Sam Glover: Well and let's be clear, like most
law firms needs can be met in a variety
of ways and at a variety
of price points and so there's nothing
unethical about saying, «Hey you should use this on premise server based
system that's going to cost a certain amount
of money and make that IT consultant a lot
of money,» and we're going to try to steer you away from this cloud based practice management software that doesn't make us any money, because they'll both meet your needs just fine.
; (4) taxpayers would not have to pay for a justice
system that provides lawyers a good place to earn a living but doesn't provide affordable legal services for those taxpayers; (5) the problem wouldn't be causing more damage in one day than all
of the incompetent and
unethical lawyers have caused in the whole
of Canada's history (6) the legal profession would be expanding instead
of contracting; because, (7) if legal services were affordable, lawyers would have more work than they could handle because people have never needed lawyers more; (8)
law schools would be expanding their enrolments instead
of being urged to contract them; (9) the problem would not be causing serious & increasing damage to the population, the courts, the legal profession, and to legal aid organizations because their funding varies inversely with the cost
of legal services for taxpayers who finance legal aid's free legal services; (10) there would be a published LSUC text that declares the problem to be its problem and duty to solve it, and accurately defines the problem; (11) Canada would not have a seriously «legally crippled» population and constitution - the Canadian Charter
of Rights an Freedoms is a «paper tiger» without the help
of a lawyer; (12) Canada's justice
system might again be «the envy
of the world»; (13) the public statements
of benchers would not show that they don't understand the cause
of the problem and haven't tried to understand it; (14) LSUC's webpage, «Your Legal Bill - To High?»