Like many at the Bar, I came to the profession out of a desire to serve justice using the skills of an advocate. This belief in justice is rooted in idealism when we are young in the profession.

International challenges to freedom under the law in Burma, Pakistan, the African continent and places closer to home remind one of the gritty relevance of such idealism.

Much of the strength of British justice is rooted in the adversarial system. I have little doubt that the English, and common law, adversarial system is here to stay and, thanks to work by the Bar Council, is gaining ground in Brussels.

We have a system, which by probing and testing as it does, in the full glare of the public eye, is widely recognised to be at least as good, if not a great deal better, than those of our European Union neighbours. It is a system which – by virtue of the independence of the advocates and judges who work in it, and of their high ethical standards – is held in high repute around the world.

Despite the awful circumstances, I was heartened to hear public demands for British justice in the welter of press coverage following the disturbing Madeleine McCann case.

What was being sought was the methodical approach of our police, our prosecutors and our barristers. There was reprehensible reporting of innuendo outside of official process. The English jurisdiction would have provided a well-adjudicated process, under which evidence is carefully tested and the issues presented to an impartial jury.

The call for British justice reminds us that it is still held in high regard around the world. That is why we must oppose any lowering of standards by those involved in the system – solicitors, barristers, judges, police, the Crown Prosecution Service and other agencies.

It is also why the system must attract sufficient investment by the Government to ensure that cases are prosecuted, defended and adjudicated upon, to the highest standards, no matter what the means of the litigants concerned.

This will be a major challenge for the profession in 2008.

We must resist any attacks on or lack of investment in the system. The public will only know that something has gone wrong long after mistakes are made.

I shall continue to argue vigorously for the proper funding of representation before our courts.

One of my principal aims for the year is to strengthen the bonds that bind us together as a profession. We are a profession of 11,500 self-employed and 3,500 employed barristers. When I was called, we numbered about 5,000 in total. The increase in the number of barristers (and of solicitors) demonstrates that there is a clear need within our society for expert help, which lawyers and barristers in particular can offer.

The recent MORI research undertaken for the Bar Standards Board found that 96% of our professional clients believe the Bar provides an excellent service, and so do 76% of prisoners. The latter is telling: they plainly feel that their advocate gave voice to the merits of the case, a view which remained even after the prison door had closed.

Barristers are the leading-edge problem-solvers in the law. The knowledge and skill that comes from the Bar's work at the end of the litigation process is what is needed before any such process gets under way.

Barristers are best placed to anticipate the outcome, and therefore advise on the appropriate response. A brief conference with or an opinion from a specialist barrister may save a client thousands in costs, and a great deal of heartache.

So I intend to loudly proclaim our expertise here and around the world. Too often one finds that a barrister has not been instructed, or instructed early enough, or that costs have been wasted on fruitless enquiries because there is a simple point that determines the case.

I shall also be readying the profession for the business and regulatory challenges presented by the Legal Services Act 2007. In my view, the referral model under which the specialist Bar provides its services ensures both high quality and a wide choice of advocates. We must be careful to ensure that we carry the best of our current system into any new arrangements that develop under the eye of the Legal Services Board. n