Two pro-democracy legislators criticised the consultants' report on legal education and training yesterday, saying it offered no new measures to improve law students' English standards. 'As far as English is concerned, this consultancy report offers nothing new and nothing capable of being a solution,' Margaret Ng Ngoi-yee, who represents the legal profession in the legislature, said. 'We all know that English is very important, but the test itself does not bring up the standard of English.' On the consultants' proposal for the Post Graduate Certificate in Laws (PCLL) course to be scrapped, Ms Ng said the recommendation was 'unhelpful' and 'arbitrary'. 'I found it very disappointing,' she said. 'We were hoping that they would at least do some rethinking since last June. They have failed to give any cogent reasons to justify why they did not accept the University of Hong Kong's proposal to reform the PCLL course. 'It seems that they just write it off. It's very unconvincing. 'Why can't we seek to improve it before making such drastic changes?' Albert Ho Chun-yan, a solicitor and Democratic Party legislator, said it was 'not sensible' for the three-year Bachelor of Laws degree course to be extended to four years, with law and non-law subjects taken concurrently in the first two or three years. On the proposals to bring in stringent English language tests for the profession, Mr Ho said: 'It's not sensible to require law students to take fresh English tests at the universities. 'What we should do is to motivate them to continue to take some English-language courses at the universities,' he added.