Hat Tip

I tip my hat to Martin Waller of The Times, for mentioning this site again.

Can an accountant be a rebel?

Accountancy Auction

My thanks to Martin Waller of The Times, for featuring my Accountancy auction for the third time in his City Diary.

The auction closes this Tuesday at 17:00.

Praise Indeed

I see that The Times reports that Accountancy, the official organ of the ICAEW, has described me as "meticulous".

High praise indeed!

In other news, I have today received a bid of £100 for my copies of Accountancy, dating back to 1984; any other bids?

The Times

My thanks to Martin Waller, of The Times, for helping to spread the word about the back editions of Accountancy that I have for sale.

In the event that I actually manage to sell them, I will be happy to send a percentage of the earnings to him.

However, the best offer I have had so far is £0!

The Times

My thanks to The Times for again mentioning my attempt to stand for Council in dispatches, and for trying to energise the Croydon vote:

"Ken Frost, the Croydon maverick, has failed in his attempt to make it on to the Council of the accountants' professional body the ICAEW. As I have written, Frost, who has been making trouble for the association these past couple of years, needed the support of ten accountants in his area. 'Regrettably the ICAEW and Croydon District Society refused to inform Croydon members that I wished to stand. As such, only one of those who offered support lived in Croydon,' he says. Joy at the ICAEW is presumably unconfined."

Frost Selected For Honour

My thanks to my ICAEW colleagues who nominated me for the AccountingWEB New Year's Honours awards for "services to the opposition".

"Qualified accountant and AccountingWEB member Ken Frost was recommended by some of his fellow members for an honour. With a degree in economics from Edinburgh University, Frost joined KPMG in 1984 where he gained his accountancy qualifications.

With several years audit experience in businesses including Philips and De Beers, Frost is best known for his outspoken comments on the ICAEW. He has been most vocal in his opposition to the institute's attempts to merge with other accountancy organisations.

In 2004, Frost set up the 'Stop the Merger' website where he regularly voices his opinion on the issue. Frost is currently seeking support to stand as a candidate for the ICAEW council.

Member's reason for award:

'Sir Ken Frost sounds about right. He has done the most for the ICAEW in recent times and his messages now command widespread support amongst its members and students'"

The Times Supports Frost

My thanks to The Times, which has come out in support of my candidacy for the ICAEW Council elections:

"Ken Frost has found one Croydon accountant, so it’s nine to go. As I wrote the other day, Frost, a long-standing critic of the accountants’ professional body in England and Wales, wants to stand in elections to its council. But according to the peculiar rules of the ICAEW, he needs ten nominations first from members of his local association. One has come forward, he tells me, and I may be able to put him in touch with another, if Herne Hill in South London is deemed sufficiently local. The ICAEW insists the rules must be observed in all cases. Frost must run!"

Let us see what happens!

The Times

My thanks to The Times for featuring my campaign to stand for Council.

The ICAEW, the body for accountants in England and Wales, may end up with one of its severest critics on its council — but only if Ken Frost can find ten local accountants first. Frost, who opposed the failed merger between the UK’s various bean-counting bodies, wants to stand in the elections but needs the support of ten members in his area first. "I know many ICAEW members, unfortunately not one of them lives in Croydon," he complains. "We welcome any members who want to get involved," says a spokesman. "That's his prerogative."

Distasteful

Those of you who wish to take lessons in the fine art of "winning friends and influencing people", and of building good working relationships with other professional bodies, may be well advised not to follow the example set by Eric Anstee CEO of the ICAEW.

That is if the report in today's Times is anything to go by.

It seems that the ICAEW is now trying to poach other institutes' members. Prompting Charles Tilley, chief executive of the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants, to say:

"I question whether it is professional."

Size, in Anstee's view, is everything.

In my view, it is quality not size that matters.

However, the views of the membership of the ICAEW are ignored by the current "leadership"; as such my views, and your views, don't count.

Counter Points

Martin Waller, of The Times, has written a short and pithy piece about the name change and merger issues in today's edition.

Visit Counter Points, and scroll down to read it.

Many Oppose The Merger

The Times notes today that the proposed merger between the ICAEW and CIPFA "faces opposition from many members of the ICAEW".

The article then goes on to add that "many believe the ICAEW will find it difficult to obtain the two thirds majority required".

Funny that Accountancy didn't note the large scale opposition, in their October edition?

The Times article even mentions the existence of website opposing the merger; again, funny that Accountancy didn't mention this?

The Times also has another article, which outlines the history of the previous failed attempts to merge.

In this article Damian Wild, editor of Accountancy Age, is reported to doubt that the ICAEW will succeed in its attempts to merge with CIPFA.

ACCA Believe Merger Plans Flawed

Allen Blewitt, chief executive of the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA) the world’s largest accountancy organisation outside China, has criticised the ICAEW merger plans.

He is quoted in today's Times as saying:

"The model for merging accountancy bodies is probably flawed..We educated accountants to be sceptical and conservative, yet you are asking people to forget years of entrenched mindsets."

He believes that institutes should collaborate first, then worry about whether or not to merge.

Scottish Institute To Fight

The change of president of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS) has done nothing to dampen their ardour, in respect of fighting the proposal by the ICAEW to name the merged body "The Institute of Chartered Accountants".

New President Mike Hathorn took up office at the end of April this year.

Des Hudson, the CEO of ICAS, said that ICAS will oppose plans by the combined English-based organisations to adopt the title Institute of Chartered Accountants.

He said that there had been little attempt by the English bodies to discuss the issue.

He is quoted, in an article in The Scotsman, as saying:

"We would be happy to sit down with them and find a sensible solution, but as yet there have been no negotiations".

As I have noted many times, it seems that the ICAEW have not though the merger proposal through.

I don't think that ICAS need worry too much, the merger proposals do not stand a chance of being approved by the membership of the ICAEW.

CIMA Don't Want To Merge

Accountancy Age reported, earlier this month, that both the ICAEW and CIPFA are struggling to gain support for their merger vote in October. Additionally, they are having trouble convincing CIMA about the merits of the plans.

CIMA announced in May that it would still consider joining, if its new proposals were met.

There's the rub!

The sticking points include the higher fees for CIMA members, and concerns about the merged Institute containing an ICAEW dominated charter and council.

Roland Kaye, CIMA president, is quoted as saying that the merger proposals "did not yet recognise the distinctiveness of CIMA".

In other words, CIMA will only merge if they are treated as unique; which of course entirely negates the rationale for the merger.

As noted many times before, this merger proposal is being made up as it goes along.

Council have failed us, it is time that they were removed and restructured.

Subscription Hike

The ICAEW has stated that it wishes to impose a 9% hike in subscriptions for 2006, upon the membership.

They claim that this will go towards the costs of maintaining the quality of the qualification.

Yet they also claim that the merger will bring in extra revenue.

Which claim is to be believed?

Maybe some money could have been saved by not sending out free editions of Accountancy in April?

I have written to the ICAEW four times, asking them how much this little PR stunt cost, yet they have not replied.

May I ask for your help in eliciting a response from them?

Please write to them asking for a figure, there is a link in the menu bar of this site to enable you to do this via email.

Thanks.

The Times

This is in the City Diary section of today's Times:

IN THE normally dull world of accountancy, rebellion stirs. The Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW) is trying to ram through a merger with two other bodies, CIPFA, which specialises in the public sector, and CIMA, which represents management accountants.

The latter has already fallen by the wayside, and its arrival has had to be delayed. Members of the ICAEW are up in arms, in so far as an accountant can be said to express so strong an emotion. There is a website devoted to stopping the merger. There are calls for resignations, demands for a vote and talk of forming a breakaway institute.

The Welsh are particularly unruly. An informal poll suggests an 11-to-1 stand there against the merger. “When will the ICAEW council realise that this proposal is fatally holed below the water line?” asks one rebel. The ICAEW had no comment to make.

Don't Dilute The Brand

My professional body, the Institute of Chartered Accountants (ICAEW), will be launching yet another campaign to persuade its 126,000 members to approve a merger with two other accountancy bodies in the UK (CIPFA and CIMA).

The ICAEW ruling council argue that:

• The demographic skew of the ICAEW means that by 2023, half the membership will be over 55. The merger, in their view, will inject young blood into this dying organisation.



• The merged body will be larger, and better equipped to address the issues facing accountants in the 21st century.



• The merged body will be able to stand up to the UK’s other accountancy body, the ACCA. The ACCA is, for reasons that remain unclear, not participating in the merger talks.



• The ICAEW argue that we have been down this route so many times before, there have been several merger attempts in the past that have been vetoed by the membership, that it is now time to make up our minds once and for all; ie vote yes.

To quote Margaret Thatcher:

NO!
NO!
NO!
NO!

The arguments put forward represent the same, tired old mantra recited by previous ICAEW councils. They failed then, and they will fail again to convince the membership that a merger is a good idea.

We, the members of the ICAEW, do not want or need a merger of incompatible bodies. The merger will “dilute the brand value” of the FCA qualification.

Rather like a poorly conceived marriage; forcing unequal, ill suited partners together is a recipe for disaster.

The membership of the ICAEW have strived long and hard to achieve their qualifications; yet the council of the ICAEW seek to fritter away the labour of years, like a gambler “blowing his salary” at the dog track. To accept the merger would, in effect, consign the members’ efforts to the dustbin of history.

To hand over control of the governing council of the ICAEW to a new body, will denude the current membership of its right to veto who can become an accountant.

The council has wasted far too much time and money over the years, in trying to persuade the members to vote for a merger. The time has come to stop this disgraceful waste of members’ subscriptions, and stop the merger juggernaut once and for all in its tracks.

The argument about demographics is spurious, and indeed a sad indictment on the “management” by the council of the ICAEW. The decline in “youthful” members is surely down to the decline in the attractiveness of the qualification, and the out of date “fuddy duddy” image of the ICAEW. These issues should be directly addressed by the council, not swept under the carpet in the guise of a merger.

Diluting the brand is not the way to address the fundamental problems facing the ICAEW.

Vote no to the merger.