Monisha Shah, Chair of the Legal Services Board, reflects on the shared challenges facing legal regulators, from technological change to professional ethics and access to justice. Closing the International Conference of Legal Regulators in London, she calls on regulators to learn from one another and use the powers they have to protect the public and respond to a changing legal sector.
Closing remarks at the International Conference of Legal Regulators, London, 20 September 2026
Please check against delivery.
Closing remarks
Good afternoon everyone.
As we come to the end of this year’s International Conference of Legal Regulators, I would like to take a few moments to reflect on what we have heard, what we have learned, and where we go from here.
Before I do that, I want to add my thanks to Alison and her team for organising such a successful conference, and to thank all of our speakers, panellists and delegates for their contributions over the last three days.
Conferences are judged not simply by the quality of their programmes, but by the quality of the conversations they generate. By that measure, I think this event has been a tremendous success.
I have not been able to attend to attend all the session due to pressures of work and illness, but I have been well briefed by colleagues and friends who have been here and participated in the sessions. There has been a great deal to reflect on.
Over the last three days, the conference has explored some of the most significant questions facing legal regulators today. We began by asking whether we are regulating for the world as it is, or for the world as it was, and that theme has echoed throughout the conference.
There have been discussions about how technology is reshaping legal services and what that means for regulation, from the opportunities and challenges presented by artificial intelligence, to its potential application in education, assessment, complaints handling and regulatory operations themselves.
Panels and speakers have considered how legal services markets are evolving, including the emergence of new business models, changing approaches to service delivery and the implications of market developments for consumers, practitioners and regulators alike.
We have also spent time examining questions of professional competence and standards – how lawyers should be educated and trained, how competence can be maintained throughout a career, and how regulators can ensure that professional standards remain relevant in a rapidly changing environment.
Alongside these discussions, the conference has tackled some of the most challenging issues facing our sector, including access to justice, professional ethics, anti-money laundering, cyber risk, diversity and wellbeing.
We have also returned repeatedly to a question that sits at the heart of effective regulation: what does proportionate regulation look like in practice? How do we protect the public and maintain confidence while avoiding unnecessary burdens on the professions and markets we regulate.
While the subjects have been wide-ranging, a common theme has emerged: how legal regulation can remain effective, proportionate and forward-looking in a period of profound change.
It is striking that while our jurisdictions and regulatory frameworks may differ considerably, many of the issues we are grappling with are remarkably similar.
How do we respond to technological change? How do we maintain public confidence? How do we support access to justice? And how do we strike the right balance between public protection and innovation?
These are not easy questions. And while we won’t be leaving this room with all the answers, this conference has highlighted the importance of remaining curious, open-minded and willing to learn from different approaches.
One of the strengths of this community is that it brings together people with a wide range of experiences and perspectives. That diversity is valuable because it challenges us to look beyond our own assumptions and consider alternative ways of addressing shared challenges.
And there were many. I was certainly struck by the statement that the legal profession may have tried to outsource its soul to regulators. I will certainly be thinking harder about whether the legal profession has replaced ethics with ‘not acting illegally and what our responsibility is to prevent unhelpful dependencies to rise within the system. I felt positively encouraged by the approach to AI described by Sir Colin Birss, which came with a bonus lesson in how to charm an audience of hardened legal regulators.
But as we leave the conference, I hope we leave with a renewed awareness that the challenges we face are rarely unique and that progress is rarely achieved in isolation.
The legal sector will continue to evolve. New risks will emerge, as will new opportunities.
The job of regulators – our job – is not to predict the future perfectly. Nor is it possible to do nothing while we discuss the merits of new models of regulation and wait for lawmakers to consider and implement changes to the law or the system.
We have no choice but to do the best we can with the levers we have. Our job is ensure that our systems are resilient enough to respond, adaptable enough to evolve, and focused enough to continue delivering in the public interest.
That is not always easy. But no one takes on the responsibility of regulation because they want easy!
The discussions we have had over the last three days gives me confidence that the legal regulatory community is up for the challenge. I know that we at the LSB certainly are.
So let me finish by thanking you once again for your participation, your openness and your contributions.
I wish you all safe travels home, and I look forward to continuing the conversations that have begun here over the coming months and years.
Thank you.