The Legal Services Board’s research note on alternative business structures seems to be preparing the ground for a slow start, with more transformative developments anticipated later on. So far, so cautious; though, yet again, the board cannot resist a bout of free-market proselytising.

Market liberalisation will lead to 'increased quality' of service, it predicts, as if this were a given. It is not.

Deregulating financial services has not exactly been an unalloyed success story; a lesson that it seems politicians are still reluctant to learn. And liberalising the energy market through privatisation – which has sent prices and fuel poverty rocketing – has arguably been a disaster.

The report is also glib on the future of small firms. More competition will see ‘inefficient’ firms exit the market, it observes, yet the market will still offer ‘more choice’. But if the big consumer brands lowball their way in, couldn’t the market actually offer less?

British high streets boasted far greater choice before the big four supermarket juggernauts got into their stride. Sure, people like them because they are relatively cheap. But do supermarkets always offer a better service and more choice than the longstanding family butcher or fishmonger they have driven out of the market? Can legal advice really be commodified in such a crude way?

Moreover, a huge question mark remains over reconciling the PLC’s imperative to produce ever-increasing returns for shareholders with core professional ethics. The potential conflict is plain.

The LSB’s research note is well worth a read, but raises more questions than it answers.