You can vote online against the proposed ICAEW merger with CIPFA here:
Online voting form
Please make sure that you vote before 23rd October.
I would also be very grateful if you could point your colleagues and friends, from the ICAEW, in the direction of this site.
Thanks for your support.
Ken
Brilliant.
ReplyDeleteAs a point of information, I believe that it is also possible to use the online form to vote in favour of the proposal.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure that the one thing we would all like to see is a good turnout.
Mostly I'd like my, undisclosed, side to win; easily.
ReplyDeleteWow, I always was under the impression it took 3 years of hard work and study to join the ICAEW, not the click of a mouse.
ReplyDeleteWell said; any more wit and wisdom?
ReplyDeleteSee CCAB LLP SORP today. Do you need more?
ReplyDeleteVote tomorrow:
ReplyDeleteThe old adage says:
better late than never but better never late
but if you are unsure
from tomorrow, wait until tomorrow or vote no now.
This whole initiative is government initiated. One can only presume that this is Gordon's way of restoring some form of credibility to local govt. accounting, control & efficiencies.
ReplyDeleteWe should not associate ourselves with this spin nor devalue the standards we adhere to.
Our council are supposed to represent our views but have promoted this govt. intiative in the face of our voiced opposition. It's time they went.
Perhaps CIPFA will have them ?
RECTE NUMERARE is the name of this puzzle:
ReplyDeleteBETTER + LATE + THAN + NEVER + BUT + BETTER + NEVER + LATE = HEALTH
If each letter is assigned a unique digit and there are SUDOKO type clues: A=0, V=3, N=9.
What is the numeric total?
Please do not post your answer as that may not please those still working on it.
I like the puzzle although it does not seem to be much of a challenge.
ReplyDeleteSome 25 years ago my neighbour John, a chartered accountant who has since moved, had and last I heard , still has, a wicked wife named Ronnie, actually christened Veronica.
Veronica transposed two of the stickers on my Ribic cube and it took me six months,of countless hours, to fathom that success was impossible.
Ronnie was hugely competive but she had charm which is more than I could say about Eric and the Council who really want to kick me in the teeth.
Puzzle now solved.
ReplyDeleteSincere apologies for a couple terrible spelling mistakes.
ReplyDeleteRe. Anonymous @ 11.00am - Local Govt accounting and control is generally robust; indeed CIPFA sets the standards with Govt backing. Efficiencies are not just the responsibility of accountants, from whichever institute they come, ultimately they're the responsibility of politicians and senior managers. And they have to be politically acceptable - not just what the accountants think should or could be done.
ReplyDeleteAnd how does Anon's statement sit with regards to the NHS, which has a frequent deficit problem and where the FD is quite likely to be an ICAEW member? Councils must by law balance the budget!
I can't stand wingers from CIPFA or any other mob. Those who can't handle the heat ...
ReplyDelete"This whole initiative is government initiated. One can only presume...."
ReplyDeleteI'd have thought that as an accountant you could perhaps do better than to 'only presume'?
Whether or not govt are behind this (I don't know if they are and I suspect you don't really know either) then its not something that can be ignored.
If the govt. does see the six CCAB bodies as fighting like rather stuck up ferrets in a bag, the profession could lose much of its scope for self regulation and its delegated responsibilities (eg: auditor stautus, under Co's act).
No Institute is entitled to a 'job
for life', no matter how large or self-regarding it might be. Given the centralising instincts of the current administration, it might be a good idea to start acting like grown-ups, lest they set up regulatory bodies to do it for us.
In reply to Anon 6:58
ReplyDeleteGood point re the NHS. The response rather suggests you've hit a rather sore nerve.
OK, so it's not their fault; but CIPFA does appear to be a useless waste of prospective talent.
ReplyDeletePlease see the serious points re CCAB IFAC etc. and respond sensibly.
ReplyDeleteGet it. Got it. Good.
I find the mud slinging towards CIPFA from my fellow members rather embarrassing.
ReplyDeleteWe do not act in this way, and neither do we all share this outdated attitude.
Anon 7.58,
ReplyDeletewell said.
Agreed.
ReplyDeleteMud slinging based on prejudice just is'nt cricket.
We should limit our discussion to facts.
A great many years ago, I was seconded to the Public Sector Audit Department over the summer quite period. I audited a NHS Trust hospitals and found it absolutely fascinating.
ReplyDeleteMy audit approach had to be completely altered. As a result of the financial controls the Trusts were operating in (EFL I think and 5% return on assets), in some cases, we had to test for over statement of liabilities and expenditure.
Further, due to the volume of transactions (and complexity of income and expenditure streams) we could not simply perform a substantive audit. The Trust was the first true systems audit I performed.
From a professional development view point - that was an excellent summer.
Ian Morris has just sent me an email containing both parts of my unique ballot code!
ReplyDeleteSurely not standard procedure for an Electoral Reform Society online vote?
Ian - just to check - the passcodes for the ICAEW vote are being sent out over a notoriously insecure PUBLIC internet?
ReplyDeleteTo Anon health service auditor. I audited NHS accounts for PwC (yes, they let CPFA's loose on this) and the 'return on assets' thing was a bit of a challenge - they were always bang on the percentage target, making a huge number of transactions/classes of transactions potentially material through their context, rather than their absolute value. 'Fascinating' would be one word for it!
sorry, misread the post about your voting email. I now appreciate that Ian Morris is your esteemed President.
ReplyDeleteI'm surprised he has time to send out 120k emails, but congratulate him on his industry and commitment.
I have just read the proposal document and laughed out loud at the following phrase,
ReplyDelete"As the pre-eminent public sector
accountancy body in the world,CIPFA
represents 13,500 members working atthe heart of an economic sector which accounts for approximately 40% of the global economy."
This kind of meaningless PR may seem very clever to those who write it, but unfortunately only highlights the weakness of their argument.
Will resignations occur if the No vote wins the day?
Patrick
ReplyDeletePlease would you explain which of the facts in the phrase you highlighted is incorrect.
Hey bright spark,
ReplyDeleteFor starters, see the 54th post two items below.
Noted - read the first of the 54 responses for specific commentary on wild PR claims.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous
ReplyDeleteMy point is, that whilst the facts themselves may not be correct, this is pretty weak PR.
Are we supposed to think "hey CIPFA members represent the heart 40% of the GLOBAL ECONOMY. Better vote Yes."
I can't see any other reason to include this tripe.
incorrect that is!
ReplyDeleteS Kamran, Well said - I agree.
ReplyDeleteKamran
ReplyDeleteThanks for voting, and for your support.
Good luck with getting a response from "our" institute.
I have written around 10 times to them, and have never had a response.
Maybe I have been deluding myself over the past 16 years or so, maybe I am not in fact a member?
If they do respond, please feel free to post their response here.
I would also be very graetful if you could point your friends and colleagues to this site.
Many thanks.
Ken
Kamran,
ReplyDeleteYour certificate(s) of membership will be meaningless and you may not want and I doubt you will get a new certificate to hang with pride.
One poster asked about the new logo - let's all spend freely and impress clients and the world.
No point joining ICAS.
ReplyDeleteWhen ACCA become the leading UK accounting body in a few years time, ICAS will merge with MICA - or whatever you call yourselves.
ACCA have lowered their examination standards and have 320,000 students, most of whom they will eventually admit as members. CIMA have also decimated their examination standards and have 86,000 students. ICAEW and CIPFA have lost the plot and will be prepared to merge with the PDSA.
ReplyDeleteYou apply to ICAS and good luck to you.
Kamran
ReplyDeleteDo not worry over such small details as letters etc.
Also CIMA will come on board in a few years time after the CIPFA ICAEW merger has been digested and the super institute established.
Kamran,
ReplyDeleteMost ICAEW members can join ACCA without taking exams.
You could use that as a temporary measure until you are able to join ICAS.
Alternatively, you you try to organise a petition requesting ICAS to admit ICAEW members on the basis that they can never have a vote and that they have to retain ACA or FCA.
K & K 10 Best of the Rest 0
ReplyDeleteHalf time score after a few own goals.
Quite a few members of ICAS are CIPFA too.
ReplyDeleteThey have a reciopocal agreement, and have done for many years.
I do not believe CIPFA members are entitled to join ICAS under any reciprocal arrangement.
ReplyDeleteIf I am wrong please quote from the ICAS regulations.
Kamran
ReplyDeleteYou should improve on your qualification - do CIOT instead. Now they are the most prestigious body you could join.
anon 3.37
ReplyDeleteJust go to google and put in:
icas cipfa reciprocal
and out pops the research you are looking for
I have just used Google as suggested. To give some exemptions from examinations is not to allow automatic reciprocal membership.
ReplyDeleteICAS, ICAI and ICAEW have repiciprocal full membership. I should be amazed if ICAS will allow that if MICA appears.
ICAEW members
ReplyDeleteSuch long posts - don't you have work to do.
It was intended for the intelligent and it was a cohesive and compelling piece.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Ken should start moderating if the standard of comment is now so low.
Anon 3.56
ReplyDeleteIt is still a reciprocal agreement, and I never said that it was honorary.
Secondly, if ICAS, ICAI and ICAEW have honorary membership then why don’t disgruntled ICAEW members simply use their “honorary” card and become ICAS or ICAI members and leave those ICAEW members who do want to merge to get on with forming the Super Institute in the brave new world.
Read the rules and use a little common sense.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.icas.org.uk/site/cms/v4_newscategoryview.asp?chapter=2&type=2009
ReplyDeleteI know the rules – you have to maintain your membership of both bodies (ICAS or ICAI & MICA in this case). Of course, publicly you would not draw attention to your MICA status.
ReplyDeleteCommon sense – you have got me there, please explain simply.
Kamran
ReplyDeleteThe 13,000 CIPFA members bring with them £40mm of income. Your 120,000 member institute generates little more than this.
By increasing your membership by 11% you increase your income by 55%. I say that is good business by your Council.
CIPFA's income generation will ensure the survival of your Institute.
Remember, ICAEW proposed marriage to CIPFA.
Sorry, I think I may have my numbers slightly wrong. It has been a long day and I am working from memory.
ReplyDeleteCIPFA has £40mm income and ICAEW £50mm and MICA will have £90mm.
I think ACCA, ICAEW, ICAS & ICAI should merge. Now that would be a dominant voice in global accountancy, in virtually all sectors.
ReplyDeleteIt does strike me as odd, when you have the top 20 and lower - training ICAEW, ACCA, ICAS & ICAI yet there is still so much rivalry. Sad really considering the potential!
CIPFA are a specialist institute and should be left well alone.