ICAEW chief executive Michael Izza, reacting to the release of the interim report by PwC CEO Kieran Poynter on "Datagate", said:
"In tandem with the next stage of this review, we believe government should look at the day-to-day operation of HMRC and ensure that it is properly resourced to deliver.
Until this happens, there should be a moratorium on any further job cuts."
Wrong!
The most effective way to turn around the underperforming and failing HMRC is to simplify the tax system, and hence simplify the bureaucracy and cut the staff/hierarchies within the HMRC.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
Thursday, December 13, 2007
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.
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.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
The Transparent Council
Over the recent weeks (most especially after having met and had lunch with Michael Izza CEO of ICAEW), I had begun to feel that maybe the ICAEW had finally started to get the message from its members and that it was genuinely trying to make itself more accountable to the membership, relevant and fit for purpose for the 21st century.
Unfortunately that feeling of optimism was blown away when I read Richard Dyson's (President ICAEW) piece in Accountancy (December 2007 page 113) entitled "Seeking Council".
I would provide a link to the piece, but Accountancy haven't entered the 21st century either and don't have it on their website.
In brief, Dyson extols the virtues of the ICAEW council; noting that "council's work is too often unnoticed and unsung..."
Well, there is a very good reason for that; none of the membership are told what council discusses!
In brief I will summarise why I totally disagree with Dyson's views:
Why does the ICAEW insist on prospective candidates for council needing 10 signatures from the local area, before they are even allowed to stand?
Why does the ICAEW need 90, or more, council members?
Operating a Victorian trading association model simply will not do for the 21st century.
Until the ICAEW gets that point it will go nowhere.
Judging from the self congratulatory tone and contents of Dyson's article, it is evident that the ICAEW still doesn't get it.
Unfortunately that feeling of optimism was blown away when I read Richard Dyson's (President ICAEW) piece in Accountancy (December 2007 page 113) entitled "Seeking Council".
I would provide a link to the piece, but Accountancy haven't entered the 21st century either and don't have it on their website.
In brief, Dyson extols the virtues of the ICAEW council; noting that "council's work is too often unnoticed and unsung..."
Well, there is a very good reason for that; none of the membership are told what council discusses!
In brief I will summarise why I totally disagree with Dyson's views:
- As I have stated on this site on many occasions, the size of council (over 90 people) is absurd (see Best in Class). Dyson attempts to justify the size of council by saying:
"..once a body is larger than, say 15 people, it doesn't really make any difference if it's 30, 60 or 90 strong.."
Clearly he doesn't get it, council should be less than 12 people (as I have outlined on numerous occasions) if it is is to be effective. Following Dyson's "logic" we may as well increase the size to include every member.
I would note that were the same proportion of MP's, compared to the population of the UK, to sit in parliament as there are council members to ICAEW members, we would have a parliament of 42,857 MP's.
Would that be an effective body? - Dyson proudly states how the ICAEW have made progress, and have tried to make council meetings more transparent and open to scrutiny.
That being the case, why can the membership of the ICAEW not access transcripts of council meetings?
I did raise that question during the ICAEW's abortive merger campaign, and got a very irate email from one member of council who informed me that the minutes of the meetings should not be available to the membership as the were "confidential".
Ah yes, progress indeed! - Dyson concludes by inviting prospective council members to contact him.
Now I know where I went wrong, when I attempted to stand for council at the beginning of this year. Had I contacted Dyson, then maybe the ICAEW would not have refused to let the Croydon membership know that I was looking for nominations.
Why does the ICAEW insist on prospective candidates for council needing 10 signatures from the local area, before they are even allowed to stand?
Why does the ICAEW need 90, or more, council members?
Operating a Victorian trading association model simply will not do for the 21st century.
Until the ICAEW gets that point it will go nowhere.
Judging from the self congratulatory tone and contents of Dyson's article, it is evident that the ICAEW still doesn't get it.
Monday, December 10, 2007
Jobs For The Boys
Dennis Howlett raises a very good question about why is it that the Tax Faculty of the ICAEW, rather than the IT Faculty, are commenting on the recent data loss fiasco by HMRC.
I agree with Dennis, the ICAEW have "missed the mark" on this:
This is where the ICAEW should be pushing the government, and this is the case that they should be making, not "fannying around" asking for consultants to be hired.
A missed opportunity.
I agree with Dennis, the ICAEW have "missed the mark" on this:
- They should have responded as a body as whole, not allowing an individual faculty to answer
- Their support of a formal independent review, as Dennis rightly points out, begs for yet more tax payers' money to be poured down the ever open gullets of the big four consultancy/accounting firms; producing no real value whatsoever
- The failure of HMRC is down to lax systems and lax attitudes; not costs savings targets, rightly imposed by the Treasury
This is where the ICAEW should be pushing the government, and this is the case that they should be making, not "fannying around" asking for consultants to be hired.
A missed opportunity.
Monday, December 03, 2007
HMRC
The ICAEW recently asked for examples of HMRC issues, www.hmrcisshite.com may provide them with some light relief whilst they plough thier way through the technical stuff.
HMRC Is Shite is dedicated to the taxpayers of Britain, and the employees of the HMRC, who have to endure the monumental shambles that is Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC).
HMRC Is Shite is dedicated to the taxpayers of Britain, and the employees of the HMRC, who have to endure the monumental shambles that is Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs (HMRC).
Monday, November 19, 2007
AIA Launches Forum and Blog
The Association of International Accountants (AIA) has launched a public discussion forum on its website (ahead of the ICAEW's plans for something similar), and a personal blog by the CEO Philip Turnbull which is accessible to all members of the public.
I wish them well with these innovations.
I wish them well with these innovations.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
EC Books Failed For 13th Year Running
Accountancy Age reports that the European Court of Auditors has refused to sign off the European Commission's books for the 13th year in a row, citing a "lack of supervision" and "irregularities" in its accounts.
The audit did not unearth any major fraud case. However, it noted that some of the EU's farm subsidies and aid for development of poor regions had/may have gone to ineligible people.
Quote:
"The most frequent errors were claims for illegible expenditure and failure to carry out tender procedures as well as a lack of evidence to support the calculation of ... costs involved."
This humiliation could not come at a worse time for the EC.
Marta Andreasen, the former chief accountant of the European Commission, has said she is up against a "mafia" in the Commission whose aim it is to frighten off whistleblowers.
Andreasen lost her appeal against her dismissal by the EC last week, but that said she plans to appeal that judgment too.
Andreasen was suspended by the Commission in 2002, and was later sacked after exposing failures and weaknesses in accounting procedures.
As if by strange coincidence the ICAEW has invited Siim Kallas (Vice President of the EC in charge of administration, audit and anti fraud) to address a meeting at the ICAEW on 26th November.
The meeting is being organised by the ICAEW (co hosted by CIPFA) to promote "improved understanding of the Commission's accounting and auditing process".
The meeting also aims to:
Given the ICAEW's current predilection for globalisation and co-operation with international professional bodies (despite an internal structure of governance that resembles a Victorian trading association) now would be a good time for the ICAEW to sally forth into Europe, and offer to train those in the EC who hold the purse strings, and have responsibility for spending our money, in the basics of accounting and financial reporting.
The audit did not unearth any major fraud case. However, it noted that some of the EU's farm subsidies and aid for development of poor regions had/may have gone to ineligible people.
Quote:
"The most frequent errors were claims for illegible expenditure and failure to carry out tender procedures as well as a lack of evidence to support the calculation of ... costs involved."
This humiliation could not come at a worse time for the EC.
Marta Andreasen, the former chief accountant of the European Commission, has said she is up against a "mafia" in the Commission whose aim it is to frighten off whistleblowers.
Andreasen lost her appeal against her dismissal by the EC last week, but that said she plans to appeal that judgment too.
Andreasen was suspended by the Commission in 2002, and was later sacked after exposing failures and weaknesses in accounting procedures.
As if by strange coincidence the ICAEW has invited Siim Kallas (Vice President of the EC in charge of administration, audit and anti fraud) to address a meeting at the ICAEW on 26th November.
The meeting is being organised by the ICAEW (co hosted by CIPFA) to promote "improved understanding of the Commission's accounting and auditing process".
The meeting also aims to:
- Consider objectively the progress made by the Commission in reforming internal accounting and auditing process
- Elicit an exchange of views on how public and private organisations deal with qualified accounts
Given the ICAEW's current predilection for globalisation and co-operation with international professional bodies (despite an internal structure of governance that resembles a Victorian trading association) now would be a good time for the ICAEW to sally forth into Europe, and offer to train those in the EC who hold the purse strings, and have responsibility for spending our money, in the basics of accounting and financial reporting.
Tuesday, November 06, 2007
Consultation
As some of you may be aware, the ICAEW has been conducting a consultation exercise whereby Gracechurch Consulting conduct an hour long telephone interview with selected members of the ICAEW in order to determine the attitudes and requirements of the membership.
I have not been contacted, I am guessing that the ICAEW know my views already:)
However, there is a good summary of the process on "The Small Practice Accountant".
It seems that this is just the start of the process.
Quote from the Small Practice Accountant:
"One of the questions I asked was how many people had been contacted and how many were participating in the initial study. The consultant I spoke too said she would find out and email me. Her reply though said the following:
'With regard to the number of participants in this stage of the study the Institute has asked me to provide you with the following information:
This is an initial stage of exploratory research which will cover members from a range of different segments. We need to review the findings of the exploratory work before a larger scale survey which will cover all segments of the membership can be designed. This will be designed to ensure that accurately reflects the views of all segments of ICAEW membership and it is statistically valid.'"
It seems that the ICAEW has finally started to realise that the membership is not that happy with how things have been run and are being run.
The question is, will the ICAEW have the courage to address the key issues such as; the size of council, the absurd council election process, the fees/costs of the institute etc?
I have not been contacted, I am guessing that the ICAEW know my views already:)
However, there is a good summary of the process on "The Small Practice Accountant".
It seems that this is just the start of the process.
Quote from the Small Practice Accountant:
"One of the questions I asked was how many people had been contacted and how many were participating in the initial study. The consultant I spoke too said she would find out and email me. Her reply though said the following:
'With regard to the number of participants in this stage of the study the Institute has asked me to provide you with the following information:
This is an initial stage of exploratory research which will cover members from a range of different segments. We need to review the findings of the exploratory work before a larger scale survey which will cover all segments of the membership can be designed. This will be designed to ensure that accurately reflects the views of all segments of ICAEW membership and it is statistically valid.'"
It seems that the ICAEW has finally started to realise that the membership is not that happy with how things have been run and are being run.
The question is, will the ICAEW have the courage to address the key issues such as; the size of council, the absurd council election process, the fees/costs of the institute etc?
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Blah!
The ICAEW is stepping up its advertising campaign, to promote itself as the top brand. It has launched its first ever cinema advertisement, which is aimed at students.
The advert is called "Blah won't get you far", and will be shown in 23 cinemas on or near university campuses across the UK. Sue Best, the Institute's marketing director, is quoted by AccountingWeb saying that is was "hopefully not something you would expect to see from the ICAEW."
Not too bad for a first attempt.
As I have noted before, I am pleased to see that the ICAEW have finally taken on board the message that our brand is a very valuable asset and should not be diluted.
Watch the ICAEW's new cinema advert here Blah!
The advert is called "Blah won't get you far", and will be shown in 23 cinemas on or near university campuses across the UK. Sue Best, the Institute's marketing director, is quoted by AccountingWeb saying that is was "hopefully not something you would expect to see from the ICAEW."
Not too bad for a first attempt.
As I have noted before, I am pleased to see that the ICAEW have finally taken on board the message that our brand is a very valuable asset and should not be diluted.
Watch the ICAEW's new cinema advert here Blah!
Monday, October 08, 2007
Ethics
I see that the ACCA have launched an ethics module as part of a drive to make ethics pervasive in the ACCA's exam syllabus.
Given that the ACCA believes that it is important to have a separate ethics module, and ICAS is introducing more ethics courses to its CA syllabus, why did the ICAEW abandon its plans for a separate ethics exam in 2005?
Given that the ACCA believes that it is important to have a separate ethics module, and ICAS is introducing more ethics courses to its CA syllabus, why did the ICAEW abandon its plans for a separate ethics exam in 2005?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)