Spanning the divide

“Over to you, Jamie.” As I read those words at the end of Ian’s last President’s column in the May Journal came the realisation that it was over to me and, quite apart from the many duties I would undertake as President, I had the prospect of composing 12 President’s columns. 

I was facing the challenge of following in the wake of a President whose column was eagerly anticipated by colleagues who insisted that it was the best part of the Journal; a President who could introduce everything from movies to European cup football to his love of Italy and all things Italian, link it to current events in the Scottish legal environment and make it interesting, quirky and amusing.

It is not so much a baton that has been passed on by Ian as a hot potato, and the President’s column this month must inevitably reflect on the proceedings at our AGM on 27 May 2010 – the 70th anniversary of Dunkirk, which was described by Churchill as “the miracle of deliverance”. That description could aptly describe the outcome of the Council’s motion at the AGM.

The official handover of the presidency took place after the Annual General Meeting at the start of the Council meeting later the same day, with both events further shaping the Society’s policy on alternative business structures.

Other than the routine but important business of approving accounts and draft practice rules, those attending the AGM were faced with three competing motions on ABSs. Given the intricacies of the Society’s constitution – a subject to which I will return at a later date – the possibility existed for a confusing outcome as well as a robust exchange of views. Needless to say, Ian chaired the lively – and potentially tricky – AGM with trademark good humour. The result was that members narrowly backed two motions in favour of ABSs. A third motion opposing any new structures was defeated.

Responsibility for determining how those decisions would impact on Society policy then fell to the Council, this time with me in the chair and Ian on the backbenches. Following a constructive, reasoned debate members voted to ratify Council’s existing policy of permitting 51% ownership of firms by solicitors or solicitors with other regulated professionals and 49% external capital. Those in favour argued that this model would allow a balance of ownership, management and control to answer concerns expressed, while also providing opportunities for our members in large, medium and small firms. In my view, it is a realistic compromise which can provide common ground for the divided views.

The Council also agreed that the policy, along with a series of suggested amendments to the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill, would be communicated to the Scottish Government and MSPs. Recognising the clear differences of opinion within the profession, it was agreed by the Council to draw to the attention of the Scottish Government the fact that substantial numbers of solicitors supported different forms of ABS – such as allowing a 25% minority of non-solicitors to own law firms, as proposed by new Council member Mike Dailly – while others opposed any new structures.

The terms of the bill are now a matter for MSPs. But with a decision made on the Society’s position, our focus should be on ensuring that an effective regulatory regime is in place for whatever reforms are introduced. With the Society regulating ABSs, standards, ethics and core values can and will be protected. Bearing that in mind, we should move forward as a united profession with a renewed sense of purpose.

It is a great honour to take office as President of the Law Society of Scotland. I recognise that the views of the profession are split on the ABS debate and that a priority for the Council and me is to build bridges and seek unity among the membership. It is an expression often quoted – “United we stand, divided we fall”. I look forward to meeting with, listening to and discussing legal and practice issues as well as Society business with members. That will be among the priorities of my presidential year.