Professionals/Bankers limit responsibility instead of enlarging it.

Open any audit report or a banking agreement(loan/ISDA etc). They are generally one sided, protecting the professional firm(accountancy, law, actuary etc) or bank(lending, derivatives etc) from their errors, to the fullest extent allowed by law. Instead of mentioning their due diligence, the firms/banks prefer to take management representations on even the most trivial points. And to add insult to injury, even if the client has wholly relied on the pitch book/opinion, he has to legally agree that he has sought independent advice etc.

Recently in India, independent directors and auditors have been jailed; practicing accountants/company secretaries have been pulled up for casually certifying obviously incorrect company filings. But the professional response to this has been to clamor for increased legal protection by shifting the blame on full time executives. The argument runs that only the full time executives know the in-and-out of the company, so only they should be penalized in legal disputes. But then, what does the company pay audit committee sitting fees, audit fees, certification fees etc for? If one cannot discharge its duty properly, they should resign from the engagement, but if they choose to continue then they should bear the cross.

Statutory/Regulatory amendments has handed over plenty of work to professionals/bankers like

1. CAs have benefited from the mandatory internal audit requirement imposed on firms, and also the increasing number of statutory pre certifications mandated from CAs/auditors. 
2. CSs have gained work due to the compliance certificate requirement, yet one does not see any substantial improvement in corporate reporting practices
3. From 2011-12, the Management accountancy profession will boom in India thanks to the voluntary cost audit. 
4. Banks gain business due to mandatory appointment of investment banks for certain capital issues exceeding defined size, need to appoint independent M&A advisor etc.

Everyone is willing to pen their name to a self serving petition demanding XYZ regulation(which throws some bones to them via new work, increased fees etc), but when it comes to professional reform from within, there is a deafening silence. And it is this that is worrying.