Some other things you'd need a licence for: to operate as an acupuncturist, own an airgun, run a butchers shop, hold a car boot sale, operate as a debt collector, give public demonstrations of hypnosis, run a lottery, or hold a public procession. And if your name is James Bond, you require a licence to kill.
A few years ago there were rumblings of proposals to licence IT security professionals as a part of the Private Security Industry Bill. The resulting Security Industry Authority currently licences guards, wheel clampers and a variety of others (read more here). IT and Information Security professionals do not require any qualifications or licence to practice. There are plenty of certifications around but none of them are obligatory. It's up to the employer, and the individual. I've worked with plenty of very skilled and knowledgable individuals who have no security specific certifications and encountererd a few not so accomplished who have one or more.
Given the information security disasters of 2008, should we be heading for a time where information security professionals are obligated to be licenced to practice? Would it make any difference or make those of us in the industry more accountable?
Additional note: added 8 January
The idea of a parental "breeding licence" has actually been proposed before. "Prime Minister" Jim Hacker mentioned it in a classic episode of Yes Prime Minister. See below....