'Tesco law' wins Holyrood support

From Democracy Live: MSPs back general principles of Legal Services Bill

Controversial plans to introduce a so-called "Tesco law" to Scotland have been overwhelmingly backed by MSPs.

The Legal Services (Scotland) Bill would allow supermarkets and other commercial organisations to provide legal services to the public.

The proposals have split the legal profession, with many solicitors opposing them.

The bill, which is aimed at modernising the profession, will now go to the justice committee for further scrutiny.

The first reading of the bill at Holyrood on Wednesday afternoon saw MSPs back it by 92 votes to two.

The idea behind the bill is that increased competition would be better for consumers.

But opponents have warned it could actually reduce the availability of services like conveyancing, leave smaller and rural law firms struggling to compete and threaten the independence of lawyers.

We can use this legislative process to improve access to justice and give our law firms a competitive edge Richard Baker MSP

Community Safety Minister Fergus Ewing said the proposals were a "necessary change" that would "benefit greatly the legal profession, the consumer and the wider Scottish economy."

He said some arguments against the bill have been "misinformed, exaggerated or just downright misleading".

Mr Ewing, himself a former solicitor, added: "The rather lurid accusations of a few risk turning a constructive discussion about the future of the legal profession in Scotland into an unedifying stramash."

The independence of the legal profession will not be threatened by the measures, he said, and the Scottish government will drop measures which prompted concerns it could control membership of the Law Society council.

Labour's Richard Baker MSP said there were still "important questions" over the legislation, but added he believed it could benefit consumers if change brought more legal and related services together in a "one-stop shop".

"We can use this legislative process to improve access to justice and give our law firms a competitive edge," he added.

'Radical surgery'

Tory MSP David McLetchie, whose party supports the bill, told the chamber: "In essence, we have to acknowledge that divisions within the profession represent a difference in economic interests as well as a difference of view as to the nature and ethics of a profession which many solicitors firmly believe is fundamentally different from a commercial concern."

While the Lib Dem justice spokesman Robert Brown said his party would also support the bill at this early stage, he added that the divided views among lawyers made assessment of the bill's merits difficult.

"This is only on the basis that a fundamental rethink is required of some of the details which may involve substantial, radical surgery of the bill at stage two," he added.

Holyrood's justice committee has already already backed the bill but said in a report there was no "hard evidence" about benefits to consumers.

Speaking before the debate, Law Society of Scotland chief executive Lorna Jack told BBC Scotland it was a "critical moment in time for the industry" and it was "only right" that the implications were fully discussed.

Members of the society backed the bill in 2008, but Ms Jack said the debate had reignited over the past six months.

It is probably fair to say right now that there is a split across the profession in whether they would welcome this bill Lorna Jack Law Society of Scotland

A proxy vote last week suggested a majority were now opposed to it.

"It is probably fair to say right now that there is a split across the profession in whether they would welcome this bill," Ms Jack said.

"Some of the profession see it as a positive opportunity for them to bring non-legal professionals into their business, some of them see it as an opportunity to raise capital that would help them expand and move their business forward.

"Others are concerned about the potential impact it might have if very large branded players come into the market."

She said efforts were under way to find a compromise for the long-term benefit of the industry.

The bill would bring Scots law into line with new legislation in England and Wales, which was sparked by consumer group Which? after it argued existing rules were stifling competition and choice.