It seems that our colleagues in Scotland are more than a little "peeved" at the proposed name of the proposed merged institute.
ICAS have posted a letter on their website sent by Ian Robertson, the ICAS president. In it he says that ICAS and its members would "robustly oppose" the name.
Quote:
"The style proposed seems to ignore the fact that throughout the world the various chartered accountancy institutes are differentiated by a national designation".
As Robertson points out that the merged institute would be an "amalgam of accountants, not all of whom are in an everyday sense recognised as being chartered accountants".
Now if he can see that, why can't our Council?
Robertson suggests a new name for the merged body: "The Institute of Some Chartered Accountants and Public Finance Accountants".
Robertson has succintly highlighted the lack of thought and planning that has gone into the merger proposal.
It has already been fatally holed below the waterline by the absconding of CIMA, now we are faced with direct action and ridicule by ICAS.
The time has come to abandon the proposal, and to restructure Council in the manner that I proposed in an earlier article.
The proposed name is so self-centred and unreasonable that it has no chance of approval if the merger were to happen; though it will not.
ReplyDeleteKen why do you not talk to The Ginger Group and get the 250 necessary signatures?
Also, as was suggested earlier, if ICAS would put the admission of ICAEW members on their agenda for discussion; the threat of gaining many thousands of new members would doubtless bring Messrs Anstee and company to heel.
Thanks for the message.
ReplyDeleteI am in regular contact with Jef W of the Ginger Group.
I have also dropped a note to Ian Roberston of ICAS about his letter.
The Ginger Group has already been through this hoop.
ReplyDeleteSeveral years ago we won a motion to the effect that the number of council members should be reduced below 40.
This has never been implemented.
The Institute has explained that such motions are indicative only and the council can choose not to implement.
It is all very Alice in Wonderland. What is the point in having motions if the council can ignore them.
The only thing that is likely to bring the council to heel is the threat of losing members to ICAS or a new Welsh Institute.
Dear Dr Wooller and Ken,
ReplyDeleteAn existising institute is the only practical proposition. If ICAS are unable to open their doors to ICAEW members then ACCA (very much a personal second choice) already offer this facility to all practising members and all members in good standing and qualified for five years - and their subscriptions are significantly cheaper?
What about some drastic action?
Here is a solution to the name problem:
ReplyDeleteAn Institute with over 125,000 members merging with one that has just 15,000 members is NOT a merger but a takeover under the "merger" disguise.
The sizes of the Instutes are so disparate that this cannot be called a merger. It really is a takeover.
Folks, please read FRS 6 for a definition of a merger.
Having come to the conclusion that this will be a takeover and not a merger I can think of only one name for the new "merged" Institute:
THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS IN ENGLAND AND WALES.
Would the Scots have any objection? Almost certainly NO.
Kamran,
ReplyDeleteA brilliant notion - it would be silly for everyone to have Assosiateship and Fellowship Certificates from a defunct institute.
However, since it will not happen, it will not matter.
It seems to me that those against the merger need first class legal advice (ideally free and from an ICAEW member who is also a lawyer of some distinction).
ReplyDeleteI suspect actions/injunctions against chartered institutions need special knowledge and research.
Personally, I shall keep up with the news but this is my last comment as all efforts to achieve a swift resolution appear to be futile.