ACCA CONDEMNED IN UK PARLIAMENT
The following motion of 'no confidence' in ACCA has been tabled
by a group of MPs in the British House of Commons. It highlights the institutionalised
corruption at ACCA. The points in the motion highlights that
One might have thought that the Association would display better standards
of accountability, democracy and openness. But it lags behind. The officials
are more concerned with thier petty games rather than with the long term
standing of the Association.
ACCA uses a system of voting which is outlawed for trade unions
ACCA presidents continue to cast 20-25% of all votes thus "appointing"
The ACCA officials do not use the 'proxy form' approved by members and
contained in the official rulebook. Instead, they pre-print the name of
the President on the forms.
ACCA President failed to answer any questions put to him at the AGM.
The minutes of the AGM meetings (as produced in the official magazine)
are usually incorrect. The Chief Executive carefully removes all questions
50% of the ACCA's UK membership is non-white. Yet there has never been
a non-white officeholder. Recently, after complaints of racial discrimination
by ACCA members, the Commission for Racial Equality forced ACCA to conduct
an ethnicity survey. The form was sent to UK members without any covering
letter. ACCA students have been excluded from the survey.
ACCA is ultra secretive. It is the only major UK -based accountancy body
that does not admit its members to its Council meetings. What do they do
behind closed doors that they don't want the members to know?
In 1997, after making lewd public comments (with the full approval of fellow
Council members), ACCA (to save face) was eventually persuaded to discipline
its Vice-President Jim Waits. To this day, the official magazine has failed
to make any disclosures.
ACCA chief executive Anthea Rose has sought to silence reformers and members
of Parliament by using unprofessional tactics. For example she sought to
exert pressure on the employers of Professor Prem Sikka. She also
threatened Austin Mitchell, a member of House of Commons.
ACCA officeholders continue to take their spouses and mistresses to overseas
trips without making any disclosures of the costs. Such disclosures are
required by FRS8 on Related Party Disclosures. ACCA chief execuive is happy
enough to reveal the information to the Department of Trade & Industry
and the Privy Council but does not want members to see it. Of course, members
always come last.
FULL TEXT OF EARLY DAY MOTION 685 IS AS FOLLOWS:
That this House condemns the Association of Chartered Certified
Accountants for its failure to function in an open, democratic and
accountable manner by not having any of its officeholders directly
elected by its members, by using a balloting system which has been outlawed
for trade unions, for permitting its President to cast 20 to 25 per
cent. of all votes thus effectively appointing Council members, by
the deliberate failure of its President to answer questions at the 1999
AGM, by removing reformers from Council and failing to explain the reasons
to the AGM, for failure to have any non-white person as an officeholder
even though 50 per cent. of its UK membership is non-white, by its
failure to admit the public to its Council meetings even though it acts
as a regulator under the Companies Act 1989 and the Insolvency Act
1986, by the failure to publicise the outcome of a disciplinary hearing
against its Vice-President in its own in-house magazine, by threatening
and silencing reformers and pressurising their employers and by legal
threats, and for its failure to disclose the £50,000 per annum spent
by its officeholders on taking friends, spouses and partners on world travels,
even though the Financial Reporting Standard 8 requires this should be
disclosed; and therefore considers that an ACCA which takes so little
account of the public interest is unfit to be a regulatory body and urges
the Government to suspend its regulatory powers and launch an independent
inquiry into its affairs.