LPA Brings Paralegal Issues to AG Gerretsen

Robert Burd

Robert Burd

Members of the Licensed Paralegals Association (LPA) executive had a productive one-on-one meeting recently with Minister of the Attorney General, John Gerretsen.

LPA President Robert Burd said the hour-long Aug. 13 meeting included Attorney General staff and Vice President Serhiy Senatorov. They covered a wide range of issues affecting paralegals. These include: paralegal regulation; legislative changes; jury duty; Justice of the Peace applications; service of documents from courts and prosecutors; early resolution and disclosure; amalgamation with the PSO; and expanding the scope of practice.

“Overall the meeting went very well, Burd said. “We are scheduled to meet again shortly.”

The LPA has met with Gerretsen at least once a year, Burd noted. “He seemed genuinely concerned with our issues and knowledgeable on them all, and even raised issues. We left thinking our issues would be addressed in short order.”

The LPA and PSO are moving toward amalgamation. Burd said Gerretsen supports the move. “Interestingly, the AG said that until paralegals speak with one voice they will not get what they are looking for. I personally challenge every paralegal, especially those that have created new internet paralegal organizations, to join in with the PSO/LPA amalgamation so that paralegals will have a truly strong voice and can dictate what their future is.”

“We can all begin by joining the amalgamated organization, continue with our excellent paralegal-led CPD presentations, and make sure the right five paralegals get elected to the Paralegal Standing Committee of the LSUC,” Burd said.

One comment

  1. Good to see the AG expressing what I hope is both an interest in and movement on matters critical to our progress. And I trust it will add fuel to the fire in accelerating the amalgamation process.

    From the perspective of a new licensee, and possessing no conflict of interest since I do not know any of the “right” candidates or the inner workings of the committee, how should new licensees decide? Intuitively, I would think most will vote for those that either promise to and/or have the ability to advance our specific interests. One might want legal aid pushed while another might feel the JP issue is more critical (and so on), Each of us is bound to have an issue that causes us to “spit bullets”.

    I’d want an experienced “right” at the table, but one that is relentless and can show me they have the gravitas to push through and shepherd changes that are critical to me.

    Thanks, very good article.

Got something to say, add, clarify or retract? Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: