HC Deb 26 October 1988 vol 139 cc281-2
6. Mr. Greg Knight

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what measures he intends to implement to tackle restrictive trade practices in the professions.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Corporate Affairs (Mr. Francis Maude)

The Government have proposed radical changes in the restrictive trade practices legislation. The exemptions enjoyed by professional services and other sectors of the economy under the current legislation will not be carried across into the new legislation without the merits of each having been established afresh.

Mr. Knight

Are there not still many restrictive practices in the professions, and is it not wholly desirable that they should be subjected to objective scrutiny to ascertain whether they are operating in the public interest? Will my hon. Friend confirm that nothing is to be regarded as sacrosanct? Does he agree that a good professional does not need the protection of a closed shop and that the only criterion that the Government should use is the interests of the customer?

Mr. Maude

My hon. Friend is right to say that there are still a good many restrictive practices in the professions. The purpose of the new system of control that we proposed in the Green Paper earlier this year is to ensure that there is proper scrutiny of those restrictions so that the overall public interest can be established. It is, of course, necessary to balance the need for competition, so that consumers have access to a wide choice of services at the lowest practical cost, with the requirement for professional standards to remain high, and to ensure a proper degree of consumer protection.

Mr. Hoyle

Will the Minister examine the position of estate agents, particularly in respect of the practice of gazumping and the selling of houses when the would-be purchaser believes that a sale has been arranged prior to the contract? What will the Government do about that?

Mr. Maude

The question that I have been asked is about restrictive practices in the professions. [Interruption.] The point made from a sedentary position is right. Estate agents are not subject to any sort of closed shop. The point raised by the hon. Member for Warrington, North (Mr. Hoyle) is widely discussed and my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Industry and Consumer Affairs is looking into the matter.

Mr. Beaumont-Dark

Does my hon. Friend agree that many of us welcome the proposal of our noble Friend in the House on Lords concerning solicitors and members of the legal profession, which will come as a shock to some of them, who will have to earn a living for once? Does he accept that what we need to do, for those who are so keen on the Common Market, is to look at an early stage at the restrictive practices that exist in Europe, which, frankly, will be much more damaging to this country than many of the other stupid things that the Common Market wants to do?

Mr. Maude

Speaking as a retired lawyer, I take my hon. Friend's remarks somewhat amiss, but I assure him that the pressure to review and look afresh at restrictive practices in the professions does not flow from the European Community. We want to establish a proper system of scrutiny for professional restrictive practices, to make sure that the public interest is properly answered.

Mr. Austin Mitchell

Is it not right, now that so much damage has been done to British manufacturing industry in the name of competition, to tackle and end the monopoly of barristers in the higher courts, to allow them to set up in practice wherever they want and in whatever combination they want with other professions, to break the restrictive practices of solicitors and to impose effective and powerful competition on estate agents, rather than talking about a mere code of practice?

Mr. Maude

The hon. Gentleman will know that my noble Friend the Lord Chancellor proposes to publish a Green Paper on the legal professions generally, plus two specific consultation papers on two specific areas, in the new year. I shall make sure that his attention is drawn to the hon. Gentleman's comments.

Mr. Baldry

Does my hon. Friend agree that, although consumers can benefit from competition, they are protected by professional skills, qualifications and standards? The consumer wants competence as well as competition. Our hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak would not want his appendix taken out by a layman. He would want it taken out by a doctor. Likewise, he would be pretty apprehensive if his will were drafted by someone who did not know what he was doing.

Mr. Maude

My hon. Friend is quite right. He puts the balance correctly and it is precisely so that such a balance can be drawn between the interests of the public, in having proper high standards and a decent level of competition so that choice is wide and costs are low, that these new procedures have been suggested.