If I set all my qualifications out on paper, I would run out of room. So, I summarise the good parts.

I am a Life Member of the Law Society and in 2022, I was honoured with the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) for my substantial contributions to the legal profession in New South Wales. My commitment is evident through my past service on the Law Society of NSW Council, the continued success of Lawyers Learning for Charity, and my ongoing support for solicitors in NSW.

I have been a Solicitor for more than 55 years. I have watched as the practice of law has changed and the advantages and disadvantages of these changes.

Don’t get me wrong. There have been some wonderful advancements in the practice of law, including measures toward flexible working arrangements, diversity and inclusion and the increasing number of firms advocating for canine morale officers (see @tofutheoodle on Instagram).

But with every step forward it seems that rising pressures, commercial needs and inflation, solicitors are facing a world of unknown and unanticipated pressures.

My areas of interest are specific and designed to make the Law Society and its policies work for those it proposes to serve.

You shouldn’t have to be in “Big Law” to reap the benefits of your own Law Society.

I have been a long-time advocate for affordable, utility based mandatory CLE. There was a day when the Law Society offered cheaper CLE than the commercial providers. This is no longer the case.

Viewing the delivery of CLE as a revenue generating venture is not only inappropriate but defeats the purpose of having mandatory CLE. Further, it is difficult for practitioners to be able to know what service providers/CLE courses are of genuine benefit to their practices.

I propose the Law Society should have a system to rate and review CLE providers, lectures and courses, including its own, to encourage competitive pricing and increased quality and utility of the courses provided and name and shame, less scrupulous providers.

We are all aware of the constitutional changes to the Law Society which came into effect in 2022. The net result is that there were fewer positions available on Council to small, suburban and regional practitioners.

The worst part? These practitioners are the ones who truly require the service, representation and support of a Law Society. Constitutional changes have come at the price of a Law Society that doesn’t truly benefit smaller players in the industry and smaller players are essential.

Small and Suburban Practices are often responsible for the provision of affordable legal services and rural and regional practices are essential to the lifeblood of their communities. In many cases, they may be the only legal service provider in town.

Given the narrow margin with which the vote passed, I propose to investigate the current Council composition and take appropriate action to restore equity for vulnerable, but essential practices.

The legal landscape requires you to be technologically savvy.

Time and time again, I see young lawyers having to teach older practitioners (myself included) how to keep up to date with changing technology and software. It is a burden they should not have to carry. They are solicitors. They are not employed to teach their Principal Solicitor how to use “track changes” in Word.

Aside from young solicitors having to carry the burden of changing technology, many practitioners do not have access to essential software and electronic security measures necessary to protect clients. Inefficient practices and lack of access to services leaves these practitioners open and vulnerable to cyber-attacks/scams, the devastating impact of which we have seen.

I propose that the Law Society should offer free courses in developing the necessary technological skills to be a lawyer, but also teaching necessary cyber security skills to sole, small suburban, regional and rural practices.

The Member Advantage Platform and the “discounts” offered by it are a disgrace. They lack utility and are minimal in nature. Why spend the time to order a Woolworth’s Gift Card to obtain a measly 4% discount?

I believe that Members should be consulted about what discounts and benefits that would actually be of service to them. I believe that rather than offering discounts for a large variety of services the average lawyer will never need, these discounts should be in consultation with the services lawyers actually need and use.

There is plenty of information out there about supporting young lawyers. But most of that doesn’t reflect their reality. Advances in technology do not reduce the expectations on young lawyers. They don’t have secretaries, they do their own typing, administration, timekeeping, research and then maintain 6 hours+ billables. All of this while they are still learning.

Firms claim they invest a lot of time and expense into training young lawyers and the hours they are expected to work are a compromise. However, the compromise faced by young lawyers is significant. The research shows that working 50+ hours per leads to burnout, illness and personal dissatisfaction and the responsibility for maintaining wellbeing is unnecessarily placed on individuals. See the Wellbeing articles available on the Law Society website.

The reality is that employers are the most culpable.

I believe that there are young lawyers facing exploitation who should be able to anonymously report and complain about unreasonable exploitation. I also believe charging mentee’s $75.00 to enter a mentoring program is absurd. Not every young practitioner is working in a supportive environment, and they should not have to pay an arbitrary fee to the Law Society to gain mentorship.

I have been and will be a strong advocate for the changes needed to the Law Society for the benefit of its members. With me on your side we will be a formidable team. I recommend as very worthy candidates consideration of Mary Macken and Vaughan Roles.