Just had a chance to catch up with Jim Turley, the global chief of accounting giant Ernst & young.

Here's what he had to say about Sarbanes-Oxley, compliance, remuneration for beancounters, the accounting profession itself and international accounting standards.

SOX FIRST: What sort of impact has Sarbanes-Oxley had on accountants?

TURLEY: If you step back, what the last few years have shown is that what we do matters a great deal. What we do is really important to the financial market place in ensuring that playing fields are level, that companies play by the rules whether it's accounting rules or tax rules. We deliver confidence to investors, and that serves a purpose that means a lot to our young people, it means a lot to people joining the firm and it means a lot to old hands like myself.

SOX FIRST: OK, so it means a lot. But what about the push in the US to roll SOX back?

TURLEY: I think Sarbanes-Oxley itself has had an equally positive impact on the culture of many companies. There are elements of the law that have had an impact beyond the words of the law. For example, having chief executives and chief financial officers signing accounts, that has a big cascading impact on the culture of
an organisation. Having management, and then an auditor attest to the strength of the system and controls has a similar cascading effect. I think those things have been very positive. Without question, there is a political discussion predictably around 404 and my sense on that is that everyone felt that Year One implementation was too difficult and too costly and what bigger companies have seen in the second and third years is those costs coming down dramatically. There is also a real need for enhanced guidance which both the SEC and PCAOB have said is forthcoming.

SOX FIRST: So the only changes you see then are about more guidance. Is that what you are saying?

TURLEY:There are still going to be political discussions. Some will say there should be bigger rollbacks, others have different views. Our view is we are going to try and implement whatever the requirements are. It's not our job to write it, it's our job to faithfully apply the rules. But I do think there have been positive cultural aspects from it.

SOX FIRST: The other big impact on the accounting profession is that remuneration and audit fees have gone up. SOX has been a money spinner for accountants. What's your take on that?

TURLEY: You say the remuneration has gone up. There's no question that the level of effort has gone up. Partly that's because of the demand from investors for more risk protection. We have greatly increased demand for our services the world over and that has resulted in more costs for clients. I look at it and say there have been some other very profound impacts on the profession. It's not just that we have to do more work. In most parts of the world, we have seen very appropriately an end of self- regulation and we have independent regulators that inspect our work, that guide us, that meet with us and frankly, I think it's a very good thing.

SOX FIRST: But the demands of compliance seem to be increasing and it does in many instances seem to lead to more red tape. What are your views?

TURLEY: I think we have come through a cycle where the public outcry over the scandals of four or five years ago drove increased focus on compliance and if you look at the recovery of financial markets, there are a lot of different reasons why financial indices are near some all-time highs, M&A volumes are very high and notwithstanding global security threats and higher energy costs, economies are very strong. I think part of it is the confidence that comes from compliance, so i think it actually benefits. Now, without question there is some sort of tick-the-box thinking that's taking place and red tape that is involved. That gets appropriate commentary and attention. If I can just give you a micro-example. In many parts of the world, you hear a lot of discussion that audit committees with independent directors in the old days used to meet four or five times year for an hour. But now, they're meeting 12 times a year for three or four hours apiece. There is a lot discussion of quantity and there is not enough discussion of the quality of the dialogue that's taking place and quality of the oversight and diligence and effort.

SOX FIRST: The other week, the US Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson came out and said the corporate governance pendulum had swung too far. Your response to that?

TURLEY: I haven't spoken to Hank so I don't know what his thinking is. I think though what we are seeing, not counting Hank's comments, is that there are differing views in the financial world on whether or not regulation has gone too far. When you hear investors speak, by and large what investors say is it's our money being spent on compliance, not the company's money and on balance, we think it's being spent wisely and our interests are being protected. When you hear company management talk, sometime they'll say its very hard and not all value adding. That's part of the public debate that's going on. I don't think it's a new debate. It is not surprising that a time when the world is facing changes, it's quite natural to have different parties in the financial markets to discuss it. To me, the communication and open discussion is a real positive because when we get dialogue around the important of getting it right, and getting level playing fields, everybody has the same desire. We all come at it from a different perspective but when we talk about it we have investors, regulators, firms, the ratings agencies, the profession, the academic community all in dialogue and that's a good thing. The power of dialogue is enormous.

SOXFIRST: How well are different countries adjusting to having international accounting standards? What are the big challenges there? And when can we expect some movement in the world's biggest capital market?

TURLEY: The good news on IFRS (International Financial Reporting Standards) is that 100 countries in the world are applying it. It's imperative that we get IFRS stable and have IFRS in Australia the same as it is in France and China and the UK. We we can't have global differences in IFRS, otherwise IFRS is just four letters. Getting a stable consistent platform in IFRS is vital. What the SEC has said is that let's all work for stability and consistency in IFRS and we'll see the convergence of two strong platforms together. I'm optimistic that will take place in the next several years.

SOX FIRST: When you say next several years, could you be more specific?

TURLEY: I would say around 2010, we'll see, that but I'm just throwing darts. If you think about it there is not a global regulatory body to ensure consistent application so the firms are very strongly and closely with each other to ensure we don't have say an Ernst & Young IFRS and a Deloitte & Touche IFRS. What I hear the SEC and FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) say is that the intention absolutely is to get to a similar standard. It's like the World Cup. Picture the World Cup tournament and 32 teams coming each playing by a different set of rules. You would have chaos on the pitch. Well capital moves around the world so quickly that if you don't have a uniform standard you would have chaos.

SOX FIRST: But there is some resistance in the US to convergence.

TURLEY: Yes, but there is also resistance in the 100 countries. You are seeing different views in Continental Europe and the UK. But that's why you have to work to get consistency. It's a big change. Whenever you have to learn new rules, it's hard spreading the word and getting consistency. Getting consistency around IFRS is one of the fundamental priorities that the profession has.