PracticeConsultingCase for MDPs is ‘weak indeed’

Case for MDPs is 'weak indeed'

'The OFT director general does, it is true, sometimes sound a bit too much like an economics professor.

There are vital social functions performed by the professions; as entities within civil society, self-interested or not, they do act as buttresses against the over-mighty state and their codes of honour often challenge the mindless market.’

So said the Guardian (no friend of the Bar’s) of the OFT’s recent report on competition in the professions.

It is true our professional rules prevent barristers from entering into partnerships with each other, or with colleagues from other professions.

That is because we firmly believe the choice and diversity presented to the professional client by the independently structured Bar is of real benefit to the end user.

So what of MDPs?

Is it not of the utmost importance that legal advice should always be independent and of the highest quality? Although the Bar stands to gain as a referral profession from MDPs, our prime concern is with this independence and quality.

Lawyers associated with an MDP are inevitably subject to corporate policy and pressure together with the desire of the deal-maker to ensure success.

Pressure comes from the big firms, who through the relentless march of mergers, exercise ever-increasing market muscle. What good for competition is a one-stop shop if there is, eventually, only one shop in town?

The OFT’s case for MDPs is weak indeed. It says they might achieve ‘advantages in branding’, whatever they may be, and ‘overhead cost savings’. But costs can be shared simply by co-location – you do not need a partnership to do that.

Curiously, the OFT says MDPs would provide ‘the ability to transfer resources in response to fluctuations in demand’.

That sounds like an anti-competitive form of cross-subsidy to protect the weak from the vicissitudes of the market.

We also hear predictions of a ‘seamless service’, another piece of meaningless patter.

For high-street firms, we are told that MDPs ‘should unlock potential cost efficiencies’, but those can be achieved anyway.

Finally, it is suggested MDPs would ‘enhance customer choice and convenience’, but surely tying in firms with each other, especially in a small town, would limit choice?

  • Roy Amlot QC is chairman of the Bar Council.

Related Articles

5 tips for SMEs to protect cash flow

Accounting Software 5 tips for SMEs to protect cash flow

5m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
Tyrie on Finance Bill 2017: ‘Making Tax Policy Better’

Consulting Tyrie on Finance Bill 2017: ‘Making Tax Policy Better’

11m Stephanie Wix, Writer
Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Richard Toone, CVR Global

Accounting Firms Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Richard Toone, CVR Global

12m Kevin Reed, Writer
Deloitte 'self-imposes exile' on government contracts to defuse PM row

Accounting Firms Deloitte 'self-imposes exile' on government contracts to defuse PM row

12m Kevin Reed, Writer
Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Julie Adams, Menzies

Accounting Firms Managing partner Q&A - the year ahead: Julie Adams, Menzies

12m Kevin Reed, Writer
Friday Afternoon Live: Deloitte's tech thing; PAC wants HMRC 'contingencies'; and Sports Direct

Business Regulation Friday Afternoon Live: Deloitte's tech thing; PAC wants HMRC 'contingencies'; and Sports Direct

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
Friday Afternoon Live: HMRC complaints rise; Deloitte scoops big audits; and corporate reporting woes

Audit Friday Afternoon Live: HMRC complaints rise; Deloitte scoops big audits; and corporate reporting woes

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
New head of equity capital markets for KPMG

Accounting Firms New head of equity capital markets for KPMG

1y Stephanie Wix, Writer