A decent number of members did vote – 56,326 – but with more than 70,000
members choosing not to bother, this apathetic majority made the task all but
impossible. It would have taken just 0.8% of non-voters to back the proposal for
it to be carried.
In hindsight, the ICAEW and CIPFA, whose members again voted emphatically for
merger, made two crucial tactical mistakes. The first was to be unclear at the
outset about how the two qualifications would be kept distinct. It was quickly
corrected but the damage was done.
Secondly, they went public early with their preferred name – the Institute of
Chartered Accountants. This was no sideshow. It created a negative
merger-related story that ran and ran across the world.
The irony now, of course, is that the name debate is dead.
Nevertheless, this outcome does the profession no favours. With six principal
institutes, and countless others, it remains a fragmented profession. Its voice
is weaker for it.
Tradition dictates the profession waits a decade before pursuing another
merger. But the narrow margin means we might not have to wait that long. Let’s
hope that’s the case.
Engineering and technology executives have voiced concerns over the government’s industrial strategy and the need to fill the R&D funding and long-term investment gap in a post-Brexit Britain
This year’s Finance Act is 649 pages, the second longest recorded, and highlights the increasing complexity for taxpayers of an ever expanding tax code
The International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) and the CIPFA have launched an introductory guide for leaders on integrated thinking and reporting
Accountancy Age is delighted to reveal the shortlists for the 2016 British Accountancy Awards