Wednesday, October 12, 2005

Parliamentary Motion Tabled Against Name Change

Motions are to be tabled at Westminster and the Scottish Parliament, opposing plans by the ICAEW and CIPFA to change their name to 'The Institute of Chartered Accountants'.

The name is the preferred choice of the two Institutes if their consolidation vote is successful.

The moves come after the First Minister of Scotland, Jack McConnell, announced his intention to officially object to the Privy Council about the proposal.

The Deputy Leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats and ICAS member, Michael Moore MP, is tabling an Early Day motion at Westminster, calling for the ICAEW and CIPFA to maintain the unbroken convention that Chartered Accountancy Institutes carry a geographical designation in their name.

Mr Moore added:

"The change of name should not be approved. There are many 'Institutes of Chartered Accountants' around the world. It would be quite wrong to allow one body to give the impression that there is only one, or that they were the first."

Brian Monteith MSP, the Conservative member for Mid – Scotland and Fife and also convener of Holyrood's audit committee, has tabled a motion which he is confident will attract cross-party support.

He said:

"This proposal is against the interests of ICAS and similar bodies across the globe. The Privy Council should not approve a Royal Charter change that would assert a false sense of superiority to the new body".

ICAS President, Mike Hathorn, welcomed the support:

"This backing at Holyrood and Westminster is an important endorsement for our arguments against this proposal. We continue our ongoing discussions with both the ICAEW and CIPFA to find alternatives to this increasingly unpopular choice of name."

Source ICAS

There is already an Early Day Motion against Media Strategy (the PR advisers to the ICAEW, paid for by the membership).

It is quite clear that this badly thought through, and badly managed, merger proposal is doing untold damage to the name, brand and reputation of the ICAEW.

Those responsible will have to resign once the vote goes against them.


  1. Ken,

    Thanks for this encouraging update. ICAS may agree to:

    The Institute of Chartered Accountants 1880 (dec'd)

  2. The International Compliance Organisation which is concerned with countering money laundering already uses the designatory letters MICA.

    It would seem likely that some ICAEW members will also belong to that organisation. Will they be known as MICA MICA or MICA and bar?

  3. Sorry, that should have been:

    International Compliance Association (ICA).

    Ken, my resignation will be on your desk tomorrow.

  4. There are 6 billion people on earth and not one of them can say what is wrong with the following name for the merged body:

    The Institute of Chartered Accountants IN ENGLAND AND WALES.

    Since when have the ICAEW Council members become so anti-English and anti-Welsh?

  5. If not to try to change the name would invalidate the voting, then I agree.

    Otherwise, I do have objections.

  6. If a name change is so necessary then how about "The Institute of Chartered Accountants OF England and Wales".

    I fail to understand why the ICAEW is so keen on dropping the England and Wales part of the name.

    The same name was retained during the 1957 merger with the Society of Incorporated Accountants and Auditors. That happened to be the ONLY successful merger in the Institute's history. So why not retain the same name?

    Is the England and Wales part of the name such a nuisance that the ICAEW has to make enemies out of other CA Institutes?

  7. Dropping the E&W is part of our Council's strategy of becomming the WORLDS leading force in GLOBAL accountancy theory and GLOBAL practice.

  8. Obviously the Council feel that a geographical name hinders it's desire to be seen as a global leader.

  9. Anonymous said...
    Dropping the E&W is part of our Council's strategy of becomming
    Does that suggest that other worldwide CA Institutes should not be entitled to follow the same the WORLDS leading force in GLOBAL accountancy theory and GLOBAL practice.
    course of action?

    ACCA does not have a geographical element, so are you saying that currently they are the the WORLD'S leading force in GLOBAL accountancy theory and GLOBAL practice, which would imply that ACCA are above and beyond any CA Institute in the World?

  10. Anonymous said...
    Obviously the Council feel that a geographical name hinders it's desire to be seen as a global leader.

    This is exactly what the ICAS is complaining about and justifiably so.

  11. One cannot be a global leader by just changing ones name.

  12. It has recently come to my notice that members of a UK based professional body are already using the MICA designatory letters.

    The name of the body is the International Compliance Association - ironically the abbreviation for this body is also ICA.

    Their website is at

    We are now going ahead with a vote to form an Institute whose name is undecided, and whose members will use designatory letters of some other Institute.

    This goes to show how ill planned this merger is.

    It is like sitting for exams without any prior homework or revision!

  13. I'm a member of another institute so the name makes no difference to me. However, I should have thought that only the first institute formed would have the right to call itself The ICA (with no geographic tag). The Institute who could do that is ICAS, and they have strong objections,so why aren't your leaders listening?

    Looking at this as an outsider I see an Institute that is saying that it is the best but is rapidly becoming regarded as a joke because of the way this is being handled. This whole episode has made ICAEW look clueless (although I am sure that members will tell me it is only your council that is clueless).

    The whole episode reminds me of the last days of the Tory Government where everyone but them could see they were doomed. It seems to me that when the merger inevitably fails you are going to have to do what Britain did and get a whole new set of leaders.

    Ken for President and the Geoff Wooller for VP?

  14. Excuse the typos in the previous post. It seems like I need my cocoa!

  15. In my humble opinion, merger or no merger nothing will change. The Council is too powerful and dominated by UK Big 4 and their agenda, which will never be goal congruent with the grassroots.

  16. Anon 8.43,

    roughly what % of your Council is comprised of Big 4 members?

  17. Kamran,

    You seem to have toned down your opposition. Are you still intending to join ACAS if the merger were to happen?

  18. acrimonious said...

    You seem to have toned down your opposition. Are you still intending to join ACAS if the merger were to happen?

    Dear Acrimonious,

    My opposition to the merger is as strong as it has always been. In fact it is getting stronger as 25th October looms.

    When I suggested names for the merged Institute, it was not because I have toned down my opposition, but merely because I am being a pessimist and am thinking of life after death (death of the ICAEW).

    As for joining ICAS (I think you mean ICAS), that is not wholly related to the merger. Regardless of the merger, I feel that CA is a quality brand and will add to my existing qualifications.

  19. Dear Acrimonious,

    I can now see why you feel that my opposition has toned down.

    In my previous messages in this thread, I have first quoted what anonymous has said and have then mentioned my reply.

    My posts say:

    Kamran said Anonymous said.....

    I hope you now see what I mean.

  20. Kamran,

    I am well pleased by your response.

    ACAS was an attempt at a meaningful pun.

    Kind regards.