Chamber
Plenary, 14 Dec 2006
14 Dec 2006 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill
I record my appreciation of the sterling support that the clerking team and the Scottish Parliament information centre have given the committee.
No one would disagree that, in recent years, the public's confidence in how the system deals with complaints about lawyers has declined. Despite some changes that were made by the Law Society, doubt remains in the minds of citizens. To be frank, there is a public perception that complaints are not dealt with in an unbiased way and that the odds are stacked against individual complainers.
If we pass the amended bill that is before us, I believe that public confidence can be won back. I welcome the fact that the commission will be led by a board with a non-lawyer majority and a non-lawyer chair and will receive complaints about lawyers that cannot be resolved at source. I believe that that is sensible, as is the intention that the commission should handle complaints about inadequate professional services. I am also content that responsibility for professional discipline will remain with the legal professional bodies and that the relevant discipline tribunals will be involved because the commission will oversee the manner in which such complaints are handled.
I believe that the Parliament's decision to support the Executive in maintaining £20,000 as the maximum compensation when a services complaint is upheld is correct. The minister was correct when she said that the commission will behave competently and professionally when it decides compensation. I welcome the Parliament's decision.
The right of appeal against commission decisions is much knottier. I thought that John Swinney's comments on the matter were eloquent, sincere and detailed but, in the end, not persuasive. Given that the amendment in the name of my colleague, Ms Baillie, was eventually passed nem con, I hope that, during the debate, Mr Swinney took comfort in the clarification that Mr Wallace and Mr MacAskill, among others, offered.
I am content that what was passed does not tilt the balance in favour of the legal profession at the expense of the individual citizen. If I had thought for a moment that it did, I would not have supported the amendments. I believe that the amendments provide only the possibility of an appeal to the Court of Session and that the application for leave to appeal would need to be sought from and granted by the Court of Session before it could proceed. Appeal would be possible only on the restricted ground that it does not challenge the merits of a commission decision. That is only right and proper. The commission will be party to any appeal. I concur with the minister's wise words this morning: the amendments preserve the essence of the current policy and do not undermine it.
The policy intentions behind the bill are vital to its overriding aim of creating a system of justice that is efficient, effective and accessible for all the citizens of Scotland, and that is seen to be so.
No one would disagree that, in recent years, the public's confidence in how the system deals with complaints about lawyers has declined. Despite some changes that were made by the Law Society, doubt remains in the minds of citizens. To be frank, there is a public perception that complaints are not dealt with in an unbiased way and that the odds are stacked against individual complainers.
If we pass the amended bill that is before us, I believe that public confidence can be won back. I welcome the fact that the commission will be led by a board with a non-lawyer majority and a non-lawyer chair and will receive complaints about lawyers that cannot be resolved at source. I believe that that is sensible, as is the intention that the commission should handle complaints about inadequate professional services. I am also content that responsibility for professional discipline will remain with the legal professional bodies and that the relevant discipline tribunals will be involved because the commission will oversee the manner in which such complaints are handled.
I believe that the Parliament's decision to support the Executive in maintaining £20,000 as the maximum compensation when a services complaint is upheld is correct. The minister was correct when she said that the commission will behave competently and professionally when it decides compensation. I welcome the Parliament's decision.
The right of appeal against commission decisions is much knottier. I thought that John Swinney's comments on the matter were eloquent, sincere and detailed but, in the end, not persuasive. Given that the amendment in the name of my colleague, Ms Baillie, was eventually passed nem con, I hope that, during the debate, Mr Swinney took comfort in the clarification that Mr Wallace and Mr MacAskill, among others, offered.
I am content that what was passed does not tilt the balance in favour of the legal profession at the expense of the individual citizen. If I had thought for a moment that it did, I would not have supported the amendments. I believe that the amendments provide only the possibility of an appeal to the Court of Session and that the application for leave to appeal would need to be sought from and granted by the Court of Session before it could proceed. Appeal would be possible only on the restricted ground that it does not challenge the merits of a commission decision. That is only right and proper. The commission will be party to any appeal. I concur with the minister's wise words this morning: the amendments preserve the essence of the current policy and do not undermine it.
The policy intentions behind the bill are vital to its overriding aim of creating a system of justice that is efficient, effective and accessible for all the citizens of Scotland, and that is seen to be so.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Murray Tosh):
Con
The next item of business is a debate on motion S2M-5223, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, that Parliament agrees that the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scot...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Johann Lamont):
Lab
I thank the Justice 2 Committee for its thorough consideration of the Legal Profession and Legal Aid (Scotland) Bill. A number of refinements were made to th...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
Con
I am minded to accept a motion without notice to bring forward decision time to 5.30 pm.
Motion moved,
That, under Rule 11.2.4 of Standing Orders, Decision Time on Thursday 14 December be taken at 5.30 pm.—Ms Margaret Curran.
Motion agreed to.
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
I pay tribute to the minister's endeavours today. I concur with the tribute that the minister paid to everyone in the bill team.The bill has been a long time...
Mr David Davidson (North East Scotland) (Con):
Con
I joined the Justice 2 Committee as convener on day 1 of stage 2 of the bill, which gave me a real introduction to the trenches in the front line—I had to re...
Jeremy Purvis (Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale) (LD):
LD
I will refer to the debate at stage 1 and to the committee's stage 1 report. The main areas of consideration at that stage have been substantially addressed,...
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab):
Lab
I record my appreciation of the sterling support that the clerking team and the Scottish Parliament information centre have given the committee.No one would ...
Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP):
SNP
I thank the Government for introducing the bill and the ministers for steering it through Parliament. I imagine that the volume of correspondence that I have...
Colin Fox (Lothians) (SSP):
SSP
As other members have said, there were many issues for the Justice 2 Committee to consider in scrutinising this 80-page bill, which was probably dwarfed by t...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
The fact that the bill is a completely different animal from what appeared at stage 1 is a good advertisement for the parliamentary process. I pay tribute to...
Mr Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I add my thanks to those of other members who were on the Justice 2 Committee during stages 1 and 2. I thank the clerks and my fellow committee members, who ...
The Minister for Justice (Cathy Jamieson):
Lab
Like Kenny MacAskill, I recognise the fact that the bill has been a long time in the making. I thank the parliamentary committees—not just in this Parliament...