Last week the President and I attended the GPPS IV which for people like me who didn't know what the acronym stands for is Global Public Policy Symposium. This event which is now in its fourth year is organised by the six largest accounting networks. This year, it was held in New York.

There was an interesting audience comprising staff of the firms, investors, management of major clients, regulators, academics and a few of the professional bodies including the ICAEW. The theme of the meeting was the "principles" debate – but the strange and encouraging outcome was that there was no debate.

With this audience at least, the debate is over. Principles are preferred to rules and we now need to work out as a profession how to make that happen. I should make the point that the largest part of the audience was from the US, not known historically as the home of principle-based accounting.

As an Institute, this is policy matter we have been vocal about since the corporate problems in the US of 2002. At the time you may remember that Peter Wyman, then ICAEW President was one of the few people willing to put his head above the parapet and promote the benefits of a principles-based system.

The debate at this meeting was around how you begin to replace rule books and red lines with judgement. Panellists and members of the audience wondered how auditors would apply judgement to circumstances when there may be several different and valid approaches. What would happen if the regulators interpretation and judgement was different? Was there enough latitude in the system to accommodate several "right" answers?

One of the regulators on a panel was very passionate about other people using the term second guessing. The regulators don't make guesses and presumably the auditors don't make guesses in the first place, I think that he has a point.

Depending on when you qualified as a Chartered Accountant, you may not think that this is a big issue. Let me say that if you have operated in an environment where there is a rule book which states that one number is right but another is wrong yet your judgement tells you different, then this will represent quite a change.

In another of the panels it was amusing to hear David Tweedie state that he always enjoyed visiting a former colony of the UK to do missionary work, even if most of the country is now converted.

From my perspective I consider that this shifting tide is very welcome. In my view, we were facing a real danger that our profession would become rules and compliance dominated and find it increasingly difficult to attract the brightest and the best, who frankly wanted careers where they could use their brains and not just tick boxes.

A career as a Chartered Accountant based on using professional judgement gives us a chance to maintain our position as a valid training option for the most talented individuals. The war is not over, but at least the battle appears to be going our way.