RegulationCorporate GovernanceSearch for a scapegoat

Search for a scapegoat

Now that lawyers dominate tribunals, has justice changed?

It is perhaps time for our profession to take stock of the governance that
surrounds us.

Not that many years ago, our professional bodies had total responsibility for
entry criteria, examination curricula, members’ conduct, accounting and auditing
standards, ethical standards and discipline. They took this responsibility
seriously and, for the most part, it was effective.

By pointing fingers at dirty deeds done at Maxwell, Barlow Clowes, BCCI, de
Lorean and Barings, to mention but a few, our ruling bodies’ own
responsibilities were gradually, yet inexorably, eroded and subsumed within the
workings of an expanding, faceless standard setting and regulatory machine
supported by consumer-oriented statutes of one sort or another.

The result is that the accountants’ true function as the objective recorder
of market-driven transactions has now lost its neutrality and deeply influences
­ both fiscally and perceptionally ­ the activities it is supposed to reflect.

Preference shares being reclassified as debt in a hitherto healthy balance
sheet, with the consequential treatment of dividends as (tax unrelieved)
interest, is but one of a host of examples of accounting being hijacked by
unrecognisable and incomprehensible techno-speak that dissembles every number of
genuine interest to users.

Standards and ethics are set by a majority of those with no practical
experience of what is involved. This is not to say they are not knowledgeable,
professional, independent and well meaning. It’s just that they don’t seem to
comprehend exactly what each of their pronouncements means in practice.

The profession’s disciplinary process has suffered a comparable fate: conduct
of auditors under scrutiny should be judged by those who have a proper
understanding of what is required of them; in other words, other auditors.

Yet vague concepts of ‘transparency’ and ‘public interest’ have led to
lawyer-dominated tribunals. In a recent controversial case, the only auditor on
the tribunal issued a dissenting finding. Says it all.

Michael Snyder is senior partner at Kingston Smith

Related Articles

Corporate governance: staying ahead in accountancy

Corporate Governance Corporate governance: staying ahead in accountancy

3m Alia Shoaib, Reporter
One in 20 audit firms quit as market evolves

Audit One in 20 audit firms quit as market evolves

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
Colin: #EURef bankers a problem

Business Regulation Colin: #EURef bankers a problem

1y Taking Stock
PwC and Deloitte chiefs sign Remain letter

Business Regulation PwC and Deloitte chiefs sign Remain letter

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
Leader: Audit competition drives change, not necessarily quality

Accounting Firms Leader: Audit competition drives change, not necessarily quality

1y Kevin Reed, Writer
EU audit reform to open up £10bn market for firms

Accounting Firms EU audit reform to open up £10bn market for firms

1y Richard Crump, Writer
Best Practice: Saffery Champness managing partner Rob Elliott

Accounting Firms Best Practice: Saffery Champness managing partner Rob Elliott

2y Calum Fuller, Reporter
Standard Life Investments opposes EY's appointment as Shell auditors at AGM

Accounting Firms Standard Life Investments opposes EY's appointment as Shell auditors at AGM

2y Richard Crump, Writer