Justice Secretary, Michael Gove, suggested in a speech in June that wealthy lawyers should "look to their consciences" and do more pro-bono work or contribute cash to prop up the poorer parts of the justice system.  LAG believes he is in danger of taking the legal profession's commitment to pro-bono work for granted and of ignoring the constraints around such services.   Lawyers have a long history of undertaking pro-bono work which reaches back to medieval times and earlier. Just prior to World War II the poor person’s procedure, which had originally been established in the reign of Henry VII in 1495, collapsed, (see chapter 1 of Austerity Justice ). Solicitors could no-longer afford to provide their services for free, as a combination of law reform and changing social attitudes had led to increasing numbers of poorer people seeking to divorce. It was the burgeoning demand for help with divorce cases which led directly to the founding of the civil legal aid scheme after the war.   Like their counterparts from the last century, today’s pro-bono lawyers will recognise that while they can offer some help they can only scratch the surface in meeting the need for advice. From a peak of 450,000 five years the number cases funded by legal aid for the sort of everyday problems people face has fallen to 100,000. The largest reduction came after the changes introduced by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act in April 2013. Benefits and employment law cases were almost entirely removed from the scope of legal aid and advice in immigration, housing and debt severely restricted.   Another type of pro-bono help, the poor man's lawyer service, was widespread across London in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and lives on in the many voluntary advice clinics provided by commercial law firms across the city. These free legal services are under threat, as legal aid and other cuts have led to closures of the advice centres which host them. Gove also does not seem to appreciate that the reason why many such services exist is due to a combination of the high concentration of law firms in London and their corporate social responsibility policies.   Over 50% of solicitors work in London and the Southeast. Firms outside London tend to be much smaller and do not necessarily have the infrastructure to support organised pro-bono programs. Many do much informal pro-bono work- legal aid lawyers are always quick to remind the government that they give many hours free advice by undertaking work for legal aid clients which is not covered by the scheme.   Pro-bono as part of the corporate social responsibility commitment of large international law firms is most likely here to stay, but the Lord Chancellor should not make the assumption that firms will choose to meet this obligation by continuing to take cases on their doorsteps. International  pro-bono work plays an important part in spreading the rule of law and promoting human rights and acts as a significant adjunct to the UK’s soft diplomacy efforts. It also has the advantage of avoiding the political controversy of replacing services previously funded by the state.   The implication of Gove’s speech is that the legal sector, particularly the large commercial firms in London, need to respond by either undertaking more pro-bono work or stump up cash. These firms though, all have their own priorities, are commercial rivals and above all fiercely independent. They are therefore unlikely to respond collectively to the Lord Chancellor’s call, but I’d suggest that they do have sufficient political acumen to know that a government with a majority of twelve has little prospect of forcing through legislation to move pro-bono from a voluntary service to statutory obligation or to introduce what amounts to a legal services tax. The Lord Chancellor's speech therefore should be seen as a provocation which is best politely ignored.   Steve Hynes, Director of LAG.   A version of this article was originally written for the charity LawWorks.