ACCA'S SHAM CALL FOR TRANSPARENCY
ACCA has long operated a double standard. Its public relations driven blurb
makes references to high ideals, but the practice is something else.
The latest evidence is provided by the words of ACCA President, Jonathan
Mr. Beckerlegge calls for
more transparency, but can't seem to connect this to ACCA's own practices.
Here are some examples of what it does not do:
- Provide a list showing the
number of members and students in each country.
- Ensure that leadership is
elected by ordinary members
- Give members access to council
- Ensure that the principle
of one-person-one-vote applies to ACCA. Officeholders continue to cast hundreds
of votes to negate the choices made by individual members.
- Explain which election candidiate
has received the benefit of the proxy votes cast by officeholders
- Explain why students are
milked for millions every year.
- Explain why everything is
centralized in the London H.Q. This includes district societies and other
- Why ACCA failed to publish
the results of its 1998 ethnic monitoring survey.
- Explain why the council
election statements written by candidates are subsequently unilaterally changed
by the management.
- Why members are not allowed
to vote on chief executive's and directors' remuneration.
- Why the annual accounts
have been silent on lawsuits involving non-UK accountancy bodies.
Of course, if ACCA's leadership had any sincerity about its public
utterances, it would put its own house in order first. It always opposes change.
It opposed the call for open council meetings, but subsequently had to embrace
the idea (not necessarily the practice in full). It has no strategy for openness
and democracy. The strategy is how to expand and make money in developing
countries, something which harms the developing countries by not enabling
them to develop their local infrastructure.
ACCA leadership is not known to be reflective. The council is ineffective
and is unable to check the power of management. The unelected leadership
is weak. The magazine carefully censors out all dissenting comments. Can anyone
really take ACCA's call for transparency seriously?