years. When my parents came to this country in the late 1950s / early 1960s, it was still possible to see signs that said: "No Dogs, No Irish and No Blacks". 8 years before I went to university, the Race Relations Act 1965 dealt with what was known as the "colour bar"; the fact that people with a Black and Minority Ethnic
background were banned from using public services or entering certain public places. 3 years later, the Race Relations Act 1968 made it illegal to refuse housing, employment or public services to people because of their ethnic background. And it was only in 1976, the year I finished my degree and joined Middle Temple, one year before I was called to the Bar, that the Race Relations Act 1976 banned indirect racial discrimination. It is hard to remember that such a dramatic change has taken place within the lifetime of a number of the people in this room, although thankfully not for some of the students present here today.

This legislative framework outlawed, systematically, discrimination against people on grounds of ethnicity. It extracted the negative, giving us space within which we could build the positive. By positive, I mean the steps towards positively welcoming a more diverse legal profession.

We now debate, for example, "Positive Action", meaning legitimate steps taken to encourage greater numbers of under-represented groups, with selection always being made on the basis of merit. I do not, however, believe that we should look for positive quotas of Black and Minority Ethnic background lawyers in order to find the bedrock of talent on which we build our legal profession and judiciary. Excellence must always determine who is appointed.

It is clear that we have come a very long way. It is also clear that we must debate the wide issue of what merit and excellence means. Can we say our efforts are having the right effect? A good sign is the increase in people from a Black and Minority Ethnic background qualifying as lawyers. In 2007/08, 22% of those admitted to the Law Society Roll of Solicitors came from a BME background. In 2008, 39% of all Calls to the Bar were BME barristers. This compares favourably with the total economically active population of England and Wales that is BME, which is 10.1% (Office National Statistics, Labour Force Survey).

Given this, are enough lawyers from BME backgrounds staying within the legal profession? The evidence here is less encouraging:
• In 2008, 10.7% of solicitors holding a practising certificate came from a Black and Minority Ethnic background; and
• The equivalent figure for the Bar was 11% self-employed and 15% employed.

Now we know that some lawyers qualify but never intend to practice. Others change their mind about whether being a lawyer is really their calling. Inevitably the legal profession is
oversubscribed, packed full to the rafters with talented lawyers. In this context, therefore, am I still troubled by these statistics? Unfortunately I am.

The difficulty is that even allowing that some lawyers of all descriptions decide not to stay in the profession after they qualify, the gap between the numbers of BME lawyers who qualify and the numbers who stay in the profession is too large for my liking.

Nor does this pattern reflect how the work of the legal profession has developed. I believe that we are a world-class legal profession. If we are to retain that excellence and that pole position, we must be a world-class legal profession performing on a global stage.

When thinking about the way we now have an international approach towards law, it struck me that I could not easily
identify any area of law that remains inward looking. We are now governed by international laws as well as domestic ones. The European Convention on Human Rights has committed us all to protecting the same types of rights and reflecting the same types of responsibilities. We negotiate contracts abroad and we claim losses suffered in other countries (and also even in cyber-space). Even crime and family law, areas that when I started practice, were firmly based in England and Wales, now operate internationally. Now, lawyers must address issues in crime such as extradition, people-trafficking, asset recovery, fraud, and in family such as forced marriages, international child abduction or even disputes about residence and contact for children, all of which may range across different continents.

What does this mean in terms of diversity? As we all know, in law context is everything. The context for our legal profession is now international; it knows no geographical boundaries. I said earlier that the very best legal profession should be as diverse as the people it might be called on to represent. Not only are the clients we might find in our own country now more diverse, we may also have international clients, operating beyond our borders and equally diverse. These clients want lawyers whose talents match or complement their own. They want lawyers skilled in different languages. They want lawyers skilled in cultural understanding and awareness.

It certainly will not be food enough if our profession does not reflect that balance. This country contains all of the potential needed for those skills. We possess a very talented, hard-working and diverse nation. We are sitting on a veritable vein of gold. If we want (and I think we must want) our legal profession to flourish and to remain a world leader, we must mine that gold. We must seek out talent wherever it can be found.

Now the title of "Attorney General" does not contain the word "General" for nothing. I have never invoked this part before but I speak today as a General. I know I am your General. I am asking for your help and commitment. I am issuing a call for action. I go further; this is my Call to Arms. I call each and every one of you to "report to me" for active duty in improving the diversity of the legal profession. I want to see evidence that we are taking appropriate steps and that this work is succeeding. A modest degree of success will not be enough.

I am invoking the role of "General" from my title, but as I hope you will find, I am a benevolent General. I am going to help you by identifying a three point plan for action.

My First Point: inspiration and aspiration - we must do even more to encourage a career in the law;

My Second Point: providing a flexible legal profession to accommodate the different lawyers that come into it. We must welcome talent wherever it can be found in all of its diversity; and

My Third and final Point: we must ensure equal opportunities for advancement and career progression - and encourage talented lawyers from diverse backgrounds to take the next step.

The plan of action requires a degree of commitment both from you and from me in order to succeed. I can assure you, however, of my fierce commitment to this plan. I am going to ask each and every one of you here today to give me your commitment as well. Because if we work together, I am certain we will succeed.

We need to encourage more people from non-traditional backgrounds to aspire to become lawyers. Many of these students will be:
• the first in their families to go to university;
• students without pre-existing knowledge of what lawyers do or who they are; and
• students whose aspirations to be professionals have already been limited.

Two days ago I hosted the first working meeting of the Attorney General's Youth Network, to help promote youth aspirations and potential. I hope to launch the Network formally before the end of the summer. I want the Network to help de-mystify the legal profession and Government for young people. Part of its potential will be to inspire children to feel they can become lawyers if they want to, whatever their backgrounds. But my aspirations go further. Through the Network, I want all children to become aware of and be able to defend their rights. Children must know that they have a voice and that they are entitled to form and express their own views about the world. I want them to know the Rule of Law is theirs to own. And they will own it, whether or not they choose to become lawyers.

We have an acute need to equip our young people to face a future that may be far more challenging than our own. Teaching them critical thinking, encouraging them to debate, to speak up over what they think is right and wrong, will help. A person trained in these skills will succeed, whichever career path they choose.

The Youth Network will complement the existing work of my Law in Schools sub-committee, which encourages lawyers to visit schools in order to teach students about their rights and responsibilities. I know that many lawyers already get involved with Law in Schools work through different routes such as their employers, through the Bar Council or through the voluntary sector. This is really wonderful work.

I also know of excellent work such as the Pathways to Law programme, which is being run across five universities in England and Wales. This programme identifies talented Year 12 state school students with little or no family history of higher education, who are interested in Law. A student on the programme will study at their host university, receive one to one mentoring and will be offered a short work placement at a Law Firm. The programme is supported and facilitated through the College of Law, and I know that the Sutton Trust and a number of leading City Law Firms also support it. Congratulations to all of the organisations involved; it's an initiative that delivers to students, right where it is needed. I was delighted to talk to Eversheds last night about the fantastic support they give to that programme.

I am certain that we all agree that if more lawyers supported this initiative and it could be extended to other universities, it would be an even greater success.
Another example: in 2008 the City Solicitors' Educational Trust ("C-SET") ran its first summer school, focusing on university students from non-traditional universities. The event included equipping these students with skills and confidence, introducing them to law recruiters and helping to overcome any perceived disadvantage of their choice of university. I say "perceived", because apparently law recruiters are less likely to search out students who study at a non-traditional university. That's a big mistake on the part of the law recruiters; I can assure them they are missing out on some really talented lawyers. I can say this because when I was 17, I didn't know much about the law at all and I applied to the Mid-Essex Technical College to take an external degree at the University of London. I didn't see any significance in which university I attended. And I took silk and am now the Attorney General. And in case you think that's a fluke, someone from the year above me at my College is now a senior Partner in a very smart City Law Firm. There are many of us about. I encourage you not to miss out on talent that is packaged a little differently.

But I applaud C-SET in working to overcome those misconceptions. I invite everyone here in this room to become involved in this project or set up something equivalent.

In terms of the commitment I am asking you to make, I am asking everyone here, and I am asking all members of the legal profession, to go out to at least one school or college, find at least one diverse, talented student, and explain to them why they should think seriously about becoming a
lawyer. I promise you that it will be a very good use of your time.

I have acknowledged that retention of diverse lawyers is a problem. How do we retain more of them? I believe we need to foster and maintain an environment that includes (and indeed welcomes) lawyers of all different types.

To be a lawyer, a person needs talent, professionalism and intellectual curiosity. Must a lawyer with these skills also fit into a "traditional" mould of lawyer? I would argue "No". I say that if they don't fit the traditional mould, the mould needs to change to fit them.

Again, I want to share with you how I have committed myself to addressing this. As many of you know, I launched two initiatives in July 2008. One is the Equality and Diversity
Strategy, the other my Expectations Statement for Civil and Criminal Panel Counsel.

The Equality and Diversity Strategy provides my promises to the legal profession, which I have promised to keep by 2012. By then, I want the applications to my various Panels of Civil and Criminal Counsel to reflect, as closely as possible, the diversity of the pool of Counsel available to apply. If not, I will review why not and what I need to do differently.

The Expectations Statement contains the promises I have asked the Bar to meet when they undertake Government work. As a major purchaser of legal services, it is my duty to insist that Chambers with barristers undertaking government work support, maintain and promote diversity and equality. I am deploying my responsibility (and what clout I may have) to use organisations that respect diversity and equality principles.

I am asking Chambers to take a number of steps. These include publishing and implementing policy statements and action plans on their commitments to equality and diversity. Chambers must also have a policy on equal access to and fair allocation of work, which they will monitor and enforce.

Where required, Chambers may need to consider positive action to encourage (lawfully) applications from under-represented groups. Chambers will, of course, make any appointments solely on merit.

I have asked all Chambers with Panel Counsel members to report on their progress by 1st October 2009. The Bar Council has joined me in that request. They share my view that Chambers can and must put diversity and equality at the heart of their practices. I want to take this opportunity to
thank Desmond Browne QC, Chairman of the Bar, personally, for his support.

Placing equality and diversity right at the heart of our work will leave us transformed, energised and inspired to become even better lawyers. The Crown Prosecution Service, which I superintend, provides an excellent example of this. In December 2008, the CPS won an award for its commitment to diversity and equality at the Annual Civil Service Diversity and Equality Awards Ceremony. Not only did the judges recognise the significant steps that the CPS had undertaken on equality and diversity, they were also particularly impressed by the CPS' track record of consulting with community groups before forming policies affecting them. Promoting equality and diversity is absolutely central to the work of the CPS and they are leading the field as a result. I superintend and supervise them with the same energy and commitment I will apply to the Expectations Statement and the Diversity and Equality Strategy and it gives me great pleasure to speak of their successes here.

In terms of the commitments I am asking you to make here, I ask you to make similar promises to mine and to share my expectations of others. For example, if you purchase legal services, do you purchase them from organisations with clear and well-maintained equality and diversity policies?

Equally, is diversity and equality at the heart of your firm, set of chambers or company? Do you have a clear, defensible policy on equality that you publish and you apply? Are you allocating work equally and fairly? Do you have effective diversity and equality training?

And, crucially; are you really welcoming every lawyer who comes through your door simply oozing talent, no matter how diverse they are?

So, invoking the "General" in my "Attorney General", this is the second part of my three part plan. If you aren't saying yes to all of these questions, then you need to ask yourselves why not and what to change so that you can say yes.

The third point in my three point plan concerns the need to encourage and support effective career progression for talented lawyers from diverse backgrounds.

It goes without saying that a lawyer's talent must always be the deciding factor in determining who becomes a Partner in a Law Firm, who takes Silk and who becomes a Judge. But do all talented lawyers feel able and encouraged to apply for senior positions for which they may be qualified?

The reality, sadly, is that some are daunted because they feel too different and too non-traditional. In the 21st century, there can be no excuse for a person's differences holding back his or her career.

We have the power and the responsibility to change such misconceptions. Role models are an excellent solution. The best advert for a particular job or appointment is frequently the person currently occupying it. People are far more likely to believe they could obtain a senior role if they see others who have already made that attempt and have succeeded.

We are all role models, whether we like it or not and in what we say, what we do and how we do it. Inevitably, all of us are the measure by which others judge the legal profession.
For some, the most inspiring role model will be the law student a few years ahead, for others, it will be the senior lawyer or the judge who is being visible and being visibly diverse.

That is my third and final part of my three point action plan. In my Call to Arms, I really do want every one of you to acknowledge that you are role models. You demonstrate the legal profession in all of its diversity. Be visible to others; show them precisely why a wide and vibrant legal profession is such an important one. I ask you to share this message with other lawyers; please inspire them to accept that they are role models as well.

I want you to be my senior officers, my Lieutenants-Colonel. I want you to lead by example and to help me prove that talent, howsoever it is packaged or wheresoever it appears, is what is important to the legal profession.

As your Attorney General, I hope you will take up my rallying cry. I hope you will make yourselves available for active duty. In 2011, when we are back at the next Biennial Minority Lawyers' Conference, I want to hear, "through despatches", of the success of a campaign that is vital to the future of the legal profession.