In other responses on the latest consultation on the issue, KPMG cited Parmalat as an example of a joint audit gone wrong. The firm also could not see the benefit of allowing shareholders to vote on audit committee reports.

The Market Participants Group, tasked with providing market solutions to the dominance of the Big Four, had opened up its initial recommendations to consultation.

Responding, Jeremy Newman of BDO said some Big Four firms were now targeting BDO’s clients, saying he accepted the competition but adding: ‘If there is to be greater choice in the UK audit market then some of the current participants will, inevitably, lose market share.’

Grant Thornton, in its response, said contractual obligations when auditors were being selected should be disclosed. The mid-tier want

to flush out any suggestion that lenders or parent companies may

be forcing potential clients away from them.

Mazars, which has pushed joint audits, emphasised the lack of tenders taking place in the market.

David Herbinet of Mazars said: ‘When FTSE 100 auditors can expect to remain in place for 48 years and 70% of those audits are not put out to tender in at least a 15-year period, this does not suggest a healthy competitive market able to offer real choice to end users.’

Mazars wants the FRC to conduct an independent review of the value of joint auditing. Big Four firms have vociferously opposed the idea, which they say would lead to no audit firm taking final responsibility for an audit judgment.

The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland urged the regulator to come up with contingency plans that could be effected in the event of the collapse of a Big Four firm.

Watch an interview with David Herbinet at AccountancyAge TV