THE Competition Authority has been criticised in the past for being more jaw-jaw than war-war but the country’s solicitors and barristers are probably already gearing up for a long, drawn-out battle in the wake of the latest investigation into the structure of the profession.

The authority’s analysis of the legal profession, published last week, pulled no punches.

This is a profession that is “permeated with unjustified and disproportionate restrictions on competition”, restrictions that emanate primarily from the “regulatory rules and practices of the Law Society, the Bar Council and King’s Inns but also from the relevant legislation”.

The report also highlights what it sees as the conflict of interest faced by the representative bodies of the legal profession.

“The Law Society and the Bar Council represent their members while at the same time they are responsible for the rules and practices which are said to protect the public interest,” the authority concluded.

Little wonder then that the authority has proposed the creation of an independent, transparent and accountable Legal Services Commission.

All told, the authority has made over 40 proposals designed to remove or amend “unjustified anti-competitive restrictions in the legal profession.”

The real eye-opener is the huge amount of money that the legal profession is generating, much of it on the back of small and medium-sized businesses.

Drilling down into the data supplied by the Central Statistics Office and the Revenue Commissioners, the authority has calculated that expenditure on legal services by 2001 had reached €1.14 billion.

The average income for lawyers in the same year was €120,000, twice as much as the average architect, accountant or engineer.

There are plenty of smart lawyers who deserve that kind of money (and no doubt even those earning €600,000 a year can argue their own case) but the size of the gap relative to other professions suggests there is something seriously wrong with the structure of the profession.

The Competition Authority’s analysis of the profession is refreshingly wide-ranging and thorough. Given the power of the vested interests involved it could not afford to be anything else. But while the analysis is sound, we are more concerned with the follow-through.

The legal profession proved to be a tough nut to crack when the government bowed to public pressure and attempted to reduce the daily fees payable for tribunal work. That led to a spat that many believe was won by the profession.

While we were critical of the Competition Authority’s report into the banking sector, which failed to get to the heart of the issues that cause most concern to the business community, there seems to have been a much tougher approach taken in the area of law.

It is correct that anti-competitive practices should be exposed. But the problems identified will merely gather dust unless they are backed up with strong enforcement.

Following through on the dozens of recommendations outlined in this report would indicate that the government is serious about tackling the vested interests that are contributing to the escalating cost of doing business in this country.

Mark Fielding
Chief executive
Isme