Chamber
Plenary, 15 Nov 2007
15 Nov 2007 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Scottish Legal Services Market
I declare an interest as a member of the Law Society of England and Wales. I was a practising solicitor with Brodies until June 2007.
Like many others who have taken part in the debate, the Scottish Conservatives congratulate the Law Society of Scotland on recognising the need for change in an increasingly competitive environment. We—as is the Government—are attracted by the idea that Scotland could market its legal services on the world stage. Scots law and Scottish lawyers have a sound international reputation, so there are definite grounds for thinking that such moves would be successful.
However, we must recognise that the existing business structures would not necessarily be conducive to that in all cases. It has also been noted that smaller and, in many cases, well-established practices have no desire to go down that particular route. Any legislation would need to recognise that a one-cap-fits-all approach would be doomed to failure.
The Scottish Conservatives support the existence of an independent Scottish legal profession that is effectively regulated and which provides good-quality and effective services to clients throughout Scotland. As Rhoda Grant and others do, we support the principle that a free democratic society can flourish only if its members have access to independent legal advice, especially on issues involving Government or that require Government procedures or decisions to be challenged. That will not happen if people have restricted access to such advice or if the providers of the advice are under the control of the Government.
As we heard from Bill Aitken, the legal sector is an important part of the Scottish economy—it contributes £1.2 billion to the national economy. There is also great variation in the characteristics of the legal market: for example, some areas—financial services and tax sectors, residential conveyancing and commercial law, for example—demonstrate a high level of competition, while other areas, such as family law, welfare debt and housing matters, demonstrate a low level of competition.
The focus of today's debate has been on alternative business structures as a means of freeing up the Scottish legal market. However, there are other controls that restrict the legal market in Scotland, notably the restrictions on individuals who want to enter the profession, on which I will touch briefly. As Clementi noted in his report on the regulatory framework in England and Wales, setting entry standards requires a careful judgement between setting the standard too high and restricting entry and setting the standard too low and not maintaining proper levels of competency. That is the challenge to the legal profession and the Government, and it must be a concern with the prospect of Tesco law.
In Scotland, as in England, the legal profession has grown substantially in recent decades. That has been most evident in the dramatic rise in the number of law school places. The normal route to becoming a Scottish solicitor is to complete a bachelor of law degree, followed by a diploma in legal practice. There is then a two-year training contract that includes further competency courses. Advocates go through a similar process, requiring the diploma, a five-week foundation course and a six-month pupillage. Minimum standards of quality are enforced during that training process, but there are no specific statutory or other regulatory barriers to entry. However, as anyone who has been through the system will know, there are bottlenecks in the system that work in a similar way to barriers to entry. Whether it be in gaining a place at university, a place on the diploma course or a training contract, at every stage potential solicitors and advocates have difficulty getting into the profession.
Another barrier that I have come across is that which restricts the ability of solicitors who are not qualified in Scots law to come to Scotland to practise. Despite the fact that I held a University of Glasgow law degree and qualified in London, I had to sit several meaty examinations to become a qualified solicitor in Scotland. It felt as though it would have been easier for me to become qualified in New York state than in my home country. That differs greatly from the situation in England, where Scots-law qualified solicitors do not face the same barriers to becoming qualified as English solicitors. I urge the Government, as part of its reform package and review, to examine such barriers to entry to the Scottish legal profession. Unless our legal profession can be accessed by the most able lawyers from throughout Scotland and around the world, we will not fulfil our ambition to enable our legal profession to compete on the international stage.
A number of members, including Aileen Campbell, talked about business structures. There are several restrictions on the ways in which Scottish legal firms can organise themselves. Advocates must be sole practitioners: they cannot form partnerships with anyone, not even other advocates. The justification for that—a point that was made by Nigel Don—is that it allows advocates to focus entirely on the work of advocacy and frees them from other demands. However, there could surely be significant advantages, through economies of scale, if that restriction were relaxed. Removal of the restriction would enable advocates to spread risks more efficiently and, potentially, to take advantage of economies of scale by meeting a range of clients' legal needs within one firm.
In relation to solicitors' practices, non-lawyers are not allowed to own legal firms and employed solicitors are not allowed to act for any third party. That is justified on the ground that it avoids any conflict of interests, maintains lawyers' independence and continues to respect client confidentiality. Although reform is required in that area, there must be some concern—as we heard from Paul Martin—that big businesses would muscle their way on to our high streets and cherry pick the most profitable legal work. We have heard throughout the debate that smaller local law firms that offer a wide range of services are vital in many communities.
In the light of recent initiatives, the Scottish Conservatives acknowledge the need for a change in the legal services profession in an increasingly competitive environment—the idea of marketing Scotland's legal services internationally, for example, is definitely appealing. In addition, although Scots law and Scottish lawyers have a respectable international reputation, it is important to note that existing business structures are not in all cases conducive to that. In order for Scotland to maintain its international reputation, the legal services market must recognise that a one-cap-fits-all approach will not be attractive. The Scottish Conservatives support the existence of an independent Scottish legal profession that is effectively regulated and which provides quality services to all clients throughout Scotland. We are happy to support the Government's motion and the Labour Party's amendment.
Like many others who have taken part in the debate, the Scottish Conservatives congratulate the Law Society of Scotland on recognising the need for change in an increasingly competitive environment. We—as is the Government—are attracted by the idea that Scotland could market its legal services on the world stage. Scots law and Scottish lawyers have a sound international reputation, so there are definite grounds for thinking that such moves would be successful.
However, we must recognise that the existing business structures would not necessarily be conducive to that in all cases. It has also been noted that smaller and, in many cases, well-established practices have no desire to go down that particular route. Any legislation would need to recognise that a one-cap-fits-all approach would be doomed to failure.
The Scottish Conservatives support the existence of an independent Scottish legal profession that is effectively regulated and which provides good-quality and effective services to clients throughout Scotland. As Rhoda Grant and others do, we support the principle that a free democratic society can flourish only if its members have access to independent legal advice, especially on issues involving Government or that require Government procedures or decisions to be challenged. That will not happen if people have restricted access to such advice or if the providers of the advice are under the control of the Government.
As we heard from Bill Aitken, the legal sector is an important part of the Scottish economy—it contributes £1.2 billion to the national economy. There is also great variation in the characteristics of the legal market: for example, some areas—financial services and tax sectors, residential conveyancing and commercial law, for example—demonstrate a high level of competition, while other areas, such as family law, welfare debt and housing matters, demonstrate a low level of competition.
The focus of today's debate has been on alternative business structures as a means of freeing up the Scottish legal market. However, there are other controls that restrict the legal market in Scotland, notably the restrictions on individuals who want to enter the profession, on which I will touch briefly. As Clementi noted in his report on the regulatory framework in England and Wales, setting entry standards requires a careful judgement between setting the standard too high and restricting entry and setting the standard too low and not maintaining proper levels of competency. That is the challenge to the legal profession and the Government, and it must be a concern with the prospect of Tesco law.
In Scotland, as in England, the legal profession has grown substantially in recent decades. That has been most evident in the dramatic rise in the number of law school places. The normal route to becoming a Scottish solicitor is to complete a bachelor of law degree, followed by a diploma in legal practice. There is then a two-year training contract that includes further competency courses. Advocates go through a similar process, requiring the diploma, a five-week foundation course and a six-month pupillage. Minimum standards of quality are enforced during that training process, but there are no specific statutory or other regulatory barriers to entry. However, as anyone who has been through the system will know, there are bottlenecks in the system that work in a similar way to barriers to entry. Whether it be in gaining a place at university, a place on the diploma course or a training contract, at every stage potential solicitors and advocates have difficulty getting into the profession.
Another barrier that I have come across is that which restricts the ability of solicitors who are not qualified in Scots law to come to Scotland to practise. Despite the fact that I held a University of Glasgow law degree and qualified in London, I had to sit several meaty examinations to become a qualified solicitor in Scotland. It felt as though it would have been easier for me to become qualified in New York state than in my home country. That differs greatly from the situation in England, where Scots-law qualified solicitors do not face the same barriers to becoming qualified as English solicitors. I urge the Government, as part of its reform package and review, to examine such barriers to entry to the Scottish legal profession. Unless our legal profession can be accessed by the most able lawyers from throughout Scotland and around the world, we will not fulfil our ambition to enable our legal profession to compete on the international stage.
A number of members, including Aileen Campbell, talked about business structures. There are several restrictions on the ways in which Scottish legal firms can organise themselves. Advocates must be sole practitioners: they cannot form partnerships with anyone, not even other advocates. The justification for that—a point that was made by Nigel Don—is that it allows advocates to focus entirely on the work of advocacy and frees them from other demands. However, there could surely be significant advantages, through economies of scale, if that restriction were relaxed. Removal of the restriction would enable advocates to spread risks more efficiently and, potentially, to take advantage of economies of scale by meeting a range of clients' legal needs within one firm.
In relation to solicitors' practices, non-lawyers are not allowed to own legal firms and employed solicitors are not allowed to act for any third party. That is justified on the ground that it avoids any conflict of interests, maintains lawyers' independence and continues to respect client confidentiality. Although reform is required in that area, there must be some concern—as we heard from Paul Martin—that big businesses would muscle their way on to our high streets and cherry pick the most profitable legal work. We have heard throughout the debate that smaller local law firms that offer a wide range of services are vital in many communities.
In the light of recent initiatives, the Scottish Conservatives acknowledge the need for a change in the legal services profession in an increasingly competitive environment—the idea of marketing Scotland's legal services internationally, for example, is definitely appealing. In addition, although Scots law and Scottish lawyers have a respectable international reputation, it is important to note that existing business structures are not in all cases conducive to that. In order for Scotland to maintain its international reputation, the legal services market must recognise that a one-cap-fits-all approach will not be attractive. The Scottish Conservatives support the existence of an independent Scottish legal profession that is effectively regulated and which provides quality services to all clients throughout Scotland. We are happy to support the Government's motion and the Labour Party's amendment.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Alex Fergusson):
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business today is a debate on motion S3M-847, in the name of Kenny MacAskill, on competition, regulation and business structu...
The Cabinet Secretary for Justice (Kenny MacAskill):
SNP
I appreciate that the level of excitement about today's debate is not quite on all fours with the anticipation for Saturday's 5 pm kick-off at Hampden Park, ...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab):
Lab
The Law Society of Scotland has suggested that, in its assumptions about the Scottish legal system, the Consumers Association made a number of errors, which ...
Kenny MacAskill:
SNP
We have been in regular contact with the OFT. We have always been at pains to point out that we accept the need for consumers' rights to be preserved and pro...
Paul Martin (Glasgow Springburn) (Lab):
Lab
I note that at your request, Presiding Officer, the minister extended his speech. I hope that you do not receive a fee note for that, given that he previousl...
Kenny MacAskill:
SNP
I intervene at Mr Martin's request. We accept that although the Law Society and the Faculty of Advocates each perform a pivotal role for their professions, t...
Paul Martin:
Lab
I welcome that commitment from the cabinet secretary and agree with that way forward.A number of key issues are worth raising today, some of which were menti...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I call Bill Aitken. Mr Aitken, as you have picked up, you basically have as long as you like.
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
Gee, thanks.The Cabinet Secretary for Justice and I have exchanged some harsh words this week, but he will no doubt be relieved to learn that that is highly ...
David Whitton (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab):
Lab
Okay, so the legal profession contributes £1.2 billion to the Scottish economy, but is Bill Aitken saying that legal fees should go up instead of some way be...
Bill Aitken:
Con
No. Mr Whitton will be relieved to learn that I am saying that we should expand the market and bring in more business. As a good public relations man, he sho...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I now call Mike Pringle, to whom the instructions that I gave Mr Aitken also apply.
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD):
LD
That is probably a first.Although this subject is important, the English 2007 act that covers these issues does not become effective until 2011, so we are di...
John Wilson (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I congratulate the Cabinet Secretary for Justice on the motion and Pauline McNeill on her amendment. The Scottish Government is clearly attempting to develop...
Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
When we are debating legal structures, it is important that we focus on the people who require access to the legal system. Their needs must inform our decisi...
Kenny MacAskill:
SNP
I am grateful for the points made about civil legal aid. The Government's position has always been that we are happy to provide facilities for civil legal ai...
Rhoda Grant:
Lab
I understand the minister's point, but we have to consider the consumer—the person who needs the service. If they are saying that they are unable to access s...
Stuart McMillan (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I am sure that many members in the chamber are as delighted as I am at being dragooned into being here this morning.Scotland has a unique situation regarding...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Trish Godman):
Lab
Excuse me, Mr McMillan.I do not know how many times I have to say this to members, but phones have to be switched off. Off.
Stuart McMillan:
SNP
Of course, funding problems are not solely related to community law centres. The Scottish Legal Aid Board's legal funds have been significantly drained thank...
David Whitton (Strathkelvin and Bearsden) (Lab):
Lab
I speak to the amendment in the name of my colleague Pauline McNeill, with particular emphasis on widening choice and on easier access to more affordable leg...
Kenny MacAskill:
SNP
No, they have not. What the member says seems rather to contradict Mr Martin's points. Is Mr Whitton telling the chamber that he supports Tesco law?
David Whitton:
Lab
I support the move to make the law more affordable and more accessible to ordinary people in the street. One of the reasons why people want to introduce what...
Aileen Campbell (South of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Like previous speakers, I welcome the debate. It gives the Scottish Government the opportunity to respond to the super-complaint from the consumer group Whic...
Nigel Don (North East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
In the context of an extensive debate, I will address one specific issue that has not been mentioned much—advocates. The argument is made that it is uneconom...
Christopher Harvie (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP):
SNP
Presiding Officer, I crave your indulgence for my late arrival in the chamber.We are sentimental about the law because the law and the office of Lord Advocat...
Margaret Smith (Edinburgh West) (LD):
LD
Again, we have had an interesting debate. It has been interesting listening to colleagues trying to fill not only their time, but that of other members. I en...
John Lamont (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con):
Con
I declare an interest as a member of the Law Society of England and Wales. I was a practising solicitor with Brodies until June 2007.Like many others who hav...
Pauline McNeill (Glasgow Kelvin) (Lab):
Lab
I declare an interest in that my husband is a practising advocate. However, competition, regulation and alternative business structures are not often the sub...
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
Order. The member may wish to draw her remarks to a conclusion, to allow the minister adequate time to respond.