Originally dedicated to fighting the proposed merger of the ICAEW with CIMA and CIPFA, this site now provides news about the ICAEW

Do you think the ICAEW rebranding was money well spent?

Thursday, June 29, 2006

An Invitation

Council members are invited to post here, or email me directly, any news items relating to the current ICAEW Council Conference.

I regard the attitude of the ICAEW, as quoted by Accountancy Age, re questions over the Durgan Debacle as being a "private matter for council" as being contemptible.

I offer those members of council, who actually respect the membership, an opportunity to tell the membership what is really going on in their ICAEW. I will maintain your anonymity should you so wish.

The days of deals being done in smoke filled rooms are over.


  1. On the one hand, Graham Durgan spent £1 of his own money on acquiring EMI and he receives no remuneration from the ICAEW. He declared his interest and took no part in the, Morris/Anstee et al, decision to reward EMI with a "gratuitous" amount of some £400,000.

    On the other hand, Eric Anstee is paid some £400,000 per annum to screw the ICAEW into the ground. He, together with Druckman and Morris, spent more than £1,400,000 of membership money on an abortive, foolish and foolhardy venture.

    Who is preferred: the honourable, astute business man and educator or the fools who presided over the present fiasco; and, I repeat, who leaked this storm in a teacup to The Independent?

    There can be no whitewash - the whole can of worms needs a full and impartial review. Surely?

  2. Great news - Anstee has stepped down with the weakest of watery explanations. Will Morris now do likewise?

    We still need a proper review and we still need to know who leaked the the Durgan story to the media.