Accounting Web has published an interesting "post merger" interview with Eric Anstee the CEO of the ICAEW.
It seems that, judging by the article, the ICAEW have succumbed to "Ivory Tower Syndrome".
I have a number of comments relating to the points the he makes, and have countered extracts of his comments (in italics) with my own thoughts:
"I personally am at a loss to understand why those 19,000 people voted the way that they did and we need to find that out."
If he had bothered to visit this site, at any time over the past year, he might have had a few clues as to why people voted down the merger proposal.
"We will undertake specific survey work using independent surveyors - probably MORI who we used back in June."
More expense for us the membership, yet for what purpose?
"I believe that what you have to do is look at what the vote itself tells you, and that is that nearly two thirds want to go forward and one third don't and therefore two thirds are the majority."
Which part of the word "No" don't the ICAEW understand? A mere 29% of the membership voted in favour, the pro merger lobby lost...PERIOD!
"We responded to all queries that were anti the integration proposal."
I wrote at least 6 emails, and used the special feedback box on the ICAEW website to send them. I even have a receipt for at least one of them.
Yet I received no response.
"My problem here is that the minority of 19,000 are dictating to the majority, so we will have to look at that constitutional impact."
If you lose, then change the rules!
"However, we would keep ourselves informed as to what the market place wants. We would have to adjust the qualification to meet the market needs."
It seems that I was right, the ICAEW would have abandoned the dual qualification for ICAEW and CIPFA members had the merger vote gone through.
"That is my big disappointment that a lot of what we are doing has not been understood."
The fault for that lies with the ICAEW.
Accept the fact that you lost, and move on.