Chamber and committees

Thank you. Ross Greer wants to come in.

I, too, thank Stuart McMillan for securing today’s debate on McClure Solicitors and the fall-out since it ceased trading in 2021. I also thank his constituency team, who my office staff have been in touch with to seek advice on some issues, and I thank Bob Doris and members of the victims of McClure Solicitors campaign group for a briefing on this subject that was hosted in Parliament in November.

From the testimonies of the members of the campaign group at that briefing—and from messages from the growing number of constituents who have raised the issue with me—it is clear just how wide ranging and serious are the issues that the former clients of McClure’s are now experiencing. The company’s actions have impacted an estimated 100,000 people across the UK, with a potentially significant number of people being unaware that their wills, trusts and other legal affairs may not be in order. I have heard reports of former clients of McClure’s who have struggled to sell their homes, of others who had allegedly paid McClure’s to put their properties in trust or to set up a power of attorney but who subsequently learned that that never happened, and of people having to pay thousands of pounds in further legal fees to try to resolve some of the issues that they have experienced since McClure’s went bust. According to the action group, many of those are people who are in their 70s or older. Some have sadly passed away, and it is their families who are trying to sort out the mess now.

In the past couple of months, I have been in frequent contact with the Law Society of Scotland and Jones Whyte, which took over the good will, work in progress and certain assets of McClure’s when it ceased practice. The Law Society of Scotland has been clear that it expects Jones Whyte to write to each client, giving priority to the most urgent cases with on-going work, but not everyone has been contacted—I understand that, at the briefing in November, the campaign group said that it estimated that around 90,000 people still were not aware that McClure’s had ceased trading. I therefore continue to urge Jones Whyte to notify all clients in a timely manner, and will remain in contact with the Law Society to ensure that its expectation that all clients are written to is realised. In the meantime, however, I hope that today’s debate will help to increase public awareness of the demise of McClure’s, and I will be doing what I can to spread the word in my Rutherglen constituency.

I hope that any constituent who is impacted will contact Jones Whyte regarding their documents and consider making a complaint to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission, if they deem that to be appropriate. The SLCC is the gateway for all complaints about solicitors in Scotland and can award compensation if it upholds a complaint. I know, from the briefing, that concerns had been raised about the SLCC’s capacity to handle a significant number of complaints, particularly as the awareness of this issue grows. Although the SLCC is funded by a levy that is paid by legal professionals, not by the public purse, I hope that its capacity and ability to handle an increased number of complaints can be monitored.

There are three key issues that need attention: everyone who is impacted must be made aware of the situation, individuals should be signposted to where they can make complaints, if they deem that to be necessary, and there should be a formal inquiry to thoroughly examine all aspects of the conduct of McClure’s, its collapse and subsequent events. That last point has been raised with me by my constituents, and I am aware that the police have recently confirmed that they are looking into it.

Everyone who is caught up in this issue deserves our full support. I know that Stuart McMillan will continue his campaign seeking answers and remedies, and I would like to reassure my constituents that I will be doing what I can to assist them, too.

On a point of order, Presiding Officer. I was unable to connect to the voting app. I would have voted yes.

I call Carol Mochan.

Good morning, and welcome to the fifth meeting in 2024 of the Health, Social Care and Sport Committee. I have received no apologies.

The first item is a decision on whether to take items 5 and 6 in private and a decision on whether a briefing session by Scottish Government officials on the Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill on 27 February will be taken in private. Do members agree to take those items in private?

Members indicated agreement.

I will bring in Peter McDonnell, who joins us remotely.

Thank you. Ivan, do you want to come in?

I thank the members of the panel for coming along today and for the work that they have done previously, as it will really help the committee in progressing our inquiry.

We will have a brief suspension to allow for a changeover of witnesses.

I think that Lucy McDonald wants to come in.

I apologise to Tess White, who was about to come in with another question, but we have run out of time.

I thank the panel members for joining us, and for the work that you have done in the workstreams. The discussion will help to inform the next part of the committee’s inquiry. I am sure that, like me, all committee members have found your contributions to be very valuable.

At our meeting, on 27 February, we will begin taking evidence as part of the committee’s stage 1 scrutiny of the Abortion Services (Safe Access Zones) (Scotland) Bill.

That concludes the public part of our meeting.