What does it mean?
My personal view is that it may be significant, but it will take time to build it back to that of the QC “honour.” And yet surely, it is just the same? None of us changed much, if at all, nor did our work. True. But the King is new. The Queen had 70 years of service which likely has developed the QC “clout” (as our teenagers would say). None of those in business or law or government today have known a King’s Counsel, and it doesn’t have quite the cachet yet. It could (and arguably should) cause the users of QC’s to reflect and consider whether that is what they want or need.

In the words of our former Chief Justice, Dame Sian Elias, appointment to “the inner bar” is just the beginning, and it is what one does with it that makes it worthy.

Some history
The first King’s Counsel in New Zealand were appointed in 1907. 43 were appointed in the years leading up to 1952 when Queen Elizabeth ascended the throne. Since then, there have been more than 200 Queen’s Counsel appointed.

There has just been another round of excellent appointments – each of whom is a pre-eminent barrister and leader at the bar. The annual round is a very thorough process, with Judges, the New Zealand Law Society, the New Zealand Bar Association heavily involved, and ultimately the Attorney-General and the Chief Justice making the decision. In recent years, there have been 10 or so, with some years there being none. In 2013, 26 were appointed in a “catch-up” year.

In 2012, as Solicitor-General, I was appointed Queen’s Counsel by the then Prime Minister, Sir John Key. I got a call from my PA (the late Jan Fulstow – bless her) to tell me the Prime Minister wanted to see me in his office straight away. I literally ran down The Terrace to the Beehive thinking there was some legal emergency. When I got to the 9th floor and was shown in, the Prime Minister was practicing his putting, so I relaxed a little. He told me he planned to appoint the Attorney-General, Christopher Finlayson, and me as QC’s. I was delighted – particularly as I had great respect for him and Chris and felt it was such an honour to be appointed.

Cost
Many of my friends joke to me about the cost of a QC and talk of thousands of dollars per hour. That is a misapprehension. For example, those who work for central government get paid at a rate set by the Solicitor-General, which is $475 plus GST (a lot I know). All of us provide services pro bono or for very low cost on occasions. We are there to do the tough jobs, sure, but no tougher than those at the coalface in the district courts where most of the criminal and family cases are dealt with.

My view
I argue for a broader use of the KC title, to include all the best barristers, including those who practice commercial law, mediation, arbitration, and in the specialist areas. I think it should be available to a wider group of senior barristers, and in that way more people can get access to the power of the title. That is not the view of others, and I respect that view because quality and courtroom advocacy is very important. I argue, however, there are many barristers who should have the honour but will never achieve it, and as a result, their clients won’t get that benefit either. I don’t think that is doing as much as we can to provide access to justice and to share this great honour with very capable lawyers. But that’s just one person’s view.

Whatever the case, the KC title is here for quite some time to come. We will see whether we can do it justice.