The Competition Authority (CA) has called for provision to be made for a non-dentist majority on the regulatory body, the Dental Council.

The CA also wants current commercial restrictions on dentists to be removed to allow for greater patient choice and more competitive fees.

The Authority, in a new report, points out that currently, the Dental Council is almost entirely composed of members of the dental profession and those involved in dental education.

At present, only two of the 19 members of the Dental Council are appointed to represent the interests of consumers.

"As highlighted in our Dentists Report 2007, it is not necessary, proportionate or transparent for a regulatory body to be run mainly by the profession being regulated," the CA says.

The Authority says it is concerned that the current composition of the body that regulates dentists 'creates the potential for a conflict of interest'.

The doctors' regulatory body, the Medical Council, has for some time had a non-medical majority in its membership.

The Authority also wants the legal prohibition on the incorporation of dental practices removed, to allow dentists to operate in a variety of business forms, including corporate dental groups.

This would, it says give patients the opportunity to choose between a corporate dental group or a traditional dental practice, depending on which they consider is best suited to their needs;

It would also lead to dental services becoming available in more convenient locations and for more hours of the day.

In addition, the CA said, the establishment of corporate dental groups is likely to lead to efficiency gains.

"In a competitive market, these gains will be passed on to consumers in the form of lower prices and access to better quality or state-of-the-art equipment."

The CA, in its report, also calls for an updating of the type of sanctions that can be imposed by the Dental Council in fitness to practise (FTP) hearings involving dentists.

The current grounds for complaint against a dentist include: alleged professional misconduct; and alleged unfitness to practise because of physical or mental disability.

"The first of these provisions is very vague, and is not defined in the legislation. This allows for broad interpretation by the FTP Committee, and could lead to anti-competitive practices," the CA says.

The Authority says it should be made clear that that 'professional misconduct' is associated with the quality of the care patients receive from dentists, rather than the commercial aspect of the services.

For example, at present, it says, flouting the bans on advertising, either generally or as regards fees, or bans on accepting clients of a fellow dentist without the latter's 'permission', and fee discounting, may be interpreted by the Dental Council as professional misconduct.

The CA also says the range of sanctions the Council can impose on dentists should be broadened so as to be 'necessary, proportionate and transparent.'

The makes its recommendations in a submission on proposed changes to current legislation governing dentists.