I've had an opportunity to read the Law Society's letter. It reflects positions that were put forward in 2004, as well as in 2013. They're the same arguments that have been presented over the last decade. I don't believe it sets an appropriate precedent. In fact, it recognizes the need for legislative enactment to extend privilege in an appropriate manner.
If there are other situations where privilege should be extended, I'm sure a similar process of consultation and study will occur.
It protects the status quo to a certain extent. I don't think it necessarily sets a precedent, other than providing protection where a gap currently exists, which, I might add, protects the communications of lawyers with their clients, where there is a gap currently.