Beyond MDPs

I write in support of the recent letter from Anthony Bogan (see [2000] Gazette, 31 August, 18).

Following the numerous articles which have appeared in recent issues of the Gazette regarding the issue of multi-disciplinary partnerships (MDPs) and the well-publicised rejection by the American Bar Association of its Committee's recommendations on MDPs, I had cause to write to my local Law Society council members and note that they too shared my concern.

One council member was candid enough to inform me that the whole issue of MDPs appears to be moving at a pace because of government pressure for the profession to 'break its own monopoly' on legal services, failing which the government has apparently made veiled threats that it will bring in primary legislation to achieve this objective.

I am concerned that the issue of MDPs appears to be proceeding without the common knowledge and/or consultation of the profession as a whole.

The present draft proposals go far beyond the creation of professional relationships which may envisage with accountants.

I am sure that the opportunity to create MDPs with many of the large City firms will be welcomed with open arms as they could look forward to merging with, or indeed being absorbed by, one of the large accountancy firms.

However, the current proposals being considered by the Law Society go way beyond what most of the profession's perception of MDPs has been to date.

Allowing non-lawyers to become profit-sharing partners in law practices would be the thin end of the wedge.

Many firms would face losing their independence as pressure grew upon them to 'accommodate' non-lawyer partners from client institutions and organisations.

It is about time that the Law Society opened up the debate to canvas the views within the profession and indeed I would support an early profession-wide referendum on the whole principle of MDPs before solicitors are faced with merely voting on the lesser of two evils.

Keith Teare, JST Mackintosh, Liverpool