ICAEW Granted Accreditation

In July 2011 I wrote:

"The ICAEW plans to "break ranks" with fellow accredited bodies and offer statements of professional standing (SPS) to advisers who make a one-off payment rather than requiring them to join as members.

The ICAEW has applied to be an accredited body, and expects to be approved by the Financial Services Authority in December 2011."

The ICAEW has now been granted that accreditation:

"The Financial Services Authority (FSA) has granted ICAEW accredited body status under the FSA Retail Distribution Review (RDR). The RDR requires all retail financial advisors to obtain a statement of professional standing (SPS) from an accredited body by 1 January 2013 to continue to advise clients.

ICAEW will now be able to issue SPS to retail financial advisors who have met the FSA’s new qualification standards and also monitor their continuous professional development. This recognises ICAEW’s experience as a professional body and regulator of the accountancy profession.

Vernon Soare, ICAEW Executive Director, Professional Standards commented, “We are very pleased to be the first accountancy body to be granted accredited body status by the FSA. The Retail Distribution Review represents a significant change for retail financial markets and financial advisors and ICAEW will now play a part in delivering an enhanced regime for consumers.”

“We are committed to supporting our members and member firms in this period of change and providing them with new opportunities” Vernon continued. “This is part of a long term strategy to increase the services that ICAEW offers to members and also to build on our consumer focus.”

ICAEW expects to open its scheme for applications in April this year when applicants will need to provide evidence that they have fully met the RDR exam qualification standards, including any gap-fill requirements. Further details of the application process will be provided in due course. In the meantime, ICAEW members and employees of member firms should continue working towards achieving RDR approved or transitional qualifications, and meeting any gap-fill needs."

Breaking Ranks?

Citywire reports that the ICAEW plans to "break ranks" with fellow accredited bodies and offer statements of professional standing (SPS) to advisers who make a one-off payment rather than requiring them to join as members.

The ICAEW has applied to be an accredited body, and expects to be approved by the Financial Services Authority in December 2011.

Other accredited bodies, such as the Institute of Financial Planning and Chartered Insurance Institute, want advisers to be members in order to be issued with a SPS.

Vernon Soare, ICAEW executive director of professional standards, said:

"They won't have to be a member.

They just need to register with an accredited body, they pay a registration fee and we do a review of continual professional development."

The proposal has generated a fair amount of heated "debate".

However, so long as the ICAEW's "certification process" does not get dragged through the mud by a conman (a certificate does not make a man/woman a "professional"), it does not seem to be an unreasonable proposal.

Scum of The Earth

It seems that the ICAEW, either via accident or design, has managed to stir up another major row with some other accounting bodies.

Accountancy Age reports that "private papers" (intended for council only) were "accidentally" published on the ICAEW website last week.

The papers disclose a plan to rank accountants in terms of a hierarchy. The Consultative Committee of Accountancy Bodies would be the top, and book-keepers at the bottom.

The plan is part of the ICAEW's desire to formally recognise the term "accountant", and will be submitted to the Privy Council.

The ranking will be as follows:

- CCAB
- financial accountants
- accounting technicians
- book-keepers.

Not unsurprisingly the ICAEW recognise that there may be some opposition to this (eg from the Association of International Accountants and Institute of Certified Bookkeepers).

ICB chief executive Garry Carter is quoted in Accountancy Age:

"Our members are highly qualified, they are not the scum of the earth."

It seems a very odd "accident" to publish this, given that the membership of the ICAEW are never allowed to read on the ICAEW site about what their illustrious members of council discuss or do.

I must ask why did the ICAEW publish this on the site, before they had finalised the plans?

I trust and assume that an investigation is being carried out by the ICAEW.

Needless to say, the ICAEW have now taken down the document from its site. However, I am pleased to say that I have a copy. Here it is ICAEW Report.

I would note that it contains this rather revealing paragraph:

"ICAEW has adopted a policy of getting closer to IFA and other organisations. In turn that meant that David Hunt became the IFA President in January 2007. Eric Anstee became the IFA Chairman of Council in September 2007."

Are we heading for another merger attempt, this time by the back door, or is this a takeover of IFA?

I did warn people about this in three articles in 2005 and 2006:

- The Confidential Plan

- Supersize Me!

- IFA Rumour

A Contradiction In Terms

On the assumption that the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) really is the independent UK regulator responsible for promoting confidence in corporate reporting and governance.

How can Eric Anstee's (ex CEO of the ICAEW and newly appointed chairman of IFA) appointment as a non-executive director of the new board of the Financial Reporting Council provide a leg up for IFA, as IFA president Professor David Hunt states?

Independent bodies do not provide leg ups.

The Confidential Plan

You may recall that last November I wrote about rumours that the ICAEW were considering merging with the Institute of Financial Accountants (IFA).

It seems that these rumours had some substance to them.

I understand that in July 2005 there was a report to the members of council of IFA from Michael O'Brien Chairman of IFA, and in November 2005 there was a confidential report to IFA Council members about a meeting between Michael O'Brien, J Malcolm Dean (CEO of IFA), Eric Anstee (CEO of ICAEW) and Les Smith (Head of the Executive Office of ICAEW).

The subject of these two reports?

Progress on discussions on collaboration between the ICAEW, IFA and the International Association of Bookkeepers (IAB).

Seemingly IFA and IAB would agree to affiliate to the ICAEW (to be renamed ICA - post merger with CIPFA). IFA and IAB would then become subsidiaries of the ICAEW, and agree to a common management with the ICAEW.

IFA and IAB would morph into one organisation which would affiliate to the ICAEW. However, there would be two routes to membership (IFA and IAB) and a new class of membership of IFA "Bookkeeper".

The two brands within the new IFA would be controlled by the newly formed ICA council. The November report emphasises that the two brands were seen as "routes", or "qualifications", to membership of the one overarching organisation - the ICA and its affiliate IFA.

It is spelt out that:

"a student can qualify as a bookkeeper via IAB, and thus enter membership of the IFA, and can continue to increase their skills, experience and qualifications to the point at which they can become a full audit member of the ICA."

IFA would have acted as a "feeder body" for the ICAEW, it also seems that IFA/IAB would have pressed for IFA qualifications to be granted exemption for fast track entry to ICA.

All IFA and IAB staff would also have been offered a job within ICA.

I wonder when the ICAEW council were going to tell the membership of the ICAEW about this plan?

Needless to say, this is all past history now. The best laid plans of mice and men etc.

After all, there is no way that the ICAEW would try to foist another merger on its long suffering membership.

Is there?

Supersize Me!

The front page of today's Accountancy Age again reports on that most well publicised, and poorly kept, secret namely that the ICAEW are pressing ahead with plans to integrate with the Institute of Financial Accountants (IFA).

IFA have only 9000 members, and are allegedly embroiled in something of an internal spat amongst themselves over accusations of disciplinary issues within the upper echelons of their leadership.

Needless to say, if the documents that Accountancy Age claim to have are anything to go by, the ICAEW are not put off by the damage to our reputation and credibility that the association with IFA will do to us.

They appear to be carrying on "full steam ahead" to bring IFA on board.

Their rationale being that size matters, and that the integration will address the falling student and membership numbers.

When will the ICAEW realise it is not size that matters, but quality?

Additionally, does it not occur to the ICAEW that the reason for the falling student numbers is the fact that they are unable to provide a syllabus that is relevant to the 21st century?

In fact, as their botched introduction of the 2006 syllabus shows, they are not able to provide a syllabus at all!

We kicked the absurd idea to merge with CIPFA into touch, and we will most certainly do the same with this ridiculous plan.

One small thing that the leadership of the ICAEW seem to have forgotten, is that they have yet to tell the membership of their plans.

This despite the fact that the talks, allegedly, have been going on for at least six months.

Indeed the plans allow for IFA becoming a "fallback" body for failed chartered accountants, especially CIMA and ACCA failures, under what the ICAEW term a "confederation".

Star Trek this is not!

Happy with this?

Proud of your institute?

I am most certainly not!

What a Shambles!

It seems that the leadership of the ICAEW are intent on digging an even deeper grave for themselves this year.

Hot on the heels of the well deserved trouncing they received for trying to bully us into merging with CIPFA, they then managed to further destroy the ICAEW's reputation by delaying the introduction of the new syllabus, and most importantly the ethics module, for 2006.

Not content with wasting our money on a futile MORI poll asking us why we voted against the merger, don't they read or listen? The ICAEW now intends to add to its ever growing list of strategic and management failures.

Accountancy Age report that the Privy Council will block the proposed name change, which had so angered ICAS and other professional bodies around the world.

This in itself speaks volumes about the quality of leadership at the helm of the ICAEW. However, in case there is any room left for doubt, Accountancy Age also report that the proposed merger with IFA (the merger that ICAEW have yet to officially tell us, the membership, about) may be entering rather choppy waters.

Astute readers will note that IFA have a membership of 9000, it is a body that is even smaller than CIPFA. Yet, in order to prove its machismo, the ICAEW are now seemingly intent on merging with anything no matter how small.

It seems that there are allegations that senior members of IFA may be facing suspension for disciplinary offences.

How will that improve the reputatation of the ICAEW?

Here are few questions that we all need to mull over:

• When will we be rid of this shambolic leadership?



• When will the ICAEW learn that it is here to serve the interests of the membership, not the other way around?



• When will that Victorian anachronistic structure known as Council be removed from office?

Failure to address these issues will see the end of the ICAEW as a legitimate force and respected brand within the profession.

I don't want to see that happen, neither do the rest of the membership. The time for the membership to take control of the ICAEW is now.

IFA Rumour

The printed version of Accountancy Age has printed a rumour today, that the ICAEW may be having talks with the Institute of Financial Accountants (IFA) about a possible merger/closer collaboration.