It’s vital to take the time to get legislation right

◆ Elegant and clever are no good if it doesn’t work, says Vicky Crichton

I’ve worked in and around legislation all my career and I admit I’m a bit of a geek about it. But while I might admire a skilfully-phrased section of a Bill or appreciate a politically adept argument, I know they’re nowhere near the most important thing legislation needs to achieve – that it needs to work.

Making legislation is messy, costly and time-consuming. Getting it wrong, even more so. When we get it right, it can change the world around us. It can bring political promises to life, influence how we act, and create new protections or opportunities for people. No pressure then.

Translating a government’s commitment into law is difficult enough, but it then needs testing out with stakeholders, interest groups and the wider public. Will the Bill achieve what it says?

Howwillitworkin practice? Do those who have to implement it have the tools and resources to make it a reality? The chances are everyone will have an opinion, but they might not – and probably won’t – all agree. The tricky balance for parliament is to consider how to reconcile all those different views to make the legislation stronger and more likely to have the desired impact. Amending the Bill and clarifying its intention needs careful attention to detail; it’s easy to solve one problem but create a new one in its place.

I’ve been reflecting on this as the Bill to reform legal services regulation makes its way through its parliamentary scrutiny. It’s a complicated, highly technical Bill, amending existing pieces of legislation, many of them already hugely complex after tumultuous parliamentary passages of their own. We’re still living with many of the unworkable parts of the existing system created by previous Acts in this area. But at its heart, like most pieces of legislation, lies a set of simple questions. How do we want to regulate a market that people turn to in times of need? How do we balance protecting the public with keeping the burden of regulation as low as possible? What can we learn from other countries and sectors about what works and what doesn’t?

MSPS have a tough but important job now. They’ll be listening to stakeholders making the case for different improvements, concessions, protections and resources. They need to craft a piece of legislation that charts a way through all those demands and still creates a coherent and effective regulatory system at the end of it all - one that works. If it doesn’t work, then it has failed in its task, no matter how elegant the drafting, or how clever the political arguments.

And there are always ‘events, dear boy, events’. We saw that in parliament last month when the fallout from a ceased law firm was debated. Those events always focus the minds of parliamentarians as they consider what they might mean for their constituents. In a technical debate, a real-life example can bring a helpful context and help to test a policy, but good law also needs to be future-proof, able to meet the challenge of the next crisis, and the one after that.

As we move towards the next phase of debate on the Regulation of Legal Services Bill, we’ll urge MSPS to keep focused on delivering a Bill that meets the objectives parliament has agreed. One that makes a real-world difference to people’s protections and opportunities. And most importantly, one that works.