Chamber and committees

I regularly meet the fire service board chair and the chief officer. The safety and wellbeing of our firefighters is central to those meetings.

I have received assurances from the SFRS that it prioritises the issue of contaminants and is working in partnership with the FBU so that the appropriate actions can be taken across all SFRS operations, which I will set out. The SFRS is currently running a pilot in East, North and South Ayrshire to test the content of the contaminant standard operating procedure. The trial will run until 31 March and will help to finalise the standard operating procedure prior to its full roll-out across the service.

The safety and wellbeing of firefighters remains a priority for the Scottish Government and the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service. The fire service continues to make progress on important issues through a specific contaminants implementation plan, which has been developed and delivered in partnership with the Fire Brigades Union. The plan includes the development of a recording system for staff to record exposure to contaminants, station zoning arrangements, progression of trials of health screening and changes to operating procedures.

We have provided the SFRS with an additional £10.3 million of capital funding in the draft budget for 2024-25. Although decisions on how the money is spent is a matter for the SFRS board, the extra funding will allow the SFRS to invest in better facilities for our firefighters.

I thank Mr McMillan for raising this important matter, and all members who have spoken and raised a number of important points. I will respond as far as I can in the time allowed.

I sympathise with all those who have been adversely affected by the collapse of McClure Solicitors. It is important that, when that happens in a regulated market, measures are in place to protect consumers. I encourage those affected to seek advice from the Law Society of Scotland and the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, which can provide information and clarity on how to seek redress through raising a complaint, making a claim under the client protection fund or making a claim through the professional indemnity insurance scheme. Such measures and schemes provide consumer protection and redress where appropriate, and they remain a route to redress when a legal firm has gone into administration.

The Government has also taken proactive steps to strengthen the legislation in respect of both legal regulation and trust, which will help militate against such a situation happening in future. Cases such as that of McClure Solicitors show the need for legal regulation that centres on the public interest and the protection of the consumer.

I appreciate that point. There is no specific legal duty on Jones Whyte to contact the clients, and there is a risk of making legislative changes for individual situations that would not be appropriate and which could, in future, act as a deterrent to a legal firm stepping in to take over a case and the files of another legal firm that has gone into administration in such a situation. That could be detrimental to the clients involved. However, I acknowledge the member’s point.

I also want to delicately raise one issue about police involvement. I am aware that the matter has been reported to Police Scotland, which has met with those affected. Given that, as I understand it, Police Scotland has commented that an assessment of the information is on-going, it would be inappropriate for me, as minister, to comment further, and I caution elected members against stating that any criminality has happened.

Clare Haughey raised concerns about the SLCC’s workload—and rightly so. As she has said, it is funded by a levy on the legal professions in Scotland. I meet regularly with the SLCC, and any proposed levy that takes into consideration increases in complaints, such as the complaints relating to this matter—

Does Russell Findlay recognise that the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission urged all members to agree to the general principles of the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill at last week’s stage 1 debate in order to secure much-needed reform?

I would advise the member’s constituent to get in touch with the SLCC, but if she is not getting anywhere, the member can write to me—I do not know the personal circumstances—and I can look into it on her behalf.

As for the calls for an inquiry, the priority at the moment is to find a solution for the people who have been adversely affected by the situation. Because this is an on-going regulatory matter and because an inquiry would not provide practical help to any of those who have been adversely affected, I do not support establishing an inquiry at this stage.

The Scottish Government will continue to monitor the situation alongside the regulatory authorities. I am aware of the calls from Stuart McMillan and Marie McNair for the Scottish Government to consider initiating an information campaign to raise awareness among the former clients, not all of whom might have been informed of the situation as yet. That is a matter for the Law Society of Scotland as a regulatory body, and I understand that the legal firm Jones Whyte took on the McClure files and is engaging with those affected.

The priority in respect of McClure is to find a solution for those who might have been adversely affected, and I encourage those with concerns to seek advice from the Law Society or the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. This is an on-going regulatory matter, and the overall responsibility for the regulation of the solicitor profession rests with our primary regulators—the Law Society of Scotland and the Lord President.

The Law Society has written to me today to advise that an independent regulatory committee is taking proactive action and intends to bring in new practice rules and additional guidance, principally in relation to obligations and expectations, including on the issue of communications, when a solicitor or practice makes arrangements to pass client assets to another. That letter has come in only today, and more information will be coming to MSPs in that regard.

The Scottish Government will, of course, continue to monitor the situation alongside the regulatory authorities.

We went through the history of the independent regulator in last week’s stage 1 debate. I watched Esther Roberton give evidence at committee, and she acknowledged that there was a divide and that views were so polarised that it would be very difficult to get everybody on board. That is why a compromise was reached at stage 1 in order to move things forward.

As I have said, cases such as the McClure Solicitors one show the need for legal regulation that centres on the public interest and protection of the consumer. That is what the Regulation of Legal Services (Scotland) Bill, which was agreed to at stage 1 last week, seeks to achieve. The current legal framework places the emphasis on regulating the individual solicitor, rather than the law firm by which they are employed. In a significant shift for legal services regulation, the bill introduces a requirement for all legal businesses to be regulated as entities.

That new system of entity regulation will bring greater oversight and monitoring of legal businesses. It will introduce a requirement for all legal businesses to be authorised to provide legal services, with public and consumer interests at their heart. That will allow the Law Society to review a business’s performance to ensure that it is complying with its duties to clients and that it is financially sustainable. The regulator will be able to direct changes and impose sanctions where there is non-compliance.

Entity regulation will also introduce greater consistency in the regulation of legal firms, with all entities having to meet the same high standards. A greater ability to collate data will help the Law Society identify and address deficiencies early and take the necessary preventative action. The intention behind the bill’s extension of regulatory complaints to cover such legal entities is to allow for a mechanism for addressing systemic issues in legal firms.

The bill also sets out the regulatory objectives that must be complied with as legal regulators exercise their functions, including consideration of the consumer principles, the better regulation principles and the human rights principles. The bill will streamline the legal complaints system, as many stakeholders have called for, making the process faster and simpler for the consumers and legal practitioners who find themselves involved with it, such as all those who have been affected by the McClure situation. Where there is any concern that a legal regulator is failing in its duties, the bill will introduce an ability for the regulator’s performance to be reviewed and for measures to be taken to ensure that improvements are made, where necessary.

During the parliamentary passage of the Trusts and Succession (Scotland) Bill last year, we learned about the fallout of the failure of McClure Solicitors and the impact on existing trusts. I thank Stuart McMillan, who, as convener of the Delegated Powers and Law Reform Committee, led scrutiny of that bill and ensured that the matter of McClure in the context of trusts was fully considered.

The Trusts and Succession (Scotland) Act 2024 has made important changes to how trusts are administered and how trustees are appointed and removed. Parliament made amendments to the bill at stages 2 and 3 to respond to the significant practical difficulties that co-trustees might face in removing a trustee who was appointed in their professional capacity and who is no longer a member of the profession.

I will now highlight a few of the issues that have been raised. First, I appreciate the need to raise public awareness about McClure in the public domain. When McClure ceased trading, the Law Society published notifications on its website to flag up the situation. As we know, the good will, the work in progress and certain assets have been taken over by Jones Whyte Solicitors, but it is now the responsibility of the acquiring firm to contact McClure’s former clients. That process is on-going and, due to the large number of people affected, Jones Whyte has indicated that it is prioritising the cases that need immediate attention and is continuing to inform all clients.

Will the member take an intervention?

I thank John Swinney for his intervention.

Following the introduction of the bill, and having carefully considered the responses to the committee’s call for views, I acknowledge the concerns that have been raised about the role that was placed on the Scottish ministers, and I have committed to addressing those at stage 2. The provisions are only one part of the bill and are based on existing legislation. Nonetheless, I have sought to address those concerns, and my officials have been working closely and collaboratively with stakeholders and, in particular, the Lord President’s office and the Law Society of Scotland.

I apologise, Presiding Officer.

There will, for the first time, be a power to review the regulator’s performance and ensure their compliance with their statutory duties and the regulatory objectives. Regulators will be required to submit annual reports on their performance, as category 1 regulators.