Lorna Jack: Legal profession must stay strong and united to serve public better

Groups within the profession have very different views. Can we be unified in such circumstances? Can we find a place of compromise – or do we fragment and go off to different places?

I would like to see the profession remain united. If it breaks up, the very badge of what it is to be a Scottish solicitor might be lost. That badge has been hard-won – through centuries of independence, probity and quality – and it must not be surrendered easily.

This is a great profession that continues to deliver high-quality legal services. Does the public want to see lawyers fighting over new business structures or the responsibilities of the Law Society? No, they want us to sort things out, work together and deliver those excellent services, whether as a solicitor's private practice or potentially a new legal provider at some point in the future.

Scots Law trades on a strong historic reputation, but it also embraces change – that's why the Law Society of Scotland went to the profession to seek views on alternative business structures (ABS), which could allow solicitors to adopt new business practices.

In the past two weeks, we have seen about 500 people at four roadshows across Scotland; further events are fully booked. Our feedback suggests lawyers don't feel fully informed about ABS. They are busy supporting their businesses and families. They don't want to have to trawl through minutiae, they just want to know more about ABS and how it might work for them, or not. The Legal Services Bill is about choice in providing legal services to the public – it is not compulsory.

Yet there remains a silent majority that has not spoken on ABS. That's why it is right to hold a private ballot on whether the Society should continue to support ABS or change its current position.

We have brought in the Electoral Reform Service to organise the ballot – all 10,500 Law Society members can cast a secure vote online. We want everyone to care enough to get informed and to vote. The outcome of the referendum will, we hope, be the settled will of the profession on ABS, and the society will move forward on that basis.

The second call for a referendum claims the society's role as both regulator and representative of the profession is untenable if s92 of the bill is enacted. The society is accused of throwing aside independence by handing government too much power in shaping its ruling council.

For those who say we are selling the jerseys on this issue, this is not the case. Any non-solicitors would be appointed to the society's council by the society's council members – not government.

We also need to be aware of the law of unintended consequences. The easiest way to split the functions would be pass regulation to the Scottish Legal Complaints Commission. That would remove a huge amount of control from the profession and hand it to a government agency – and that could be a serious own-goal.

In England, the split between representation and regulation has been unpopular and has created new problems. Let's look at what we have got – and want – in Scotland and find a Scottish solution.

Comments from our roadshows suggest most lawyers want to keep the profession together. So let's work hard to resolve these issues and move on, as a strong and united profession whose members stand up for each other and provide a great service to the Scottish and wider public – that, after all, is what we are all here to do.

If we can't do that, we jeopardise the superb reputation and respect that Scottish lawyers have built up over centuries.

Lorna Jack is chief executive of the Law Society of Scotland