Mike Dailly, in the first of his new weekly blog postings, takes a sharp look over the edge of the Alternative business structures precipice

Before the return of our Parliament it was often said Scottish law reform was either an English law solution or a few sections tagged onto the back of a Westminster bill. Devolution opened a window for progressive law reform north of the border. It enabled 'Scottish solutions to Scottish problems', as Donald Dewar observed back in 1999.

A decade on and who would have thought the Scottish Government would be serving up English solutions to English problems? The Alternative Business Structure (ABS) consultation promises Scotland a future of Tesco law where multinational supermarkets and banks can own, control and trade shares in solicitors, advocates and the gateways to justice.

It's a scary thought. Particularly, as the predatory and anti-competitive nature of multinationals is likely to result in small and medium sized Scottish legal firms being artificially undercut and forced out of business in mainstream areas of legal practice.

If that sounds over the top the UK Competition Commission has already published chapter and verse on supermarket price-fixing. Supermarkets have eradicated countless local shops and if farmers don't accept their terms they go out of business too. The financial sector is no better. The UK banks remain hoisted by their own morally bankrupt petard and their conscience remains missing in action, presumed dead.

So why is Kenny MacAskill MSP so keen on selling Scotland out to the ethically bereft?

It all started in London with the Which? super-complaint to the OFT. Which? had successfully lobbied for ABS changes in England and Wales. Emboldened from that success they decided to lodge an OFT super-complaint against Scotland’s legal profession. There was no empirical Scottish evidence. More a pad of post-it notes. If the structure of the English legal professional was working against the interests of ‘consumers’, then the same ‘restrictions’ must be prejudicing ‘consumers’ in Scotland said the sticky note.

The arrogance and intellectual paucity of this approach was startling. I suppose I should watch what I say. When I suggested to Which? in the pages of The Herald that they had been reckless with their super-complaint they threatened to sue me!? I immediately published their ‘confidential’ letter on Govan Law Centre’s website and told them that up here in North Britain it’s not defamatory to make fair comment on the facts.

So called ‘restrictions’ were the jewel in our legal profession’s crown. To put it another way, regulation isn’t a dirty word. If we needed evidence of that self-evident truth just look at the banking system. The Bank of England had been a powerful and successful regulator of UK banks, but from the 1980s onwards we witnesses repeated calls for deregulation and ultimately regulatory power was transferred to the FSA. So called ‘red tape’ and ‘rules’ was the only thing stopping greedy and reckless CEOs and Directors gambling our money away.

Will permitting massive international companies to own and control Scottish legal firms really help ordinary citizens? Not even a discredited trickle-down economist would take a stab at that flimsy argument. Essentially ABS will enrich a few partners in the City firms, and maybe butter-up a few well-off surveyors, accountants and other professionals.

Would anyone care if the multinationals took over Scotland’s legal profession and put smaller firms out of business? I would. And I bet you would too. Justice is a constitutional right; not a commodity to be traded and sold as the self-styled ‘consumer champions’ would have us believe. But there is another issue at stake here. The i word. Independence.

If you accept justice isn’t a commodity it follows you need an independent legal profession. That means independent law firms. ‘Consumer champions’ may pay lip service to choice but they worship at the altar of a false god. Take the banks, you can bank with RBS and get hit with punitive bank charges or go to Lloyds TSB or the Clydesdale and get hit with the same punitive bank charges. Corporate choice is often smoke and mirrors.

It’s a very good thing to have lots of small and medium sized legal firms in Scotland. It’s good for access to justice, democracy and genuine choice. We need independent lawyers up and down our country to champion the rights of ordinary people – professionals that aren’t afraid of unpopular or controversial cases. Upsetting whoever needs to be upset. Acting without fear or favour.

Scotland’s legal profession has many well-known champions – for example, Frank McGuire, Cameron Fyfe, Tony Kelly, Aamer Anwar and many more – the kind of people unlikely to be working for MacLegal LLP. But there are many more less well-known solicitors and advocates up and down the country equally ensuring that Scotland is a fairer place to live.

A strong, independent, legal profession has become increasingly important since devolution has silenced many of the national campaigning charities. Most of the big charities now have multi-million pound contracts with Scottish and local government. Their main activity is now service delivery and the risk of upsetting a major funder stookies their campaigning arm.

So when Govan Law Centre recently called for urgent action from the Scottish Government to ensure mortgage repossession was a genuine last resort I found myself supported by the Scottish Liberal Democrats, Scottish Labour, the Scottish Greens and the redoubtable Margo McDonald MSP. No major campaigning charity was prepared to back us. Indeed one major charity preferred to make its Government criticism known by way of a private letter to the Scottish Minister.

It’s incredible to think our legal profession stands at a precipice. A precipice of deregulation which almost killed our banks and our economy with it. And why? Because a London based organisation guessed our legal professional needed the same corporate medicine as England and Kenny MacAskill volunteered to be the spoon boy.