Introduction of advocate assurance scheme delayed - for third time
The Quality Assurance Scheme for Advocates (QASA) has been delayed yet again, with no new date set for its implementation.
The controversial scheme was originally due to be introduced in December 2011, but the date was put back first to April 2012 and then to next month.
However, the Joint Advocacy Group (JAG) – which is setting up the scheme and comprises the Bar Standards Board, the Solicitors Regulation Authority and ILEX Professional Standards – has now said a revised timetable would be confirmed at the end of January.
The JAG insisted that, following a fourth consultation, the next steps for introducing QASA had been agreed.
In a statement it said: “As a result of the comments received in the many substantive and constructive responses, some adjustments of detail will be made to the scheme.”
The group stressed that the core elements of the scheme would remain, including:
- the framework for assessment;
- the central role of judicial evaluation;
- periodic re-accreditation; and
- phased geographical implementation.
A JAG spokesman said: "This scheme is the one of the biggest changes to the assessment of advocates in many years and we need to ensure that we listen to those who have responded, to ensure we get the scheme right.
"While the debate has often been vigorous, this reflects our joint commitment to produce a workable scheme which meets the needs of legal consumers and takes account of the views of those whom we regulate.”
QASA has been sharply criticised by, amongst others, the Law Society and the Criminal Bar Association.
In October Chancery Lane sought to restate its “fundamental objections” to the scheme, saying it was disproportionate to the perceived problems surrounding advocacy standards.
The Law Society also warned that solicitors who did not become accredited under the scheme would lose their rights of audience in the magistrates’ court after five years in practice.
The Criminal Bar Association had meanwhile threatened a potential judicial review action over QASA, arguing that there had been regulatory overreach by the Bar Standards Board.
It also criticised the inclusion of QCs in the scheme, saying that this risked reducing the rank to a “purely ceremonial honour”.