Solicitors voted against the introduction of alternative business structures (ABS) in Scotland at a special general meeting of the Law Society of Scotland yesterday.
The vote, including proxy votes, was 1817 in favour of a motion from the Scottish Law Agents Society against ABS as proposed in the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill, with 1290 against the motion, and five abstentions.
A compromise amendment on the introduction of “Tesco Law” had been proposed by McGrigors’ managing partner, Richard Masters.
The firm sought to remove the part of the SLAS motion declaring that external ownership of legal practices would be reserved to those qualified as solicitors, and state instead that majority ownership should be in the hands of such persons, "or persons so qualified together with other persons who are regulated professional owner managers of that business".
However, the amendment was rejected.
Of course it was...can't have the public getting a better service. We're lawyers after all.
We studied for years and deserve to have our monopoly protected. Yawn.
I said it before and I'll say it again, legal reform will not be driven by what lawyers do
or do not want, it will be driven by economics and social change. People needing
legal services will vote with their wallets and the firms that deliver the best service
will get the most business.
All this internal bickering is self-serving and pointless.
Can lawyers prevent change? No. Their strength could "oppose" the Bill, but so what?
Just as "money" finds the friendliest place to live, so too will consumers find the
friendliest place to do business.
Spend time and effort on that and christmas WILL be worth having.
The vote, including proxy votes, was 1817 in favour of a motion from the Scottish Law Agents Society against ABS as proposed in the Legal Services (Scotland) Bill, with 1290 against the motion, and five abstentions.
A compromise amendment on the introduction of “Tesco Law” had been proposed by McGrigors’ managing partner, Richard Masters.
The firm sought to remove the part of the SLAS motion declaring that external ownership of legal practices would be reserved to those qualified as solicitors, and state instead that majority ownership should be in the hands of such persons, "or persons so qualified together with other persons who are regulated professional owner managers of that business".
However, the amendment was rejected.
Of course it was...can't have the public getting a better service. We're lawyers after all.
We studied for years and deserve to have our monopoly protected. Yawn.
I said it before and I'll say it again, legal reform will not be driven by what lawyers do
or do not want, it will be driven by economics and social change. People needing
legal services will vote with their wallets and the firms that deliver the best service
will get the most business.
All this internal bickering is self-serving and pointless.
Can lawyers prevent change? No. Their strength could "oppose" the Bill, but so what?
Just as "money" finds the friendliest place to live, so too will consumers find the
friendliest place to do business.
Spend time and effort on that and christmas WILL be worth having.
RSS Feed