Ken,Transpose two letters and be rightly ridiculed.Have you now read CIMA's 2004 Annual Report?
Jasper,I must confess I have not motivated myself yet to wade through that.SorryKen
Did the NAO employ even a single candidate who successfully passed CIPFA's final test of professional competence in June 2005?How can it be to the advantage of ICAEW members to merge with CIPFA when the premier specialist does not even favour them?
It is repoted today that an ICAEW spokeswoman called the consolidation "not an end in itself". However, it would in itself be the end of CIPFA and possibly CIMA and ICAEW.
AnomThere is a very good reason why the ICAEW said that.Bruce Lawson has called upon the CEO of ICAEW to resign if the merger vote fails.ICAEW, despite publicly saying that 67% of members are in favour of the merger, are nervous that they will lose the vote.Therefore, in order to save face, they are saying that the merger is not an end in itself.They also have noted that the Council fully back the idea, in other words they are trying not to let the CEO become the fall guy.The conclusion from the above is simple, if the vote fails then Council should resign as well.In fact, disregarding the diversion of the merger, the ICAEW should cut Council down to 12 as I have stated on this site many times.Ken
So, you are currently a member of CIPFA. In the new institute, will you be an associate, a fellow or something else?Whether ICAEW or CIPFA will you have a certificate of membership from the new institute? Even if so, what date(s) and details would it bear?
Ken,I have in mind an extremely professional organisation which I think will have very few council members.It does your cause no good seek the impossible - start by halving the number and if you get that far do it again and again.
AnomI appreciate your reasoning re "seeking the impossible".However, it is not in my nature to accept half measures. To my view, if something is going to be fixed then it should be fixed properly.I would note that our "dear" Council have ignored a vote of some years ago, whereby they were to be cut to around 40 or so.In view of this, they should be removed form office lock stock and barrel.Let us start with a clean sheet of paper.Ken
I agree about the resignations and a clean sheet.You could be right about 12 though it might be a miracle if you could find more than a handful to agree with you.It would certainly be good to hear some more views - I found this week's young ACA view most interesting.To discuss a merger is one thing, to be in favour is fine, to spend so much time and money is a sin.
Ken,
ReplyDeleteTranspose two letters and be rightly ridiculed.
Have you now read CIMA's 2004 Annual Report?
Jasper,
ReplyDeleteI must confess I have not motivated myself yet to wade through that.
Sorry
Ken
Did the NAO employ even a single candidate who successfully passed CIPFA's final test of professional competence in June 2005?
ReplyDeleteHow can it be to the advantage of ICAEW members to merge with CIPFA when the premier specialist does not even favour them?
It is repoted today that an ICAEW spokeswoman called the consolidation "not an end in itself".
ReplyDeleteHowever, it would in itself be the end of CIPFA and possibly CIMA and ICAEW.
Anom
ReplyDeleteThere is a very good reason why the ICAEW said that.
Bruce Lawson has called upon the CEO of ICAEW to resign if the merger vote fails.
ICAEW, despite publicly saying that 67% of members are in favour of the merger, are nervous that they will lose the vote.
Therefore, in order to save face, they are saying that the merger is not an end in itself.
They also have noted that the Council fully back the idea, in other words they are trying not to let the CEO become the fall guy.
The conclusion from the above is simple, if the vote fails then Council should resign as well.
In fact, disregarding the diversion of the merger, the ICAEW should cut Council down to 12 as I have stated on this site many times.
Ken
So, you are currently a member of CIPFA. In the new institute, will you be an associate, a fellow or something else?
ReplyDeleteWhether ICAEW or CIPFA will you have a certificate of membership from the new institute? Even if so, what date(s) and details would it bear?
Ken,
ReplyDeleteI have in mind an extremely professional organisation which I think will have very few council members.
It does your cause no good seek the impossible - start by halving the number and if you get that far do it again and again.
Anom
ReplyDeleteI appreciate your reasoning re "seeking the impossible".
However, it is not in my nature to accept half measures. To my view, if something is going to be fixed then it should be fixed properly.
I would note that our "dear" Council have ignored a vote of some years ago, whereby they were to be cut to around 40 or so.
In view of this, they should be removed form office lock stock and barrel.
Let us start with a clean sheet of paper.
Ken
I agree about the resignations and a clean sheet.
ReplyDeleteYou could be right about 12 though it might be a miracle if you could find more than a handful to agree with you.
It would certainly be good to hear some more views - I found this week's young ACA view most interesting.
To discuss a merger is one thing, to be in favour is fine, to spend so much time and money is a sin.