Hansard

I noted the concerns that were expressed by Paul O’Kane earlier about the amount of time for which we have been considering the bill and debating it this afternoon. I observe that it is but a blink of the eye compared with where we found ourselves at the same time last week.

I join other members in thanking the committee and the minister for their work on this piece of legislation. I took part in the stage 1 debate, and it is fair to say that we have come a fair way since then.

The bill introduces many welcome reforms that are long overdue. The Law Society of Scotland fairly highlights that the legislation will act to modernise and reform regulatory systems, some of which have been in place for four decades or more.

I was a member of the Justice Committee when Esther Roberton published her review, which highlighted the lack of transparency, clarity and simplicity in the landscape of legal services regulation. Although the bill stops short of one of the review’s key recommendations for an entirely independent regulatory body, it nonetheless goes some way towards improving the accessibility and reliability of legal services, and it points to the issue of access to justice that Maggie Chapman raised.

The task faced by the minister and the committee was to find an appropriate compromise that does not diminish the principle of an independent and vigorous system of regulation but ensures that we do not tie the hands of regulators and practitioners in maintaining a system that is workable and flexible—and it was no small task. One area that prompted particular opposition and concern at the time was the inclusion of what felt like arbitrary and overreaching ministerial intervention in our legal services. It was regrettable that that pretty fundamental tenet of the legislation was left to amendment at stage 2.

I acknowledge the point that Paul O’Kane made, very reasonably, that the minister inherited the situation, and I think that she has done a power of good work in seeking to address the issues with the co-operation of the Equalities, Human Rights and Civil Justice Committee.

The bill that we are dealing with today is a very changed beast from the one that confronted us at stage 1. I commend the committee for its efforts, and the scrutiny of the bill has clearly been a collaborative endeavour. The amendments that Tess White successfully progressed today in relation to the 10-year review will serve us well; likewise, the amendments to toughen up the approach to unregulated legal services are a valuable addition to the bill.

The steps that have been taken on the basis of Paul O’Kane’s amendments to improve transparency are also very welcome, and I know that they have been welcomed by the Law Society of Scotland. They go some way to restoring public confidence in the accountability within the relevant systems.

As the minister suggested, this process was embarked upon back around 2010. There has been considerable effort, through the amending phases, to address concerns. However, referring to an observation that I made at stage 1, it has felt like the introduction of the bill was rather rushed, which is surprising, given how long the issues have been under consideration.

However, the work that has been done at stage 2 and at stage 3 today has left us in a much better place. The eventual legislation will take important steps to improve a system that for too long has failed to meet the needs of consumers or even many of those working in the sector—a system that was outdated and overly complex and, as we have heard, that repeatedly failed the public, many of whom found themselves in vulnerable positions when seeking recourse in the face of misconduct or wrongdoing.

The bill before us today better reflects the needs of a diverse and rapidly evolving legal services sector, and it builds much-needed transparency, accountability and protections into a system that must work to safeguard the interests of consumers. For that reason, Scottish Liberal Democrats will be voting in favour of the bill at decision time shortly.