Joshua Rozenberg

"Just don't call me Doctor" said Joshua Rozenberg, as I congratulated him on his second honorary doctorate this week, this latest one from Nottingham Law School. 

Joshua is undoubtedly the country's most high profile commentator on law, known by many as the voice of the BBC's Law In Action on Radio 4 (which he launched in 1984). Not only does he also write regularly for The Guardian and The Law Society Gazette, and previously for The Daily Telegraph, he is an Oxford Law graduate and the only journalist to be listed in The Times' independently-judged list of the UK's most influential lawyers. He can often be seen or heard on radio and TV as a legal pundit, commenting on a wide range of legal developments and stories.

As you would expect, we have known Joshua for many years. He has chaired a number of round table client events for us on discussion subjects as diverse as "The Brave New World of Legal Services", "Commercial Risk" and "Piracy on The High Seas". This man is one of the most diligent chairmen I have ever come across, planning meticulously before each event, even to the extent of asking for bullet-point opinions from all participants ahead so he can draw out interesting points from the most shy and retiring of the people there. No wonder he always gets so much out of the folk he interviews. 

So I asked him: what does it feel like to be given not just one, but two honorary doctorates. He told me "Of course I'm honoured by this kind gesture from Nottingham Law School. But as I said to the roomful of law students at this week's graduation ceremony: honorary degrees are good fun, but it's the things you work for that are worth having." Joshua is modest to the last.

Joshua and I were bemoaning the fact that the broadsheets generally have far less appetite for proper, dedicated legal coverage than they used to.  "The print editions of most newspapers in the UK now devote less space than they have done in the past to coverage of demanding subjects such as international relations, science, politics and the law," he says.  With the exception of business-related stories, such coverage as remains tends to be at the lighter end of the market: parliamentary sketches, for example, rather than the detailed accounts of debates that the newspapers used to carry.  Law has suffered from the same change in approach.  And the reason is not hard to see: selling newspapers in a declining market requires them to have the broadest possible appeal.

"But although a newspaper such as The Daily Telegraph sees no need to have a full-time legal correspondent, others such as The Times and The Guardian carry extensive coverage online.  The Guardian law page in particular draws on a number of different resources to provide extensive coverage of legal developments.  This combined with the authoritative law blogs provided by law firms, chambers and legal publishers is the future of legal journalism, enhanced by free access to judgments and proceedings in Parliament." 

And of course we still have Joshua to keep us updated on legal developments.  He's part of legal journalism's heritage, he keeps us up to date and well informed today (he deserves an honour for this alone), and he is undoubtedly part of legal journalism's future.  Set yourself up to follow him on twitter and get regular legal updates from the great man to your phone.

***

Our lovable big brother Boris Johnson is trying to help all of us plan around Olympics chaos. But his public information announcements on Tube and bus routes have had a mixed response since their launch at the start of July. Some of us love them, finding Boris's approach fresh and funny.  Others are unhappy his voice is everywhere and drawing comparisons with George Orwell's 1984.   

The thinking behind the campaign is simply that Boris is worried Londoners will use the Olympics as an excuse 'to pull a sickie'.  He has said this on record. Check out this choice report in The Huffington Post of the speech where he urged Londoners to avoid the temptation to 'Work From Home' which he says can only mean one thing: - 'basically sitting, wondering whether to go down to the fridge to hack off that bit of cheese before checking your emails again'. Not quite my experience I have to say, but for a politician you have to love his style of delivery: a (very cheesy) breath of fresh air.

***

Never thought 'jet stream' would become part of my daily vocabulary, but I'm definitely developing a depth of expertise in this scientific phenomenon I never knew I wanted. In the UK our collective heart skips a bit whenever we hear "the Jet Stream is on the move", promising a return to more appropriate Summer weather (Yes, it is Summer. Did you forget?)

As a person I'm not normally that easily given over to pessimism, but even I can't help suspecting this promise of a heatwave and a hot Olympics is a cynical PR ploy to make sure the expected thousands of overseas visitors don't change their minds at the last minute and cancel their flights. But then... the sun is out as I write this...  I can feel the optimism returning...

Charon QC

I had lunch this week with the most dangerous man in legal education. We have Mike Semple-Piggott to thank for BPP Law School, which he launched in the 1990s and subsequently sold to become a serial legal education entrepreneur. You may know him better as the man behind famed and fictitious blawg persona Charon QC.

Why “Charon”? I asked him. “Charon is the name of the ferryman of Hades, paid to bring  souls across the river Styx. When I was deciding on a character to be the face of my blog when it started 10 years ago, I liked the idea of dragging lawyers into hell with my writings.” You can also see why they call him dangerous.

And the QC part? "Well, for the first years of Charon's life online he was merely a lawyer" Mike tells me. "Then when the QC Selection Panel decided not to make up any silks in 2004/5, it seemed the perfect time for a fictitious lawyer to be given the moniker." 

Mike’s blog is now part of the legal establishment, albeit defining the subversive fringe. If you’re not familiar with all parts of the blog, take a look here. He is prolific: reams of insightful comment on legal developments and legal market change, in blog and podcast format, plus a Law Weekly Review, laced all the way through with humour and a mischievous spirit. He has a vast audience of practitioners and interested lay people; also law students attracted by the free books and lectures made available for them. No wonder he attracts an audience of some 90,000 lawyers (including a loyal following in the Ministry of Justice and the Legal Services Board). He’s not in it for money. I’ve come across this before with legal educators and Mike exemplifies it. Their prime driver is simply not commercial. In contrast to the classic business mindset, often concerned about giving away their Crown Jewels when publicising expertise and opinion, educators instinctively like to share information, rather than hold on to it for personal gain.

He does have to cover the (substantial) costs of running the blog though, and his model for monetising it takes care not to compromise the quality of its content. He carries advertising from such names as Pannone, Riverview Law, Oxford University Press as well as the law schools. 

But business took up only a tiny part of our conversation this week. Mike regaled me with a veritable rainbow of colourful stories, like the time travelling back from Singapore he brought a suitcase of counterfeit watches through customs, for a lecture he was planning on intellectual property rights. This was in the days before importing fake branded goods was illegal. But it raised the eyebrows of the customs official who stopped him on his way through nevertheless.  He made the mistake of trying to engage Mike in a legal argument. Needless to say after just ten minutes of "lively" conversation Mike was waved through. 

So he’s not in it for the profit. And he’s not in it for the honours either – he’s turned down two visiting doctorates and a visiting professorship so far this year. So what does motivate this man? “I like to do interesting things, discover the new, immerse myself in legal concepts and fresh ideas. I'm in it for the fun.  Forget the past, I say. The future’s what excites me.” 

Funny how by being so interested, you become one of the most interesting men in the marketplace.

***

So the SFO is worried about ‘reputational damage’ and is bringing in a raft of special advisors and other senior appointees to put its house in order. It's a comfort to know that in this often superficial age some people still recognise that fixing reputation is not always only about profile and spin, that sometimes it's more about the "essence" of something; one of the newly appointed experts at the SFO is none other than Geoffrey Rivlin QC, a high profile former judge, who will be focussing on improving case management.  The SFO was heavily criticised this May for an overly cautious position since the ill-fated raids on the Tchenguiz brothers last year, in March 2011 - and subsequent legal cahllenge. In fact no raids were conducted in the entire financial year since.  The SFO clearly needs help.  

The high profile appointments were announced this week just days after news reports the SFO would investigate the LIBOR rigging scandal. Reckoned to be potentially the most expensive investigation yet staged by the SFO, no wonder it has focussed minds. The question is though, can this crack team of senior executives do enough in the time available to make sure on this occasion the crooks don’t get away? With these latest appointments at least the outlook is promising.

***

This week the Olympic torch relay reached the town where I live. It coincided with a family birthday and I had the day off. A celebratory breakfast in bed was dutifully served, and then from our bedroom window we watched the torch pass right in front of our house. Special!  Those who know me will be well aware I am not a sports fan. But even I feel part of the Olympics now.  I love how the torch relay has worked to make everyone feel part of this national event.

It reminds me of an excellent internal communications stunt by DLA, which we observed at close quarters some years ago when we first got to know the firm well. 1,000 partners and staff took part in a relay-style walk from Land’s End to John O’Groats in a single day, dividing the journey into 740 segments, a different regional team taking a 10 mile segment each. Fantastic way to bring all the offices together in one collective endeavour. We had just started working for DLA as they did the walk and raised 500,000 pounds for the charity Wellchild. The excitement, camaraderie and sense of collective achievement was palpable.

I'm almost tempted to dig out my tracksuit for July and August. Almost, but not quite.

Ray Parker

Ray Parker is looking for the woman who saved his life. 
Victim of a cycling accident which left him with a serious brain injury, slurring his speech and causing some Dysphasia, Ray is grateful he is as much “himself” today as he is; in the case of brain injury, the time that elapses between impact to the head and treatment is critical in preserving as much brain function, and as much of your personality, as possible. In Ray's case he was extremely lucky that a casual passer-by on the quiet cycle path where the accident happened, between Canterbury and Whitstable, was an off-duty GP with her daughter. She had the knowledge and presence of mind to administer first aid and call an air ambulance.

"I was cycling home from college, going through Clowes Wood on a designated cycle path" says Ray. "All of a sudden I found myself waking up and all I could see was black. I could feel the blood pumping out of my head and the next thing I remember was a lady with a Dutch accent saying she was a doctor, telling me to lie down. She rolled me onto my side, put my head on her daughter's lap and phoned an ambulance. I had a two-inch hole in my head that was bleeding profusely, but she stopped the flow - and basically she saved my life. I have no idea who she is but I would love the chance to thank her. So if anyone knows who she is, please ask her to step forward and make herself known."

Ray's lawyer is Prolegal's Ben Posford, who specialises in catastrophic personal injury cases. He explained to me that the cycle path Ray was on was in a very sorry state of repair and that a broken piece of concrete had become stuck in Ray's front wheel, sending him over the handlebars, landing head first on the concrete and fracturing his skull. Ben intends to bring the company responsible for maintaining the path to account, for letting a designated cycle path fall into such awful disrepair. It encourages cyclists, but it's a death-trap. He would also like the GP to step forward, as she would be a key witness in Ray's case. 


If you've heard or know anything that could identify our Good Samaritan, please call Ben Posford at Prolegal on 0207 743 6700.
***

Any takers for London's latest luxury pads? The Shard's publicity machine rolled into impressive action this week, starting with a reminder on Monday that the apartments go on sale later this Summer for a cool £30-£50 million a piece, the most prestigious apartments in Europe; followed by stories speculating about who will be buying them, The Evening Standard coining the phrase "Oligarchitecture" to let us all know who has been showing the most interest; and culminating this Friday with reports of the previous night's opening extravaganza. Check out this Telegraph video of the laser light show at the inauguration ceremony.

One news report the PR team probably didn’t plan was Monday’s story of the maintenance worker stranded on the outside of the building, 72 floors up, swinging in the wind.  the London Fire Brigade had to be called.  We were visiting our friends at Lawyers On Demand, at Berwin Leighton Paisner's offices on the opposite bank of the Thames from the Shard. They had seen it all that morning from their office window. It made national news later that day. For all its futuristic design, the Shard will require manual window-cleaning - 11,000 panes no less, covering an area the size of eight football pitches: the sound of Health and Safety lawyers across the City sharpening their pencils is audible.
***

The banks' Summer corporate hospitality season has become just a little bit “Awkward”. We heard from an accountancy friend that his invite to the Henley Regatta from a bank at the heart of the Libor scandal was rather compromised when his hosts had to explain they couldn't attend themselves.  Instead they turned up just to hand over tickets and introduce their guests to each other, then made their excuses and left.  This year's Regatta of course coincided with the news of the Libor scandal breaking. A similar issue has arisen with other Summer hospitality events. The reason for their non-attendance? Apparently a Dictat from the heads of PR: no photo opportunities please of bankers swigging the champagne. Quite.

Collingwood Thompson QC

When it comes to the Barclays banking scandal, Collingwood Thompson QC has seen it all before.  One of the leading lights in 7 Bedford Row's Regulatory and White Collar Crime team, Collingwood started practising law in the 1970s, so decades before the Financial Services Markets Act of 2000 that created the FSA, and long before The Death of Gentlemanly Capitalism in the 1980s when the bowler-hatted old boy network was replaced by red-braced and brash casino-style bankers. He began at a time when relationships in financial institutions were so family-like and cosy that insider trading wasn't even unlawful, just the accepted was to get ahead in the City. And over the years we have observed the growth of financial regulation. Today Collingwood is a leading silk in his chosen area of specialism, working in both civil and criminal courts in London, regularly advising on overseas cases as well, also sitting part time as a judge on the Midlands circuit.

Our conversation took place during a journey to the BBC this week, for Collingwood to do a Newsnight interview. 

Collingwood had been invited by the Newsnight team to be their "expert talking head, explaining to viewers how the myriad legal issues in the scandal, particularly any criminal proceedings, might play out. I was fascinated to hear his views on how this latest scandal could potentially change the face of the banking world as we know it. Collingwood is not a man to sit on the fence (for which the Newsnight team love him of course!)

"When you think that no individual banker has been convicted for their part in the events that led to the current economic crisis, it makes you realise what a charmed life bankers have led.  Instead it's the corporate entities that are penalised - and who suffers then?  That's right: shareholders and tax payers, the public at large.  But this latest debacle is all about dishonesty - the FSA Report makes it clear there has been deliberate distortion of the market to enhance the profits of the bank and the size of individuals' bonuses.   This is undoubtedly fraud and I don't think the public will stomach it this time if the individuals responsible are not made to pay.  But is there sufficient political will to see through a rigorous investigation? And do the regulatory authorities have enough money and other resources behind them in any event?  It's sobering to think that Barclays' £60m fine is sizeably larger than the SFOs entire annual budget.

"But is this really a new phenomenon? No, we've seen this all before.  In fact long before even my earliest years in financial services litigation.  One of the leading legal precedents in this area is 200 years old and has a direct bearing on the events emerging in the last few days: in the famous Stock Market Fraud of 1814 false reports of Napoleon's death were deliberately circulated to manipulate the bond market.  The high profile naval hero Lord Cochrane was brought down by the scandal. He and his co-conspirators were sentenced to 12 months in prison, a fine of £1,000 each and an hour in the public pillory. In addition Lord Cochrane was stripped of his naval rank."

Reading up on this case, one key difference stands out in comparison to the present day; in Lord Cochrane's case, public opinion was most definitely on his side: after his prison terms was over he was re-elected to the House of Commons, and due to the public outcry over how he had been treated the punishment of pillory was abolished.  Not sure that the bankers in this latest scandal can expect such forgiving treatment from the general public. 

"What I think the public will really object to if fraudulent bankers are not brought to account, is the contrast with how individuals at the other end of the social spectrum have been treated. A good illustration is the authorities' determination to make an example of last summer's London rioters, jailing a college student with no previous criminal record for six months for stealing a £3.50 case of bottled water. Will the public stick watching banking fraudsters go free? I don't think so."

I can't argue with the man. You can view his snippet on Newsnight here.

***

The highlight of my week though was The Lawyer Awards. Not just for the glitz (The Grosvenor House), the entertainment (Jason Manford) and the legal celeb-spotting (we all knew Robert Jay was going to win Barrister of the Year for his high profile lead council role in the Leveson Inquiry). For me the thrill was seeing friends collect well-deserved awards on the night. Russell Jones & Walker Slater & Gordon's Manchester based Mike Cain named as one of the top two Assistant Solicitors in the entire country; the firm's employment team coming second in Employment team of the Year category. Mayer Brown's mining team winning Infrastructure/Energy team of the Year, for their pioneering work putting in place Afghanistan's first mining code; and best of all seeing the Brecher team's incredulous faces when their win as Boutique Firm of the Year was announced. I used to work in-house at the old Brecher & Co before its merger with Nicholson Graham & Jones and 15 years ago reported to Valerie and Andrew Brecher, who head the new firm today and I knew Nicky Richmond well there too, now the new firm's joint Managing Partner (as well as famed legal blogger and tweeter). I have to say these guys are seriously self-effacing. Knowing them so intimately and having the advantage of the consultant's helicopter view I've always known how outstanding they are. My challenge was to persuade them to see themselves the same way and have the confidence to put an award submission in. I felt particularly emotionally invested and was over the moon to see them win. You couldn't wipe the beam off my face for the rest of the week! No more hiding lights under bushels for them. Congratulations Brecher! This award absolutely went to the right firm! 

***

Wish I could have been at the London Solicitor's Litigation Association's 60th Anniversary bash, but sadly it clashed with The Lawyer Awards. Kysen was represented of course, (our Adele Baxby made lots of new friends among the Junior LSLA), but I couldn't be there myself. By all accounts it was a great event, celebrating just how far the LSLA has come since its inception. Over the past 60 years it has grown in influence, for example advising on the plans for the new commercial court complex at Rolls Building before it opened (this is the court famous for handling Oligarch and other overseas big-ticket litigation). At the same time the LSLA has been campaigning hard at the small ticket end of the litigation market having a key role in the Jackson Review. President Francesca Kaye believes strongly that to maintain its status as a world class legal system London must be capable of serving both its own people at all levels of the market, as well as attracting lucrative litigation from other parts of the world. And with the Junior LSLA growing like topsy since its launch just over a year ago, the LSLA's influence looks set to increase long into the future. 

My favorite story though was hearing how former President and high profile legal pundit David Greene opened the dance floor by proffering a hand to current President Francesca. Those who know David well will be aware he has been on crutches the last few months after a fall from a ladder. Ever the gentleman, he at least put his crutches aside for the dance, but even Frankie's grace was challenged as he wheeled her round the floor with a big plaster of paris boot on his foot. What a picture! Shame no cameras were allowed. :-)

Stephen Allen

The death of the billable hour is a subject close to Stephen Allen's heart. Currently Director of Innovation (I want that job title!) at Berwin Leighton Paisner, formerly both a Chief Executive at leading barrister chambers 7 Bedford Row and prior to that Group Company Secretary at Orange broadband services, Stephen has a particularly well-informed perspective on the topic of what in-house lawyers want and how private practice firms should go about providing it. Always one to engage attention with an intriguingly-turned phrase, Stephen came in to talk to the Kysen team this week about "The Value Paradox": how in-house lawyers are undoubtedly tired of the hourly rate as a way to measure the value that private practice lawyers provide; yet the reality is they find it hard to measure value in any different way.

"I have a story for you, a parallel with Lady Windermere's Fan", he told us, "the famous Oscar Wilde play staring Lord Darlington, the man who knew the price of everything and the value of nothing. Imagine this scenario: a head of legal at a FTSE 100 firm invites two firms to give a piece of mission-critical legal advice. The first firm, Erlynne & Co, costs the job on the basis of research and drafting time, delivering an estimate of 70,000 pounds for the work. The client negotiates this down to 50,000 pounds. The firm then takes three weeks to deliver a 150-page report, of which the executive summary contains all the client needs. They tell the client 70,000 pounds worth of time was spend on the work, but finally agree to stick to the negotiated 50,000 pound charge. The client is happy, feeling they received real value for money.

"The second firm, Augustus Lorton, offers straight away to do the job at a flat fee of 50,000 pounds and the next morning delivers the equivalent of the exec summary, (the only bit the client actually valued in Scenario One), in a half page email. The client balks at paying 50,000 pounds for such a quick-turnaround job.

"The moral of the tale? Despite the rhetoric about wanting a change from hourly rates, a typical in-house legal client often finds it hard to see value in the way the job was handled in Scenario Two, despite them getting the bit they said they valued so much - and getting it sooner. This is what I call The Value Paradox.

"The message really is that it's the job of the private practice firms both to find a new pricing model and lead the client in understanding where the value is."

In his role at BLP Stephen has been working hard - indeed innovating - to find new models that get to the heart of how in-house lawyers want to work differently and in a way that works for his firm too. Take a look here for details on BLP's ground breaking deal with Thames Water, where they bought out the in-house legal team in a five year deal to deliver legal services to the company through the former in-house team, through BLP's own team and via subcontracted firms Ashfords and Pannone.

"A triage system is key to the success of how this project is managed, with the emphasis on accurate diagnosis of what skills a particular piece of legal work requires, followed by an astute assessment of who in our collective team does what best - and how to divvy up tasks for maximum benefit to the client and to the various firms involved. We're looking for a "win: win: win" for all the parties involved," says Stephen.

Remember the Orange slogan? "The future's bright - the future's orange"? I've always thought Stephen brought a little bit of that bright future to the profession, when he arrived from his in-house role at the telecoms company. Now of course, since its merger with T-Mobile, the merged company "Everything Everywhere" has a new slogan: 
                            
                                          "I am who I am because of everyone."

Maybe there's a point here for the profession, about collaborating to win ...

***

There was something strangely familiar about this week's stories of celebrities and tax avoidance schemes: a memory nagging at the back of my brain - investment in high risk creative projects, (film, music)? With the idea that the inevitable losses can be offset against tax on other income? Then I remembered it's pretty much the plot of Mel Brooks' excellent satirical dark comedy The Producers.

The Story focuses around a desperate washed-up Broadway producer and his accountant and a play they design to be a flop - to avoid the scrutiny of the Revenue  and oversold to investors 250-fold in the confidence they'll never have to pay out (so in fact part Ponzi scheme). You'd think that "Springtime for Hitler: A Gay Romp with Adolf and Eva at Berchtesgaden" couldn't fail to fail, so to speak. Especially with its Busby Berkley style geometric choreography with aerial shots of dancers in swastika formation. But it turns out to be a surprise hit and panic then ensues as its creators are expected to pay out to their investors. 

The 1968 film won an academy award for its screenplay and is preserved in the National US Film Registry. It is one of the maddest satires of antisemitism you'll find. Delicious for this. If you haven't seen it, take a look - the 1968 film is much better than the remake or stage play. 

Of course on the subject of life imitating art Jimmy Carr went one better. Check out this Youtube clip of a Carr routine where he lambasts greedy tax avoiders. First rule of reputation management anybody? That's right: it begins with the words 'people in glass houses ...'

***

Thank you to my twitter companions who kept me entertained on a broken down train on Tuesday evening. To stave of frustration and boredom I put out a plea on Twitter (a "twea"?) for any good jokes or other interesting distractions. I was inspired by the response. 

@legaltwo kicked it off with: "Did you hear the one about the law firm that embraced technology and client focus? No, me neither ... boom boom :-)". Made me smile out loud and we went on from there. 

(I hope it goes without saying that my clients and many of my friends in the legal world, being connected with such new-fangled concepts as PR, are by definition among the early adopters, in the vanguard, the exceptions that prove the rule.)

On seeing @legaltwo's offering @Louise_Restell tweeted me her latest blog post, which touches on this subject of lawyers embracing technology (or rather not). She makes an interesting point that there is a clear need for an official and independent legal advice and guidance site - similar to NHS Direct Online she suggests. The Legal Services Board found in a recent report that "the internet revolution has yet to reach legal services" (what a quote!) and this is making it almost impossible for consumers to find accurate and helpful legal information when they are looking for support. They are swamped by information and just can't see the wood for the trees. Our friends at Prolegal tell me they are exploring a legal diagnostics site. It would be interesting if they could be persuaded to share this for the benefit of all. Watch this space ...

Thanks for the company @Legaltwo, @Tucola, @aahafezi (who was the one person to urge me just to live in the moment and enjoy observing the lovely evening through the train window) @RupertWhite, @Louise_Restell, @HeatherTowns, @MEkowalski, @LexFuturus, @allaboutcosts. You were there when I needed you!

Keir Starmer

"Starmer struck" is how I would best describe the two teenage girls who came with me to see a talk by the Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer at this month's Hay Literary Festival. Apparently he has a "firm judging chin". He is certainly an excellent communicator, putting across quite nuanced legal and ethical points in language so simple and clear that nothing was lost on my 14 year-olds companions. They told me afterwards, with starry eyes, that they felt 'very reassured knowing our justice system was in the hands of such a capable man'! 

For me? I was particularly struck with his views on the importance of transparency in public office and the work he has done to build what he describes as a 'virtual glass wall' around his department. Whereas his predecessors tended to the view they shouldn't have to justify their decisions and that the public should trust them to use their discretion wisely and get things right, Keir believes this is no longer a tenable position in an age where the public has seen such lack of integrity among so many public office holders, first with MPs and expenses, and now Leveson bringing disrepute on politicians, police and press alike.

"Discretion can be a force for good, certainly. But it can also hide incompetence - or even corruption' he says 'and in my mind this means we must be transparent: issuing guidelines explaining our general approach to an area, be it assisted suicide, phone-hacking, whatever. Then be transparent about what we decide in each case. We are making important decisions that have very significant impacts for individuals, for families, victims, witnesses. We owe it to them to be open about how we arrive at these life-changing decisions."

He also told a wonderful tale of the case of the DDP impersonator. Definitely a case he had to stay at arm's length from; he didn't even want to be privy to who in his department was handling it. The doppelgänger was Paul Bint, a con man who posed as rich or important men to win the affections of women. One of his girlfriends gave witness for the prosecution. Her suspicions about her new boyfriend began when she realised she had never seen any one of the three expensive cars her lover bragged about and he was always cadging lifts from her. The clincher came when they had a row one evening and as he left in fury he sprawled the word 'Bitch' over her garden fence "which didn't seem something the DPP would do" she said in the witness box. Quite. 

When the time came for the trial, Keir did just have three questions for his colleagues: "Is the man pleading 'Not Guilty'? If he is, what's his defence - is he saying he really is me? And in that case, what happens to me if he is acquitted?" Luckily for everyone concerned, Brint was found guilty of fraud and put away. My teenage friends can rest knowing we still have the right man in role for this very important job.
***

So what do we think of Danny Boyle's Green and Pleasant Land? I always knew we could expect something imaginative, ambitious and memorable from the top film-maker and theatre director, his medium being such a high-impact visual one. And as his plans to transform the Olympic stadium into "the British countryside" were unveiled this week, my heart did stop for a moment - although I'm not entirely sure it was all for positive reasons. The pastoral scene is to include three live sheepdogs, 10 chickens, 12 horses and 70 sheep to create "a picture of ourselves as a nation" we are told. So far, I can't say this particularly resonates with my own sense of what's great about England - don't know about you... 

But then he came to his "mosh pit" under the fake Glastonbury Tor, filled with real people - members of the public representing the masses; his "posh pit" at the other end representing the first-night-of-the-prom-goers - and his hopes the two groups might "do battle and face each other off" on the night. Now that's more like the England I know. Like it. And the model includes four big suspended clouds which are capable of producing rain, "just in case we don't have enough." Well thanks for that, Danny. Thoughtful.

But then more excitement later in the week as we learn that this "rural idyll" theme is to be just one of several segments, each sequence to burst through the previous.  According to the Guardian "the countryside side set was a feint, inducing critics into taking it at face value...thus to make the eventual spectacle more shocking".  Now that's more like the Danny Boyle we know and love. 

***

Last chance to see... The BBC's Chief Economics Correspondent reminded us at a Gorkana Media Briefing at Mayer Brown this week that as the TV team moves out of the historic Television Centre in White City to join radio colleagues at Broadcasting House in Central London's Portland Place, and the BBC ceases broadcasting from its iconic headquarters altogether, 50 years of TV history comes to a close. Television Centre was built in the 1950s and officially opened in 1960. It is synonymous with an age of broadcasting that brought us Play School, Blue Peter, Top of The Pops, the original Dr Who, Fawlty Towers and countless other programmes that are now part of out collective cultural mind map. 

Feeling nostalgic? Take a look at this video and write up for a recent documentary on Television Centre that the Guardian's Michael Pilgrim described as 'a leaving do for a building'. Hankies at the ready... 

Elizabeth Ferguson

How well do lawyers deal with uncertainty?  An interesting question raised by Elizabeth Ferguson of change management consultants Crelos at a very thought-provoking panel discussion they hosted last week.  The event formed part of the consultancy’s Change Mastery Series, focussed particularly on the professions and designed to drive debate on the latest theories, models, tools and techniques of change.  Well of course the legal profession needs all the help it can get in this area, given that lawyers at every level of the market and across all disciplines (barristers as well as solicitors) are facing more change now than at any other time previously.

We are all familiar with the maxim that in today’s business world "change is constant", ie that a state of change is no longer an exceptional event, but the norm.  Crelos even talk about the issue of "change fatigue", how people are becoming dulled to the idea of change as the stimulus is so constant, and how this can get in the way of innovation if not addressed.  But in the legal profession we are experiencing change not only in this sense of continual evolution, but also as "revolution" as well, following deregulation in the form of The Legal Services Act which now allows legal services to be delivered by Alternative Business Structures, paving the way for  all manner of creative alternatives to the traditional partnership structure or classic barrister offering. Indeed new weird and wonderful ABSs seem to be popping up almost on a weekly basis: we now have our first listed law firm in the UK after the merging of English stalwart Russell Jones & Walker and Australian firm Slater & Gordon; and I recently blogged about the astonishing news that haulage company Eddie Stobart is getting in to the business of law; and last week’s big ABS news was that newly launched fixed-price legal offering Riverview Law is opening in New York.  

Elizabeth shared with us some conclusions drawn from recent research interviews she has conducted among senior executives in professional services firms.  She began with the observation that many professional firms remain steeped in history and tradition, working within a culture that emphasises cooperation and a collegiate approach which has many advantages, but which is not generally helpful in promoting dynamism and transformation at pace, she says.  

"The professions contain some of the most intelligent high achievers in the world of business.  So why do they find change so difficult?  The short answer is, because they are made up of human beings.  Managing change is about far more than just changing structures: the real difference between failure and success is most often the extent to which you are able to change behaviours, ie get people to think and do things differently.  And that is inherently difficult; as famed organisational psychologist Elliott Jaques put it so eloquently, "It is precisely the uncertainty inherent in human work, the feeling of never being quite sure, that makes you close your eyes and agonise over decisions".  And this is why even the most intelligent people will balk at change, preferring to stay in denial, resist, put up walls, etc.   Another main barrier is of course "group think", that classic feature of group behaviour where individuals’ desire for harmony within the group holds them back from properly challenging each other’s ideas and realistically assessing alternatives.  If I have one message for the professions, it is to have confidence in your abilities to deal with change; you do have many of the tools: you have particularly strong skill sets in analysing data, weighing up evidence and coming to judgements. The challenge is to be brave in applying all this when it comes to your own business and your own individual position in a fast-changing market - and to know when to bring in help from the experts with some of the softer skills challenges!"

For more detail on Elizabeth’s research of business leaders in professional firms and how they see the impact of the changing regulatory and economic climate on their businesses, click here. 

***

It's good to be reminded there's still heroism in journalism, particularly at a time when the Leveson Inquiry has brought the reputation of the media to an all-time low. Attending the Amnesty Media Awards made me think about the power of the media in a whole new light. In contrast to the jaded view of the press we are inevitably left with, watching the sordid detail of dodgy press practices that emerge through the inquiry process, the journalists celebrated in these Awards all have a strong conscience and are driven by impulses you could be forgiven for thinking were outmoded in our cynical media age: the relentless pursuit of truth; the need to tell the stories that oppressive regimes are trying to hide. And some of these journalist will risk even life and limb in this pursuit. 

Sunday Times war correspondent Marie Colvin, whom I blogged about earlier this year (26 Feb 2012 see second story) after her death by shellfire in Syria, received a posthumous award. It was collected on her behalf by her photographer colleague Paul Conroy who was wounded in the same attack that claimed her life. He limped on to the stage to collect the award on crutches and with various wires and tubes peering out from under his clothing and joked how Marie's 'infectious bravery' hadn't been such good news for him, particularly from his family's point of view.

For more information on the Awards, check out the live tweets from the event. 

***

This week I've been at the Hay Literary Festival on the Welsh/English border, enjoying a wide range of speakers from  the world of books, screenwriting and music. For many years Hay was sponsored by The Guardian but these days it's supported by the Telegraph. Before I headed off for the festival a chum from the Sunday Telegraph told me over lunch that the atmosphere was rather tense the first year the Telegraph took over, a good number of literary professionals and stars even choosing to boycott their party they were so upset The Guardian had been usurped. The Guardian readership must surely be the largest represented at Hay of all the broadsheets after all. (Me? I'm not particular of course, having a professional interest in reading across all the nationals every day and favouring the different titles for different types of coverage.) I understand relations are rather better now and everyone is only too appreciative of the Telegraph's generous continuing support of the arts in these austere times. 

The hottest ticket? Hard to choose, but in my view it was 'legendary punk poet and King of the performance stage' John Cooper Clarke. Tickets sold out very quickly but we booked ours early (*smug*).  He didn't disappoint. There was lots more to enjoy. If you're interested, you can check out the lineup here.