The merger between the ICAEW and CIPFA has been rejected, by the narrowest of margins.
65.7% of ICAEW members, who voted, voted for the merger; less than 600 votes below the 66.7% majority needed to carry the motion.
However, the 37,004 members who voted in favour of the merger represent a mere 29% of the total membership of the ICAEW.
Hardly a mandate for merger!
The close margin just goes to prove that the outcome was far from certain, and that every vote counted.
I am pleased to say that turnout was reasonably good, compared with other votes, 56,326 members (44%) voted.
I understand from feedback at the meeting, that the younger members, who have only recently qualified, were the most keen to maintain the brand value of the qualification that they have worked so hard for.
This puts into perspective the media spin that has been used by some, to portray the "anti merger camp" as being out of touch and "of a certain age".
I would like to thank everyone for their help and support in stopping this misguided merger proposal.
I am very pleased with the result.
The brand value of our qualification has been maintained.
However, there are issues that now need to be addressed:
1 The size of council needs to be cut from its current level of over 90, to 12.
2 Peace needs to be made with ICAS, with a view to merging in the long term.
3 £1.4M has been wasted, members of the ICAEW executive team should now consider their positions.
4 Our relationship with Media Strategy should be terminated.
I will continue to run www.stopthemerger.org, to ensure that these issues are addressed.
Once again thank you for your help and support.
- Tax Books
- Business Products
- Tax Investigation Insurance
- Contact Me
Originally dedicated to fighting the proposed merger of the ICAEW with CIMA and CIPFA, this site now provides news about the ICAEW
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Agree. But ICAEW must look outside the box. Accountancy is not just audit. It needs to also look at recruiting in the industry. It should look at ACCA membership policy (copy and enhance it) It sould adopt ICAS way of running the institue(efficiency..just look at the number of staff vs ICAEW)
Excellent outcome. Probably the misleading Accountancy Age poll meant many more objectors thought it unnecessary to vote. Congratulations and many thanks for all your hard work.ReplyDelete
"You few, you happy few, you band of brothers".
I believe you made the difference.
Thanks to you all with especial thanks to Ken for keeping many of us thoroughly up-to-date.
Well done Ken I think that your site made the difference.ReplyDelete
But every vote counted, despite the heavy pro merger lobbying by the "big firms"; as such it was the membership, who voted, that made the difference.
well done, now lets start attacking wasteful expenditure by the institute secreteriat. As individuals we should have more say in how our subscriptions are spent. Where did the institute find the £1.4m to spend on this project - to my mind its ultra vires.ReplyDelete
I have only just discovered your website from an article in today's FT .I had voted against the proposed merger and suspected that perhaps I was an "outcast " in so doing . Having read your website and watched your video , I am pleased to find that I am not a lone voice and agree totally with your thoughts.A merger with CIPFA or the ACCA would not enhance our hard earned qualification . A merger with the Scots would !
More power to your mouse Ken and very well done !!
Thanks for all your efforts. You're a true hero - you've saved the ICAEW from itself.
I just hope that we are never threatened with merger again.
Congratulations on running a successful one man band campaign Ken. You've clearly demonstrated the power of this medium in an unconventional way. It is important to keep the momentum going because when you look at the result, the younger generation want the same as the rest of membership - a better deal on brand management along with a recognition that being a CA is a lot more than 'bean counting.'ReplyDelete
Can you believe the CIMA President, and obviously a (if not, the) great joker, is apparently still interested in a merger with ICAEW (and he is awaiting a response to some questions they put to ICAEW)?
See CIMA website today 25/10/2005.
Thanks for all of your messages.ReplyDelete
As noted in today's FT, the ICAEW are thinking of changing the rules to allow the vote to be passed next time.
So I, and this site, will not go away.
More will follow.
Even if the rules were changed; who, except for CIPFA (note the word "stall" in their review of 25/10), would want to merge with ICAEW?
Elsewhere, someone reported getting an ICAEW circular this am - and Eric has dropped "England & Wales".
Mr Lawson is absolutely right; Eric the Fool must go, and soon. Start up a fund to get constant press coverage - pelt him with flour and eggs if he wont resign. He doesn't play by rules - so why should anyone else.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.ReplyDelete
I was shocked to learn that despite being defeated, the ICAEW council is still obsessed with its "consolidation" strategy.ReplyDelete
A sixth failed merger attempt is still insufficient for the ICAEW council to try its best to turn the ICAEW into a dinosaur.
No other professional body in any profession in any part of the world has been so determined on becoming extinct.
It appears that the ICAEW council will do anything necessary to merge with anyone at any cost as soon as possible.
In view of this continuing threat, we should set up an ICAEW preservation society before it is too late.
Members such as Ken and Bruce Lawson and others should stand for Council election such that the Council is comprised of members with both pro and anti merger views. We must have a balanced council that acts in the interests of all its members.
I also suggest that steps be taken for fundamental issues such as mergers, so that merger planning is not carried out solely by the council without prior voting by members.
Final Score: Ken 1 Mr. Anstee 0ReplyDelete
Ken, you deserve all the praise for ensuring the survival of ICAEW. Although I must say that Bruce Lawson also did an excellent job.
You both should be on the ICAEW council.
I am happy that our victory is also a defeat for the Big 4 who should now realize that smaller practitioners also have a voice that needs to be heard.
Thanks for your posts and your support.
Re standing for the current council, I am afraid that would be hypocritical.
I want council cut to 12.
To sit on a body of over 90 would be seen to endorse the current structure.
Well done Ken - your campaign must have made a difference and I for one am grateful that you have helped to save my institute from being swallowed whole! Best of luck in saving your own institute from itself!ReplyDelete