Alasdair,
Thanks for the information regarding the past thread on protecting the title. I've only been as aware of the communities as I am now quite recently so am aware that many topics are likely to have been discussed previously. I realise that the useful information you've provided in that respect is reporting what others have said, rather than expressing your own viewpoint, so the following is not critical of your post in any way, but I find it an interesting concept that, because the UK has exercised what many of us consider poor practice, which is out of line with most of the rest of the world, up until now, we can't now act to put it right or adjust for the correct usage of the term. I wonder where we'd be on the various anti-discrimination rights issues (gender, race, religion, sexual preference etc.) if this had been the guiding principle? Presumably we'd still be allowed to assume that women didn't have the mental capacity to manage, govern or even vote, and I'd rather not even mention the various derogatory words that would still be in common use for people of non-Caucasian ethnic origin. I'd be very interested to know whether that principle has actually been tested in law. Personally, I doubt very much that it really does make it not legally possible. I'd suggest it's simply in the "too difficult" category. In fact, wouldn't a law dictating that the title could not be used unless you were formally registered to do so, with the ensuing publicity attached to it, be the very best way to adjust public perception and stop that widespread usage? There was a time when you could practice medicine (and call yourself a medical doctor) without registration, but that change was achieved.
I agree completely with the remainder of your points, and as you say, the differing practices across the different sectors would be the issue that would make a generic common licensing system across the whole profession virtually impossible. Without a doubt, we keep returning to the need to adjust public perception as lying at the heart of creating political impetus for change.

Alasdair,
Thanks for the information regarding the past thread on protecting the title. I've only been as aware of the communities as I am now quite recently so am aware that many topics are likely to have been discussed previously. I realise that the useful information you've provided in that respect is reporting what others have said, rather than expressing your own viewpoint, so the following is not critical of your post in any way, but I find it an interesting concept that, because the UK has exercised what many of us consider poor practice, which is out of line with most of the rest of the world, up until now, we can't now act to put it right or adjust for the correct usage of the term. I wonder where we'd be on the various anti-discrimination rights issues (gender, race, religion, sexual preference etc.) if this had been the guiding principle? Presumably we'd still be allowed to assume that women didn't have the mental capacity to manage, govern or even vote, and I'd rather not even mention the various derogatory words that would still be in common use for people of non-Caucasian ethnic origin. I'd be very interested to know whether that principle has actually been tested in law. Personally, I doubt very much that it really does make it not legally possible. I'd suggest it's simply in the "too difficult" category. In fact, wouldn't a law dictating that the title could not be used unless you were formally registered to do so, with the ensuing publicity attached to it, be the very best way to adjust public perception and stop that widespread usage? There was a time when you could practice medicine (and call yourself a medical doctor) without registration, but that change was achieved.
I agree completely with the remainder of your points, and as you say, the differing practices across the different sectors would be the issue that would make a generic common licensing system across the whole profession virtually impossible. Without a doubt, we keep returning to the need to adjust public perception as lying at the heart of creating political impetus for change.