Bar council hits out at rising costs, vague ethics claims, and lack of progress on key reforms
The Bar Council has launched a scathing critique of the Bar Standards Board’s (BSB) draft five-year strategy, warning of “serious concerns” over its expanding remit, escalating costs, and vague claims of unethical behaviour within the profession.
In its formal response, the barristers’ representative body criticised the BSB for successive budget increases, warning that much of the extra funding has been spent on recurring costs rather than performance improvements. “The BSB should prioritise the delivery of its key regulatory activities, and not venture into new projects, at ever-increasing cost to the profession,” said Stephen Kenny KC, chair of the Bar Council’s regulation panel.
The Council also took aim at the regulator’s January assertion that barristers may let their “zeal” for advocacy lead to ethically questionable tactics. Branding the claim unfounded, it called for specific evidence rather than generalised statements. “We are not aware of specific instances where this has happened,” the response said. “The BSB needs to cite evidence before proposing any targeted change.”
A particularly sore point remains the BSB’s treatment of unregistered barristers—those who have qualified but never gained practising rights. Currently, practising barristers shoulder the full cost of their regulation, a situation the Bar Council described as “unfair.” It proposed alternatives such as charging an annual fee to unregistered barristers or restructuring training and qualification routes to reduce the number of barristers in this category altogether.
Embed from Getty ImagesKenny warned that costs are rising faster than inflation while key performance indicators remain unmet, particularly in investigations and authorisations. “Some of the BSB’s key performance indicators remain unmet, especially in important areas such as investigations and authorisations,” he said. “It must implement the Fieldfisher Report recommendations aimed at improving its investigations process.”
That Fieldfisher report, commissioned following earlier criticism of the BSB’s operations, remains a focal point. The Bar Council said the regulator must deliver on all of its recommendations before expanding its portfolio. “The BSB has said that it plans to expand its programme of activities. We think that it must first meet the targets set by the revised balanced scorecards and implement the other Fieldfisher Report recommendations,” the response stated.
Calls were also made for greater collaboration with other regulators, notably the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA). The Council suggested joint research into the ethical responsibilities of in-house lawyers, which could offer “specific guidance about how the core duties and other code requirements should be met, consistent with any SRA guidance.”
The Bar Council’s sharp critique underscores a growing frustration within the profession. Many believe the BSB is drifting beyond its core responsibilities, while simultaneously failing to deliver on essential regulatory functions. Its broader ambitions, paired with rising financial demands, risk alienating the very profession it exists to regulate.
With six comments already surfacing shortly after publication, it’s clear this is an issue resonating strongly across the Bar. Whether the BSB will take this latest round of criticism on board remains to be seen.
