Two IPs In A Pod
Brilliant inventions, fresh product designs, iconic brand names and artistic creativity are not only the building blocks of successful business - they deliver a better world for us all. But these valuable forms of intellectual property must be protected in order to flourish. We are the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys - the UK's largest intellectual property organisation. Our hosts Lee Davies and Gwilym Roberts chat with entrepreneurs, creatives, patent attorneys and the occasional judge about how patents, trade marks, designs and copyright can improve our lives and solve problems for humanity.
Two IPs In A Pod
Inside IPReg’s Education Review And What It Means
What should a newly qualified patent or trademark attorney be able to do on day one, and how should we train for a world shaped by AI, shifting client needs, and the public interest? We sit down with IPREG’s education review lead, Sally Gosling, joined by Katie Flett, to unpack the biggest rethink of qualification in years. From defining core capabilities to asking who even finds their way into IP, we explore the decisions that will shape careers, employers, and the users of the IP system.
Get him a band list now. Hang on a minute. I can't find it. No, there we go, got it.
SPEAKER_03:Yeah. I mean I wasn't expecting before you answer that, I wasn't expecting to see that background behind you, because that's your normal background, and I thought you would still be in Cardiff.
SPEAKER_04:No, no, that was yesterday. My daughter was I'm very proud. My daughter was playing for Cardiff University women's rugby team against Cardiff Met in the in in Cardiff Arms Park. It was really exciting, actually. It was so cool.
SPEAKER_03:So I don't I I I love watching rugby, but I don't particularly understand it. It's not something I've really followed. Um what what position does she play in, if it's means anything to me?
SPEAKER_04:Uh she's she's in the scrum at number six, which I believe is I'm not very good on this. I think she's a flanker, which means that you basically never see her because she's always at the bottom of every pile of bodies, which is quite stressful for a parent watching a sporting game. But she's she's she's been playing. It's lovely, she's been playing since she was four. Because her brothers played, and she played and she played with uh with the boys' team until she was 11. So she's just been brought up in that. And uh, I think as a result, she's got all this kind of uh as with anything. If you learn that early, nothing phases you, she's very relaxed about the whole thing. That was great, great, it was a lovely thing.
SPEAKER_03:And what I've done now very clever what I've done now very cleverly has got us to the point where we need to start the podcast without you being able to use your list of dance that you carry around with you. Oh, he's frozen.
SPEAKER_04:Oh, that's such a shame because there's a whole chicken thing I'll do, but we'll save it on. You froze on us then, Gillem. Oh yeah, uh yes, I was gonna say let's keep rolling, as it were.
SPEAKER_03:But um, if I do freeze, now now your voice is scarily out of sync with your video. So uh it looks like you're you're in you're from some sort of like 70s badly dubbed European movie.
SPEAKER_04:Oh, yeah, that could be. Also a kung fu movie as well. What I was gonna say is uh that's a shame, Lee, but we can talk about the chickens another time.
SPEAKER_03:Yeah, I'm a bit worried about the chickens. I don't know where you might be going on that, but uh, yeah, let's do it another time, shall we? Should we crack on with the show? Yes, let's do it.
SPEAKER_00:Lee Davis and Willem Roberts are the two IPs in a pod, and you are listening to a podcast on intellectual property brought to you by the Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys.
SPEAKER_03:So really exciting today because um we have Sally Gosling with us um from it break. Uh Sally Sally has a minder with her, just making sure that she gets everything right. But but we're not we're not bringing Katie into the conversation just yet, Will, and we'll save that for later, yeah? Yeah, okay. That's that's fair and reasonable, I think. So Sally, hi, welcome to the podcast.
SPEAKER_01:Hi, hi. Lovely to join you, and thanks so much for the opportunity. Thank you.
SPEAKER_03:It's an office background you've got behind you. That isn't your home, is it? You don't live in a house where you've got that wallpaper.
SPEAKER_01:Choice of decor, no, this is a suite of offices where it product is based. Um, quite remarkable. It is.
SPEAKER_03:Yeah, that is it is that to encourage shorter meetings because people are feeling quite dizzy about 15 minutes in.
SPEAKER_01:Yes, I think it'll be a bit of a lot of things.
SPEAKER_03:Conversation doesn't work very well on a podcast, does it? Because no one can see it. We'll have to take a screenshot and um um put it in the edits. Right, okay. Seriously, on with the show. Sally, well, welcome to the podcast. So why don't you start by introducing yourself? Uh, because um we've got to know you recently since you've come to lead the education review at IPreg, but people won't know you uh otherwise sort of professionally. So tell us a bit about yourself.
SPEAKER_01:Oh, that's lovely. Thank you. So, yes, I joined Ipreg to lead the education review back in September 2024. I've been in a part-time role, sort of setting up and scoping out the review since that point, and joined by Katie since the summer in doing that. But my background is mostly in healthcare, education, professional development, workforce development. And I worked for many years for a professional body, um, UK professional body for physiotherapy, leading on education, quality assurance, workforce development, professional development, regulatory issues, um, and sort of developing research capacity within the profession. And did a lot of work across the professions known as the Allied Health Professions, the HPs, during that time as well, chairing an education leads group across all the professional bodies and doing quite a bit of work with the main regulator for those professions on developing standards approach to CPD, being very much an outcomes-based approach to CPD through a government-funded project. And I did a lot of work to really grow the physiotherapy profession through optimizing funding changes, student funding changes. So the profession is significantly bigger now than it was, say, 10 years ago, through quite innovative work that I led while I was at the CSB and that has continued um subsequently. And then I was uh Director of Education for the College of Optometrists, so led their regulated education provision while I was there, was in that role during the height of COVID, so um led the delivery of um the route interregistration as an optometrist um during the pandemic and was very involved in the regulators education strategic review that that really sort of came to uh sort of have the height of its activity again during COVID and is now being implemented. And then since then I've had a sort of portfolio of activity that I've pursued. So I've um worked for NHS England, their advanced practice agenda across all of the professions in healthcare, outside medicine, very much linking with medicine, uh led work on advanced practice credentials until last summer when I left that role to join IPREG. And then I've had a sort of portfolio of roles for different regulators that I'm many of which I continue to do, all with a focus on education, CBD, quality assurance, uh particularly actors and inspector for social work England for pre-registration education. So I continue to do that activity alongside, as I say, my part-time role. But I would say there's lots of sort of complementary value parallels between what might seem like quite disparate professional worlds, but perhaps we can come on to that. But I think there's some really interesting um parallels and links, including I'd say, how professional bodies and regulators work in complementary ways to develop professions, serve the public interest, etc.
SPEAKER_03:You are quite active in the health space, aren't you? Because uh you and I bumped into one another at breakfast a couple of weekends ago, which it was one of those one of those situations where you find you you meet someone out of place, out of situation, not where you'd expect them to be. So I I was I was speaking about TPD at the the Institute of Osteopathy, have I got that right? I think I I do struggle to say it. Uh conference a couple of weekends ago and sat sat for breakfast getting ready and to speak. And Sally appeared next to me, and it was like, do you do that thing when you look at someone about for far too long where you're trying to work out whether it is the person you think it is? But it was it was Sally. So she's she's seen me perform with my stick and shoes.
SPEAKER_01:Yes, very impressive uh me. Yeah, but no, I do some consultancy activity for the Institute of Osteopathy and was previously a lay council member for them, so yeah, and that's why I was there.
SPEAKER_03:Cool. So shall we start with? Let's start with how you found the IP professions since you've since you've come to that, because obviously it's very different from the world of health and healthcare where you've been previously. Have you found getting to know patent attorneys and of course trademark attorneys?
SPEAKER_01:Well, I think I've found it hugely interesting and really enjoyable to um, as you say, start to get to know the professions and respect the differences between the professions, but also sort of see some of the sort of common links between them. I think certainly what I've picked up is Katie and I have increasingly had informal initial conversations with experts within each profession, that there's a real, really positive engagement in the education, the qualification routes into the profession, um, building on existing good practice and exploring what might be ripe for reviewing and looking at um what could be done differently. So I think it's been really positive to sort of get that very positive um response from each profession and a real um commitment and eagerness to look at the optimizing the purpose of the review in the way that's intended. And this is just we had the first meeting for our expert advisory group for the review yesterday with strong representation from CEPA within those discussions as well as obviously SIPMA, but that was again really positive meeting for sort of collectively discussing the review and how we take it forward and um just some of the sort of priority themes that we interest within it. So I think it's been really positive. Obviously, Katie and I are still very much getting to grips with the complexities of the professions and how um what's important for the professions and a key part of a review, we'll be exploring what's changing in professional practice, what are changing employer needs, consumer needs, professional practice needs, and how we appropriately respond to those as a sort of so that's the sort of key grounding before we move into some of the details of the review. We can't be looking at uh potential changes to qualification routes if we're not really grounded in changing nature of practice and what's required of future patent and trademark attorneys. Um but I think this acts, you know, we've had some really sort of positive, engaged responses to beginning to address and understand what might be those kinds of issues. And so I suppose another issue that's really been, as you're probably aware, one of the driving um motivations of IPREG to undertake the review in the first place has been exploring how entry to the two professions can appropriately be widened and how um the professions can be appropriately inclusive and um diverse. And I think again, we've we've had some very positive discussions with all parts of the professions, I think, from different uh stakeholders within the professions about obviously all the work that's been done on that front to date and what might be what can be built on in that respect as well.
SPEAKER_03:Before we get into the sort of detail of the review and how it's going to pan out, just a reflection on something you said fairly early on in that section. And that's what one of the fascinating things for me when I came to CPA 14 years ago now was we we often think about CPD as something that's a mandated requirement on professionals. And very very often it's about selling that to the profession that it's a good the the fascinating thing I've always found with um certainly with our members is that they have an inexhaustible capacity for learning. Learning is something they are in fact very, very good at. And it's something that I think particularly STEPA does really well to support them with quite an extensive webinar, seminar, conference, kind of knowledge program. So um, in many senses, you're preaching to the converted because this this is a profession that takes both its initial kind of professional formation and then it's then its post-qualification CPD really, really seriously. Is that fair, Gwen?
SPEAKER_04:Yeah, I think it is. I think we uh as a profession, we beat ourselves up day in, day out for not knowing enough. Um there's not a lot of complacency. It probably comes from the the scientist background, possibly, but I think people just very academic, very um, very keen to basically we don't like making mistakes. Bottom line, we don't like making mistakes, we hate it. Um, my our our head of uh HR, head of people and culture to be exact, says one of the things that amuses her about pattern attorneys is that basically we can't cope with making mistakes. We we hate it so much and she thinks it's weird. But I think it's professionally, I mean, we set ourselves a super high standard, and I think learning is a is a key part of that. Not to say we can't improve, obviously, but as a group, I it's really notable just how we push ourselves, I think.
SPEAKER_03:Let's let's start. Lots of people listening to this will not be familiar with the review, Sally. So when did it start? Why did it start?
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, so my understanding is that um the IPREG board agreed probably fairly early on in 2024 that um it was timely to undertake an education review. And my post was advertised that summer, and I took it up in September 2024. So I suppose, as I said at the start, I've been uh spent quite a bit of time sort of exploring and scoping out what the review could and should look at usefully, obviously, all through the lens of what it's appropriate for IPREG as a regulator to explore while respecting that it meant the review itself may well generate issues and opportunities that may be more appropriately picked up by other um stakeholders, whether it's you as CEPA or uh SITMA or um other bodies. So I suppose it's sort of spent a good six months or so sort of scoping things out. And I think I first uh I think I came along to your council meeting um back in May to and that was sort of did the same with SITMA around the same time, April, May time. Katie joined the team in June, and I suppose we've more concertedly been progressing um how we're going to run the review since that point, but obviously put forward previous um papers today, pre-board from um beginning of this year, sort of scoping out how we'd run the review as a project. But I suppose in terms of it going live, as it were, we're only really reaching that point now because it's felt really important to do a lot of exploration, a lot of due planning. So making sure that the review is robust, it's proportionate, it's it has all the characteristics you would expect that it adheres to sound project management approaches. It's obviously thoroughly embedded and uh accountable and uh scrutinized through IPREC governance processes. So we've been going through how we set up the review in that way. Okay, with Katie and I are really thinking um in terms of the live part of the review, really has has now started. And I think with the expert advisory group meeting yesterday, it was obviously took a reasonable amount of time, but not a surprising amount of time, to get that group set up, um, and obviously to pave the way for that group to be able to have its first meeting. But what we're gearing up to now is preparing to launch a call for evidence, um, which should go live early in 2026. So that's when we're really concertedly seeking feedback and input from all stakeholders, whether that's individual patent and trademark attorneys, whether it's trainees, whether it's organizations, networks, specialty groups, employers, qualification providers. So that's when we're kind of thinking the review really takes off and becomes a very live thing. And this is just to say we've, as you would expect, we've been giving careful thought to how we take a fully inclusive approach to stakeholder communication and engagement. And again, we'll be stepping up how we communicate on the review through launching a newsletter, which um we're in contact with your team, Lee, on how we launch, uh optimise CEPA as well as Sitma links on how we share that. And then in terms of how long it will last for, we're talking about the live part of the project being at least a couple of years to give due time for stakeholder involvement, the development of proposals, obviously sharing those proposals through consultation. And only then will we work up a formalised plan for when the finalized outcomes of the review are um implemented so that we'll be in the next phase of longer-term activity.
SPEAKER_03:So it's not a short term. I'm just conscious that I don't want to drive if Gwillam wants to come in at all. You okay for me to carry on for a bit, Gwilla?
SPEAKER_04:Really happy. I mean, fascinated to hear it, obviously. Um I I I have to remember I'm a podcast host, not an interested party here, but both from both from both aspects, really interested. But no, Lee, please drive.
SPEAKER_03:We have enough of these where you drive, so um I'm I'm quite happy to um sit behind the steering wheel for a bit on this one. So where should I shall I start, Sally? So let's let's start for the with the call for evidence. Do you have a sense of what that's going to look like? Will it be a series of questions that you'd be looking for evidence around? Will it be something more esoteric than that? Will there perhaps kind of like a theme or an ideology that you're trying to explore? What what do you know what the call for evidence is going to look like? Yeah.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, and that um is certainly what we've been planning for and were sharing uh yesterday with the um expert advisory group for their um feedback on on uh what the plans that we have for the call for evidence. So the approach we're taking within it is to have a number of high-level themes. So at the moment, we have four themes that we'll be um sort of refining and finalizing ahead of the um call being launched, but those are deliberately sort of high level rather than uh particularly specific um uh to maybe with but but to provide a structure for what we want to seek feedback on and what kind of feedback we want to seek. So the essentially the the key focuses of the um review around as I was saying earlier is uh what are what are the what's what are the changing needs in professional practice for each profession, how the professions are practicing, what's required in their practice, obviously looking at the the different geographies in which the professions practice, so particularly the European dimension and changes in European uh requirements for patent attorneys, as long as as well as obviously UK and global dimensions, understanding more specific aspects of how the uh employers' requirements and needs around professional capabilities are changing, how are future members of each profession best prepared for the changing nature of professional practice? So key considerations would be AI, for example, professional ethics, just sort of how the melding of obviously for patent attorneys of scientific expertise, IP expertise, technical, and broader aspects of being effective enroll, um, perhaps something in more transferable or softer skills is sometimes uh referred to. But I suppose just going back to your point, Lee earlier, around the profession's commitment to ongoing career-long learning, I suppose sort of how pre-re sort of qualification routes really effectively prepare future members of the professions for the inevitability of constant change in practice. So that sort of resilience, the appetite, as you say, for ongoing learning, the independent critical learning skills, the engagement in defining learning needs to meet those, all of the sort of key aspects of, as you highlighted, professional practice and accountability and responsibility. So exploring those kinds of issues. And then related to that, we want to explore the sort of learning and development culture in each profession, really drawing out existing good practice and where there might be variation in how um trainees are supported in their uh journey to become a member of each profession. Also in ways that are uh not sort of making presumptions about how what it might look like, but the sort of how the sort of journey to become either profession is a bit smoother. What sort of integration of professional experience, learning and development, particularly obviously from a the mix of learning experiences that that um trainees gain in the workplace and um in external, whether it's academic learning or or externally delivered courses, and the assessment they go through. So exploring some of those kinds of issues, and then running through the whole is that focus on um widening entry, supporting progression, so inclusive inclusivity and diversity uh approaches. So those are The four broad themes that we're thinking, obviously, they may be refined a bit more before we actually launch the call, but they're deliberately, as I say, high level rather than sort of focusing in on uh education provision or exam provision per se, um, in a way that would feel premature and and and not not not getting to the number of what we need to consider.
SPEAKER_03:Quite a big ask. I've got a couple of things that come out of that for me. So, first of all, that's quite a big ask because we you are looking at the what I would call the professional formation piece. So that's how uh how a patent attorney becomes qualified. Yeah. And and we know that there are already kind of multiple complexities to that.
SPEAKER_02:Yeah.
SPEAKER_03:You're then looking at the remaining in good standing bit. Um, you know, you know that I don't have a particular fondness for continuing professional competence. As an educationalist, I can argue that it's absolutely not that, but I'm not gonna do it on this podcast. But uh good, I would love to hear the argument, obviously, but uh but it's but it's not but it's not happening today. Will it also look at what particular patent attorneys need before they start to train as a patent attorney? So are you gonna go backwards to before the point that people join the profession and the sorts of kind of subject expertise that they need, the technical qualifications, or or does this start at the point they're recruited as a trainee patent attorney?
SPEAKER_01:I think it's a really good point, Lee. And I think we do, we, we, we, we are very much interested in looking at that because I suppose what we're wanting to achieve through the exercise and how we progress and use the evidence and feedback we gain through the call for evidence is how do we appropriately update what we're calling day one capabilities required for practice as a patent attorney or trademark attorney. So, as you say, inherent within that are the sort of prerequisites to someone embarking on that journey to become a patent attorney or trademark attorney. So I think both from an inclusivity and diversity perspective, and how do you meld that that, as you say, that that key combination of knowledge, skills, and behaviours within day one capabilities, I think looking at the the, as I say, the prerequisites to being eligible to apply for a trainee, patent attorney role. So I suppose really interesting from that perspective, for example, in the the work that SEP has obviously been critical in leading around the patent scientist engineer apprenticeship, because obviously that is by definition looking at how a STEM um degree could weave in IP components into it to enable someone potentially to become a patent attorney in the future. But I think that usefully throws into relief how uh for a patent attorney STEM issues are addressed, including from a European dimension. And I suppose as well, it's looking at how prospective members of the profession are even become aware that they could become a patent attorney or a trademark attorney. And I suppose, particularly for the patent attorney profession, how people are sufficiently aware it is a career option that they might want to pursue from whatever social background they come from, but what choices would they need to make early in their educational journey in order to be even ready to do that? And I said, I think it fits strongly with the sort of EDI focus as well, around how choices are not or opportunity, potential opportunities are not closed down too early. So I think it's a key dimension that we need to look at. But for me, it's kind of fits really with the EDI focus, but also the day one capability focus, because obviously we need to ensure critically through this um review that high educational professional standards are upheld through the review and that the product, as it were, from pre-registration qualification routes is producing the workforce that's required in the context of changing contemporary practice needs and future needs. So, yeah, it's not the prerequisites as I'd call them, obviously, essential to consider.
SPEAKER_04:I jump on one of my soapboxes at that moment, all fully in support of what you're saying, um, which is that one of the arguments we we hear about the kind of the EDI breakdown within the profession is that we can't do better than the statistics you've got in STEM more broadly.
SPEAKER_02:Yeah.
SPEAKER_04:And I think that's always been a particular concern of mine, because we can we can do everything we can, but there are all kinds of problems way before you get to the patent profession in getting people to the the spread of people doing science degrees in simple terms. Um a little thing that I'm always begging the profession to do every time I get an opportunity is say that there's all kinds of interesting charities and tutoring schemes out there for us to use our science qualifications to train people coming through the school system to want to do science long before they decided they want to do IP. But we have three, was it three and a half thousand scientists, Lee? So every time I get the chance, I say everybody, but for things like the Access Project, some of some of the other charities out there to make those changes even earlier and start redressing that balance earlier.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah. And it's because I would think that, I mean, I absolutely agree, Gulem. I think and I think all the work that the professions already do around sort of outreach and trying to address that issue is really, really important. I would say, in the context of the government's um recent publication of its white paper, uh Post-16 Skills Strategy, Springland, it highlights a number of potential opportunities and potential ways of the profession engaging with that huge focus on skills and particularly with a strong focus on young people and um addressing challenges to people entering or not entering education or employment. Um, so I think there's some quite key agendas that are very live, um much broader than um what we're talking about here. But I think from addressing that point, I think there's probably more initiatives and more opportunities to link into um that would be helpful. But yeah, we'd absolutely agree. There's that it would be a false premise to think we're just talking about people once they've got a STEM degree or once they've been recruited by an employer to become a patent attorney trainee.
SPEAKER_03:Sally, and another thing that struck me is you you talked about apprenticeships. And of course, you know that that's something that particularly um CEPA is developing. Current president Bobby Mukajee is very um passionate about. And that'll that'll be the first time when we when we successfully launched that, that being an intellectual property lawyer is sort of like a first professional identity, if that makes sense. Someone actually making the decision to try in from the youngest possible age as a patent attorney. To date, patent attorney patent attorneyism, if for want of a better word, is very much a second or third, at least, professional identity. So um, so so our members are scientists, engineers, technologists first, and then the the law comes to them after, either because they they get into the workplace and they develop an interest in IP, so choose to train um as intellectual property lawyers, or because they bought it at university, uh, they go to career spell or something like that. So so obviously the the review will need to recognise that the the routes for patent attorney trainees and trademark attorney trainees, that's quite difficult to say, isn't it? Is it's very distinct and very and very separate. So, in terms of how you're going to so the long, very long question I'm asking, let me actually ask a question. How about if I just do that bit? So, in terms of the evidence that you take for the review, how are you expecting that to come? Are you expecting people to look look at the themes and provide lots of written evidence? Will there be opportunities for people to come together and have discussions around these topics? Could we do more podcasts where we get guests on and the conversation is their contribution to the review? Could we could we take evidence in all sorts of kind of different and interesting ways?
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, no, and thank you. And sorry, I realised I didn't answer the second point of your earlier question about the call for evidence. So it's for you to come back to it, um, Lee. So, yes, having outlined the the key themes that you know, as I just did, we will be providing structured questions that that seek to give a basis for um an indication of the feedback that we'll be seeking from respondents. We'll also be seeking um or inviting the submission or uh uh indication of published material that we should really be aware of that needs to inform the review, and we'll also be seeking additional information that respondents think it's appropriate and important for us to be aware of. So there will be, we'll structure the call such that it's sort of feedback as well as evidence, as well as um kind of grey literature kind of material that it'll be helpful for us to be made aware of. But I think, as you say, we are really keen to use different approaches and different models through which we we seek to engage key stakeholders. We're keen, obviously, as we've talked with you before about promoting the call for evidence through webinars and things, but we're beginning to plan more thematic workshops on sort of key topics as ways of um gaining in what allow for more in-depth discussion. But I think, as you say, if the if you were to organise podcasts on particular topics and effectively submit those as assets or share those as assets that can inform the review, that would be a great approach to take. So I think maximizing different media and opportunities to enliven engagement and input is really helpful. But we'll be seeking to provide that clarity um and to take an open approach while also giving due structure so it's clear kind of what we're asking and what would be helpful. And we're looking at a range of different calls for evidence from different sectors and settings that we can uh sort of draw um the practice from to um try and make it as engaging and clear as possible.
SPEAKER_03:Project will and we could get a range of guests on in 2026 to look at the themes for the review, and that'll um um give us an opportunity to interrogate people about the sort of thinking that they've got. How cool is that?
SPEAKER_04:Yeah, really interesting, actually. I think this this is gonna get a lot of interest across the board from the profession. And I have to say, I think we need to avoid complacency. So it's really, really important to do it as well. We are proud of how good we are, but we can always get better. And I think that's hopefully the message that you'll be hearing.
SPEAKER_02:Yeah, yeah, that's good.
SPEAKER_03:But a thought that's just crossed my mind is will you be talking to I'm gonna call them the other stakeholders, but let me let me try and introduce at least a few and see whether you've thought about how they might engage. So we've got the UK IPO, obviously, as a factor in this, because whilst they don't train patent attorneys or trademark attorneys, they are where our members do business. So so they would have a perspective. You've got the users of the IP system, so the the clients of our of our members and how how you might take take from them what they would expect the future patent attorney to look like. You've got the judiciary, and I don't know whether you've thought about that yet. So you've got the the perspective from uh judges who obviously work closely with our members in in litigation, and then you've got the the sort of like the associated professions because because it preg will be looking at this through its regulatory lens, so I imagine it'll be contained to pattern and trademark attorneys, but of course both CPA and Sitmar have spent a lot of time developing the IP power legal profession. And you've got you've got a lot now of qualified IP power legals supporting patent attorneys, and they would have a perspective on this. So, how are you going to engage all of those sort of peripheral, if you like, stakeholders, but very important ones?
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, absolutely. I think they're all on our list of the stakeholder mapping that we've been doing. We haven't had direct contact with all of them yet, and I think we've certainly acknowledged the strong significance of the paralegal professions within um the sort of multidisciplinary team working. And we we've perhaps it's something that we could usefully pick up with CEPA on that. We've certainly had some discussions with SIPA on that, but it would be really helpful to explore that route and how we can, as you say, fully engage with them. And I think we've we're certainly alert to the need to look at the role of each of the professions within the broader multiprofessional, multidisciplinary context in which they work, respecting that all different and different workplace settings and sectors and specialties, but it's a really important dimension. I don't I think it from my experience of doing work around education, workforce development, professional development, you can't look at individual professions in silos. It is not the reality of professional practice requirements. So I think it's a really important point. On the consumer points, we are in uh very direct contact with the LSB consumer panel, and we have a panel member joining the expert advisory group, and we'll look to ways in which we can usefully expand on that. But as you say, we recognise that's a critical dimension. Um, and we'll be exploring with the Secretariat of the Consumer Panel how we um seek to promote the call for evidence and optimise um opportunities for involvement that way in other ways. So I think, as you say, the the whole the stakeholder, our stakeholder map is already pretty busy and you know it gets busier, and we were kind of needing to look at how we identify all stakeholders, recognising if some have a greater interest in the review itself than others, but we need to provide that opportunity for engagement and input, and we will certainly be keeping under review whether we're successful in doing that or whether we have gaps of whatever type that we need to look at, how we address so that the kind of feedback evidence base we generate through the review, uh call for evidence is yeah one that is inclusive, reflects appropriate depth and breadth, um, and and seek to mitigate if um we're concerned that we're missing out on some key perspectives.
SPEAKER_04:I'm actually thinking about the stakeholder list, and that was that was a really good one. I th I think you were talking about parallel areas and barristers and solicitors we work very closely with. I think that's uh that's an important one too. But I've got a really fun stakeholder for you. I don't know how you're going to engage with this one, which is the public. The public. We are we're obviously guardians of the only legal monopolies available. Uh, and so a huge part, as you know, the patent system is actually making sure that there's fair there's a kind of fair certainty for third parties. But a bit we also don't talk about quite so much is actually that the patent system also benefits the public because all the technical information that we create that we decide to patent by definition goes into the public domain, and that's actually one of the reasons why it's a you know this. Sorry, I was just reflecting on it. But that's quite an interesting one. I don't quite know how you engage the public as a stakeholder. But we've got this kind of forgotten duty to actually propagate technical information as a thank you, as it were, for the monopoly. So that'll be a fun one for you.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah. No, I think it, as you say, Gwillem, I think the whole um you know that key dimension is one that I think we need to consider. And again, your thoughts and uh Sitma's thoughts and others on how we do that effectively would be really very helpful. Again, my sense is that there might be sort of quite quite regionally based uh sort of initiatives across industry, um all sectors, including the legal sector and universities, that are really looking at how they demonstrate their value around economic growth and innovation. And you know, obviously the professions are key to how that's done, whether there's some opportunities through some of those kinds of regional initiatives through which that might be done that we could draw upon could be quite helpful to explore, I think.
SPEAKER_04:Another one that uh another point you raised a little earlier on, which I thought was very interesting, was talking about the future-proofing profession. Uh and you mentioned it, you mentioned in particular AI, which is obviously the hot topic of the world, the world at the moment. Um, but uh again, it's something we're I think we're very much looking at. And Lee, I was talking to Vicky, who I think is a future president when 2027, that's right, isn't it?
SPEAKER_03:And I know that she's actually the time when we'll be starting to consider how we're important to practice.
SPEAKER_04:Yeah, she's hugely well, she's she's wonderful for many reasons, but she's hugely committed to the um the education side. And I think part of her kind of agenda, what she really wants to achieve is that to to work on that that future-proof thing. Uh, and I'm sure the the issue that you're aware of, which is that we need to be careful that we use AI in a sensible way, we don't ignore it, but we realise that it's going to be replacing some of our roles and freeing us up to do other stuff. And I think the future of the profession has to be built around that kind of thing.
SPEAKER_01:Yeah, totally agree. And I suppose um, yeah, I think as you say, Gulem, it feels as though AI, well, clearly in its own right, is a key focus in in terms of changing the nature of professional practice. What impact might it have on um changes in workforce supply and demand? You know, how do um will that impact on trainee roles and how those fit within um team roles and provide the opportunity for development? How is it ensured that individual trainees have the opportunity to develop robustly the key capabilities required for IP practice in a context in which AI might be replacing some activity or or supporting some activity? So I think, as you say, that kind of um ethical, responsible, um informed approach to how AI is embedded in practice and how that's developed in qualification routes and how it's appropriately assessed, and how assessment is the integrity of assessment is is upheld. Obviously, as you say, these are issues that are all professions, all qualification providers, employers, etc., everyone's exploring these issues, and I think we're looking at how we can draw upon uh the value of some of the um thinking that that's happening on a constant basis on that front. But yes, I think it kind of fits with, as you say, Gulam, future-proofing um the professions and ensuring that uh the professions or future members of the professions are equipped with that sort of capability to adapt to change and to um say it's not about just uh sort of equipping with um the needs of the moment, it's about the dynamic nature of that AI is an example of. So I think that kind of provides quite a strong focus within our exploration of required professional capabilities and might help to throw into relief how we how we appropriately think about what those capabilities need to be, not looking at what impact does AI per se have on how someone, yeah, what someone needs to be able to do. It's more nuanced and complex and more sort of um links with lots of wider aspects than that, I think, that we're keen to explore.
SPEAKER_03:One of my jobs on the podcast, Ali, is to do a bit of timekeeping. Uh, and I failed miserably because producer Opinia is messaging me saying, Yeah, we're we're there or thereabouts, Lee. And we are we are indeed, Richard. If we run over it, it's always a sense that uh we've got deep into a conversation and it needed to be developed. But it's terribly unfair for Katie to have just sat there minding you all the time. So so ordinarily I would ask this question of you, Sally, but I'm gonna ask you of Katie if that's okay. So, Katie, are you sat there thinking, phew, they didn't ask that question, or ooh, I wish Sally had said that. Is is there anything that's missing in the podcast? What what what else should we have in there?
SPEAKER_05:I would just say, I just like to emphasize the point that like when we go out for the call for evidence, because as has already been discussed, like these are such broad, big topics, just really emphasizing them like for people to get involved, um, for people to think hard and think critically about like their answers and what they're submitting. And we're really keen to get like a wide range of Feeding back from Ivan. So yeah, just really push that. Thank you.
SPEAKER_03:Yeah, that's that's yeah, that's that's that's a brilliant call to call to action to finish with. So so thank you for that. We never we never, however, close the podcast on a serious topic. Uh we always try and end up with some kind of lighthearted question at the end. I think I might have explained that. So, are you ready for this one? Yeah, so I'm gonna ask Gwillem and then we're gonna come to you two to see if you have an answer for the question, okay? So we started off talking about wallpaper at the start, didn't we? And uh and and and and I I don't want to um be disparaging to that wallpaper there, but it's pretty awful. Having said that, I've moved into a house which I've not decorated yet, and I have similar kind of awful wallpaper, which I need to get rid of. So, what I was gonna ask you, Gwillen, is what's the worst interior decorating kind of experience you've ever had?
SPEAKER_04:I'm actually gonna share a friend's one because I remember hearing it, and they saying that they were looking around the house and they didn't ended not to buy it, they ended up not buying it, and it had an R-Tech ceiling, which is that kind of weird embossed ceiling. Yeah, yeah, but it had spirals, it had um cascading spirals all around the ceiling, and the previous owners oh you got R-text. Um but the the previous owners had painstakingly colored each of the spiral strands in a different colour, and they say it was one of the most it kind of sounds like technicolor intestines now. I say it, but I thought that that that's what I remember.
SPEAKER_03:Sort of thing you might do on a trip, mate. Not I don't mean like a visit somewhere, but maybe if you you if you had taken something that was encouraging you to think in that kind of way. Not that I would not think about that, obviously. It might induce a trip, actually, huh? Maybe that's what I meant. Thank you for saving me. So Sally, Katie, have you got any horrific interior decorating stories? Katie is nodding.
SPEAKER_05:Because I had one. So a few years ago now, um, it was when I was a student in Dunedin and I volunteered to help my cousin um strip wallpaper in her old cottage of a house. It's the middle of winter, it's snowing, and we're in this tiny enclosed space with all the doors open and shorts and t-shirts, because it's the whole room had steamed up as we and it was about maybe like five or six different layers of wallpaper stuck, and it took us hours. Which I made to be more careful about what I was volunteering for in the future.
SPEAKER_03:Sally?
SPEAKER_01:I suppose one that springs to mind, I think um my husband and I bought the our first house. We hated the bathroom tiles, they were grey and had sort of occasional flowers on them. So I think it was my idea that we would there is a thing called tile paint that you can buy because we don't want to re-tile it. We bought the tile paint and uh painted um the tiles with that paint, and I'd say it probably looked worse than than than the original, but um it was worth a try anyway. It was emerald green and um sort of terra terra cottage total disaster, I'd say.
SPEAKER_04:Sounds very tasteful to me, but then again, I want to decorate I want to decorate a room in green and red because I thought, well that's the same colours as the Welsh flag, and that works. Turns out it doesn't. Um Lee, go on, what have you got?
SPEAKER_03:I'm gonna I'm gonna go back to my plumbing days, Gillum. So it's not it's not my interior decoration, it's someone else's, the households working in. So I had to I had to go and refix a loose radiator. Yeah. Uh so I've taken the radiator off the wall, I've done a little test drill with uh I don't know I'm gonna put a backing board up to reinforce it, okay? So I've done a little test drill with a pilot drill, and I've immediately found okay, so I've got something to fix to. So I get my bigger drill bit, I'm drilling away, and all of a sudden my drill goes through like that, and there's a scream from the next room, a proper kind of piercing scream, and it's bedroom. And I go charging into the room next door, and there's a lady in bed, she's entirely covered up and stuff like that. And there's nothing there's nothing on toward there. There's a lady in bed, and the drill bit is just above her head, sticking through the wall. So so that they had taken down, they had taken down to make an arch around the bed, the interior plaster board. So what I was drilling into wasn't a button, it was the headboard of the bed because it was bang up against sheet plaster boards. So, yeah, that's my one. I'll I'll end there. Sally, Katie, thank you so much for coming on the podcast. We're we're really looking forward to engaging with the review. We'll have you back on um when we're part part way through and the call for evidence is out and and you're starting to learn stuff, and maybe we can do a little kind of mid-year review or something like that. I think that'd be quite nice. Grillum, thanks for being excellent company again, as you always are. Apinya, thanks for lurking in the background and reminding me that I was running out of time. Again, if you've listened to the podcast and you found it really, really interesting, and you want other people to find me and Grillem in our little IP space on the web, then drop us a review.