Brussels, 24/03/2003 (Agence Europe) - According to an independent study carried out for the European Union, the general public would have much to gain from a lesser degree of regulation for professions such as lawyers, architects, and others. Regulation of these professions varies widely from one Member State to the next, particularly with regard to prices, advertising and inter-professional collaboration. In a speech on 21 March to the German Federal Bar Association, Competition Commissioner Mario Monti invited regulators and practitioners to reflect on whether some of the restrictions, which retrace their origin to the medieval guilds, are still needed, and whether these restrictions might not have adverse effects for businesses, which are active users of professional services, and for consumers.
The study, which was carried out by Vienna's Institut für Höhere Stuidien and published last Friday, is meant to open a debate at European level as to whether the level of regulation for the professions is not out of step with economic developments and technical progress, and whether any rules are unjustified under competition law. It compares the provisions regulating lawyers, notaries, accountants, architects, engineers and pharmacists in all the Member States, and concludes that the situation varies enormously from one to another. Germany, Austria, Italy, Luxembourg, and Greece have the highest levels of regulation, whereas the United Kingdom, Ireland, the Netherlands, Sweden, Denmark and Finland have rather liberal regulatory regimes (with the exception of pharmacists in the Nordic countries). The other countries (Belgium, France, Portugal and Spain), appear to be somewhere in the middle. On a scale of "regulation indices" from 0 to 12, the study finds that Greece is the country where the legal profession (lawyers and notaries) is the most regulated (9.5), while Finland has practically no rules (0.3). Most other countries cluster around 6. Italy, on the other hand, has the highest regulation index for architects (6.2), which itself is not the most highly regulated profession, as the European average is 3.
The Commission highlights the fact that the study is a contribution to the debate, and does not necessarily reflect its opinion. It is based on responses from national professional associations, and looks at regulations on market entry and conduct, such as regulation of fees (fixed prices, minimum or maximum prices), advertising and marketing, restrictions on inter-professional co-operation, geographical location on offer of services, or on establishment of branch offices, etc. It concludes that the trend is towards lower regulation, and that in countries with little or no regulation, there is no evidence that consumers are less well protected. Another conclusion is that in countries with low degrees of regulation, there are relatively low revenues per professional, but a proportionately higher number of practising professionals generating a relatively higher overall turnover. This would suggest that low regulation is not a hindrance, but rather a spur to overall wealth creation.
In his speech to the German Federal Bar Association in Berlin, Mario Monti encouraged both regulators and practitioners to reflect on the study's findings with an open and constructive mind, saying that professionals and consumers alike were likely to win from more competition. "This study provides a fascinating picture on the situation in the different Member States, and advocates that the public would win from more freedom being brought into the professions", he declared, adding that "professionals would also gain from healthy competition. They may be better able to adapt their services and innovate to meet the evolving needs of the users (…) Having a long and honourable historic tradition should not be a barrier to modernising, offering new services and becoming more competitive". (The study can be seen at the following address: http: //europea.eu.int/comm/competition/index_en.html ).