RegulationAccounting StandardsICAS opposes merged institute name in parliament

ICAS opposes merged institute name in parliament

Opposition to proposed name for merged institute grows, as motions are tabled north and south of the border in Parliament

With only two weeks to go until a crucial vote in the ICAEW/CIPFA merger,
opposition to the body’s potential new name is hotting up north of the border,
with motions tabled at Westminster and Holyrood by high-ranking members of the
Scottish institute.

In a statement, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland announced
that motions had been tabled at Westminster and the Scottish Parliament,
opposing plans by the ICAEW and CIPFA to change their name to ‘The Institute of
Chartered Accountants’. This name is rumoured to be the front runner if the
consolidation vote is successful on Tuesday, 25 October.

The move comes after the first minister of Scotland, Jack McConnell, backed
ICAS and announced his intention to officially object to the Privy Council about
the proposal.

The deputy leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats and ICAS member, Michael
Moore MP, also tabled an early day motion at Westminster, calling for the ICAEW
and CIPFA to ‘maintain the unbroken convention that chartered accountancy
institutes carry a geographical designation in their name’, the statement read.

Moore said: ‘The change of name should not be approved. There are many ”
institutes of chartered accountants” around the world. It would be quite wrong
to allow one body to give the impression that there is only one, or that they
were the first.’

Brian Monteith MSP, Conservative member for mid-Scotland and Fife, and
convener of Holyrood’s audit committee, has also tabled a motion confident in
the fact that he will attract cross-party support.

He said: ‘This proposal is against the interests of ICAS and similar bodies
across the globe. The Privy Council should not approve a Royal Charter change
that would assert a false sense of superiority to the new body.’

ICAS President, Mike Hathorn, welcomed the support: ‘This backing at Holyrood
and Westminster is an important endorsement for our arguments against this
proposal. We continue our ongoing discussions with both the ICAEW and CIPFA to
find alternatives to this increasingly unpopular choice of name.’

Related Articles

Demystifying GDPR for accountants

Accounting Standards Demystifying GDPR for accountants

1w Ellen Temperton, Lewis Silkin
EY fined £1.8m over Tech Data audit

Accounting Standards EY fined £1.8m over Tech Data audit

2m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
The great professional services shake-up

Accounting Standards The great professional services shake-up

3m Fergus Payne, Lewis Silkin
What do clients actually want from an accountant?

Accounting Standards What do clients actually want from an accountant?

4m Emma Smith, Managing Editor
Accountants shouldn’t neglect hybrid mismatch anti-avoidance rules

Accounting Standards Accountants shouldn’t neglect hybrid mismatch anti-avoidance rules

4m Alison Conley
Membership of the accountancy profession on the rise

Accounting Standards Membership of the accountancy profession on the rise

5m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
The real price of mates' rates in the provision of professional services

Accounting Standards The real price of mates' rates in the provision of professional services

5m DAC Beachcroft
IASB overhauls insurance accounting with issuance of IFRS 17

Accounting Standards IASB overhauls insurance accounting with issuance of IFRS 17

7m Alia Shoaib, Reporter