Controversial attorney, Reinhardt Buys, advises that the Competition Commission is considering his complaint re the law societies etc at the same time as their exemption qualification will be heard.  One thing I have always believed strongly in, is if you have views, you should put them forward - and as most of you know, I have done so.  I do prefer howver to try and make changes within one's profession, because that way, by simple reference to electorate results, you can see if you are shooting in the dark, or representing the views of your colleagues.  Election results, whether for the JAA, the Gauteng Law Council or the Law Society are surprisingly consistent.  For example, I came 2nd to Ronald Bobroff for the election of the Johannesburg representative for the Law Society out of 5 candidates.  I came 2nd behind Ronald again in the last Gauteng Law Council elections when I think as many as 10 attorneys stood.  In the last JAA election, where Ronald is no longer on the committee, I won the election by members.  That sort of consistency in voting across various bodies tells me that members are aware of what attorneys stand for, and while I certainly think Rule 43 should be re-considered (something that Reinhardt has not considered), it is clear to me that members know who does work and they vote for them.

I have to say I don't like the program.  Its the equaivalent of McDonald's to a proper homecooked meal when it comes to news and its best redeeming point is that it is on on a Sunday evening when most are too tired to think.  We have approached them so many times over the years and all they want is a "case study" of a person who is affected by the new legislation.  Well, we will have plenty WHEN it becomes law and it is TO LATE to do anything, or to care what the program will have to say.

One of the mistakes most attorneys have made is to not get involved and assume its all been done.  I have said that often, but if you think the political process is about consulting with the Freedom Front + and the DA, then it has been done.  If you think its about consulting with and engaging the majority party, as I would, well then.............

The plane trip was less nerve racking than the drive home at night, in pouring rain from Laneria airport.  We flew in a Lear Jet - pictured above, and although its a small can of metal travelling through the air, its pretty comfortable inside.

Back to work, we hear the RAF regulations will be published at the end of the month.  Then comment will be accepted.  We are told further that NEXT week the medical hearings will be held and THIS weekend there will be advertisments placed inviting participation etc.  Maybe I am too sceptical but I find it hard to believe you can get proper participation next week if you are only inviting the people by ads this weekend.  On the other hand, if you have already invited the people, then you don't really need to place the ads now, at the last minute, unless you are just keeping up appearances of public particapation.....

A story about the Master and the DG of the Justice Ministry to read at:http://www.moneyweb.co.za/education/investment_insights/890052.htm

I just went through some of the stats for the site for January - a very impressive 3500 unique visitors, some 800 or so readings of the blogs.  Blogs have not taken off, across the world, as much in visits as in publicity, but they do provide a means to always have fresh content without sourcing articles.  One can in a 100 words give the latest info faster and quicker than if you ask someone to "prepare an article" - words which seem to terrify most attorneys.  Going on the updating of blogs and previous figures that would indicate about 15 readers a day for my blog - or about 90 readings per update given it is about once every 6 days on average.  Thats not huge, but as attorneys go, its not too small either!  The problem is those attorneys out there who simply do not read - almost ever.  Not De Rebus, not Without Prejudice, nor the Law Society updates and just merrily go on their way.  A few weeks ago a prominent Johannesburg attorney, who does RAF claims for Plaintiff's, but also recovers money for medical aids realized, for the first time, that there were proposed changes to the RAF act.  It is these types of attorneys who never contribute to the cause and afterwards ask why not enough was done!