ACCA members have a good reason to be concerned about the lack of library, increase in subscription, poor magazine, unaccountable leadership, lack of support, waste of resources, ballot rigging and other practices at the Association. But relatively few vote. May be they feel that a self-appointed elite has hijacked the Association and they can nothing about it.

For the May 2002 council elections only 7307 (just over 8%) of the membership voted. The ACCA President cast 751 votes. With each ballot paper having an opportunity to cast 11 votes, the president could have cast 8,261 votes.

At the AGM held on 9 May 2002, ACCA president did not explain who received the benefit of his votes. The number of delegated proxy votes cast by other officeholder is not known. Through these delegated proxy votes, the ACCA leadership “appoints” council. The 16 candidates contesting the 11 seats, failed to put forward a single proposal for reform between them. Not surprisingly, people could not be bothered to vote at all.

With 5,017 (5.77% of the membership) votes, Samuel Wong (Hong Kong) topped the vote whilst Cetin Suleyman came 11th  with 2,378 votes (2.73% of the membership).  With such support, ACCA council has no mandate to govern.

The most powerful person at the Association is its chief executive. But s/he is not elected by anyone. Most of the council members are too afraid to say anything. They just sit like nodding donkeys at the AGM. Whatever the President says they support. All recent reforms at the Association have been instigated by outsiders. The ultimate losers are the ACCA members. They have got a professional body that is profligate, ineffective and carries no influence in the UK or elsewhere.