ICAEW-CIPFA merger rejected

Confusion

The proposed merger would have led to confusion among non-members who would not have been able to understand how two qualifications could co-exist under the guise of one Institute.

Posted by: Laurie Grove FCA, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Accountancy merger in tatters

As a member of the ICAEW, the proposed merger with CIPFA did not make sense at all. If the merger had been between ICAEW and one of the other Institutes then it would have received a full backing of the members.

The present committee should now consider their position in view of the decision.

Posted by: Mike Kerridge, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

ICAS or ACCA

It would have made more sense if the merger proposals were with either ICAS or ACCA but not with CIPFA.

Posted by: Raj, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Resignations are in place

In light of the adventures by ICAEW at a substantial cost and no real benefit to the members, the executives should now consider resignation as an honorable way out of this mess.

Posted by: Anon, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

ICAEW-CIPFA merger rejected

ICAEW should be concentrating on batting for its members in the same way as the BMA does for doctors, rather wasting resources on a merger that its members do not want and is of no real value to them.

Posted by: A Mitra, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Two qualifications

For me, the greatest problem with the proposals was the continuation of two qualifications. In effect new public accountants would have been urged to qualify as CPFA rather than CA resulting in a closing of the door to CA's for public sector jobs. My preference was always to have one future qualification(CA) whilst allowing past CPFA people to use either CA or CPFA as they wanted.

Oh, and bigger is not always better.

Posted by: Mike Leyland, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Re: Confusion

I find the comment that the merger would have confused non-members somewhat vexing. Universities have managed to award more than one type of qualification for years without causing any apparent confusion.

Posted by: Mark Corfield, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Dream

Perhaps now the ICAEW will stop wasting members' funds on side shows, take a more logical course and pursue the most obvious requirement for a merged profession, namely a partnership with ICAS.

This will require hitherto unknown realism, humilty and a complete absense of grand-standing. Why not locate the the HQ in Edinbugh?

We are all permitted to dream sometimes!

Posted by: John Watkins, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Cost

I wonder how much our Institutes have spent now on failed mergers? What proportion of our membership fees have now effectively been spent without achieving any tangible benefit?

Posted by: Harry Kemp, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Shameful waste of time and money

This so called merger between the CIPFA and ICAEW was a non starter from inception. The pair would never make good bedfellows in a milion years.

ICAEW was purely spurred on by the threat from the rapid growth of ACCA both at home and on the global front.

No future merger plan can ever be complete without the major bodies taking part, and ACCA is a major force to reckon with, like it or not, and can teach ICAEW something about global presence in any future merger plans. ICAEW needs ACCA not the other way round.

Wake up to the new realities. Forget snobbery and get REAL for the sake of a common voice for the profession.

Posted by: Michael Hall, 25 Oct 2005 | 00:00

After the CIPFA vote

The model adopted by ICAEW to consolidate the accountancy profession could not, in SPA's opinion, succeed in the long term - even if successful with CIPFA - as other major Institutes would not be prepared to submerge their identities in this way.

SPA encouraged ICAEW to bring Institutes together under an umbrella body - revamping the CCAB and perhaps calling it 'The Federation of Professional Accountancy Institutes' (FPAI); ICAS and others echo this proposal which merits serious consideration.

Domestically ICAEW will need to ensure the good ship 'Moorgate Place' is in seaworthy condition - overhauling costs, structure and member communications - so that all aboard are informed and committed to the future chosen direction.

Godspeed !

Peter Mithell

Chairman, SPA

Posted by: Peter Mitchell, 26 Oct 2005 | 00:00

ICAEW committee should resign

The ICAEW committee have clearly spent a huge amount of time and resources in campaigning for an issue that its members rejected.

More significantly, the ICAEW 'noise' around a unilateral change of name to position itself as THE Insitute of Chartered Accountants - and antagonising the Scottish Institute among others has clearly lost the committee members any goodwill among their peers.

As Chartered Accountants are meant to be commercial leaders in business, perhaps the committee should take the right commercial decision and resign.

Posted by: Rahul Handa, 26 Oct 2005 | 00:00

ICAEW-CIPFA MERGER

Once again the ICAEW have demonstrated a complete lack of comprehension that we Chartered Accountants do not want to merge with anyone. How many more times do we have to have our Membership Fees spent on these mergers when history keeps telling our Council "NO".

My F.C.A qualification is unique and precious to me and is not to be banded about for dilution or compromise. This pre-occupation for "one voice" is misleading as each accountancy body offers a different set of skills and knowledge to the business community. There is no more logic in trying to speak as "one voice" for all Accountants than there is for trying to do the same for all farmers, whose range and diversity of operations call for different solutions to different problems.

The ICAEW executive need to publicy state how much this latest exercise has cost the Members of our Institute and apologise for yet again spending money without obtaining any tangible benefit.

Get on with supporting us and not trying to change us.Furthermore would you NEVER again put us through this process. We will never want this, ever.

Posted by: Alan Cook, 26 Oct 2005 | 00:00

What next?

Is ICAEW going to be acquired (not to merge) by say ACCA or ICAS or what; where is this going to stop.

Posted by: Rilwan Badiru, 26 Oct 2005 | 00:00

Stuck-up

i suppose the merger stopped because of perceived snobbery of some ICAEW members :) this was clearly a good news for ACCA. Absolutely hilarious that there are existense of more than 6 professional accountancy bodies in the UK.

Posted by: Vforvendetta, 22 Nov 2009 | 00:00

What A Shame

I would have to agree with you 'Vforvendetta', sounds like stuck-up snobbery by some of the ICAEW members.

At the end of the day you still can?t hide the facts that this was an extremely narrow decision with the majority of members for both institutes in favour of the merger.

* 63.3% of ICAEW members voted in favour,

* 65.7% favour of this merger

Although the minority may have got their decision (for now) the greater proportion obviously knew there was a lot that could be gained from such a merger of institutes. I understand there will be issues to overcome with the amalgamation of the various panels and boards but that it what change is all about. It is slightly ironic that we pride ourselves knowing the issues of ?change? yet we can?t comprehend it when it involves us. Although Accountancy is an evolving profession the comments below have yet again shown that people don?t like change for whatever situation.

At the end of the day ICAEW and CIPFA aren?t so different, although both may take a different stance of specialism (private sector and/or public sector) there are many areas of overlap and duplication that could easily be stripped down and harmonised. A merger of these two CCAB institutes that both pride themselves being experts in their field would only strengthen our prestige, depth of knowledge and resources available to us.

Additionally I would like to make a point of the apparent ignorance and snobbery with some ICAEW members that feel their status would be in some way diluted. CIPFA this year are celebrating their 125th Year Anniversary, have just been named Accountancy Body of the year (PQ) and requiring 1st class or 2.1 graduates in the majority of trainee roles. ICAEW on the other hand are not a shadow of their former selves in terms of sternness with regards to their current exams, which you will see with the large proportion of pass rates now in excess 80%. I hope these jumps in pass rates in recent times are not a way so membership can keep up with the massive growth of ACCA membership that has now exceeded ICAEW. The facts tell us that this gap cannot be bridged any time soon given the much greater proportion of ACCA students, and so lenient marking to ensure higher pass rates is in effect diluting this so called elitist ICAEW status.

I find having 6 CCAB institutes in the UK quite ridiculous and the stubbornness of some ICAEW to merge specialism, resources and membership quite perplexing.

At the end of the day ICAEW need CIPFA as much as CIPFA need them.

Posted by: Mystic, 28 Feb 2010 | 00:00