Seòmar agus comataidhean

I think that I get Maggie Chapman’s point, given the Lord President’s power over the legal professions. From the consumer’s point of view, I suppose that it is about transparency. That is the more serious point. It is important that decisions are transparent and open, that there are enough checks and balances in the system and that transparency is provided for. I think that that is the point that Maggie was trying to make.

Before we move on to our second evidence panel of the morning, I ask for any declarations of interest.

Thank you very much. We have come to the end of our evidence session, but I want to give you the opportunity to bring anything to the committee’s attention that we have not covered. This is your time.

Thank you, once again, for your evidence.

That concludes our business in public. We will consider the remaining item on our agenda in private.

Thank you for that. The diagrams were exceptionally helpful and I say that not just as a teacher who loves diagrams. [Laughter.] They do illustrate things.

I will ask for clarification on a few points. The diagram of the current regulatory framework says that the

“Scottish ministers have duty to consult Lord President”.

What does that involve? Is that a legal duty to consult and if so, on what, for example? How do you know that ministers have consulted? Does that transfer into decisions? I am interested in what power ministers have at the moment.

Thank you very much. I will kick off the questions; my colleagues will then come in.

Lady Dorrian, you mentioned the role of the Lord President. I want to give you an opportunity to unpick that a little bit. Can you give us some practical examples of the role of the Lord President and the implications of the bill for what the Lord President would or would not be able to do?

The minister has indicated that amendments will be lodged that should allay some of the concerns that have been robustly raised, but we do not know what those amendments will be. In that wriggle room, would either of you like to give me an indication of what those amendments could be that would address your concerns?

Fair enough.

I have been listening really carefully and would like to come back on a few points. I would like to generate more discussion about the consumer’s perspective, because we have taken lots of evidence on the lawyer’s point of view and every other view. Can you give us some insight into how the consumer’s point of view informed your report, whether your views have developed on that and whether the consumer is served well by the bill in its current state?

I have a final question before I bring Karen Adam in on that theme. I am interested in how the Lord President takes the views of consumers into account when he is carrying out his regulatory functions. For example, are there any formal processes to ensure that consumer views are considered in addition to the views of the legal profession?