Search for

A fitting tribute

8 Apr 08

I wasn’t lucky enough to work with Aileen Beattie, former Technical Director at ICAS, but her legacy of integrity, intelligence and decency will not be forgotten by the many friends she left here at ICAS and throughout the profession

One way of remembering Aileen is the annual lecture in her name which we hold in London. It’s a high profile event and we have been grateful that, since the lecture began last year, we have had two leading figures in business to deliver the talk – our own Sir Robert Smith gave the inaugural lecture and this year saw the contribution of John Griffith-Jones, Joint Chairman of KPMG Europe LLP.

What John said has really struck home. It featured prominently in the media and judging by the question and answer session that followed his talk at the Scotland Office, will gather momentum throughout the profession. Perhaps Andrew Hill in the Lombard column of the FT summed up the core message of the speech best – ‘Shed the boilerplate and let audit kitemarks take off’, said the headline. Basically, John wants an audit report that amounts to one line which basically says - “these accounts are about right unless management has deliberately conspired to falsify them.”

The kitemark audit report would arguably achieve the following:

  • Reinforce the fact that an audit report is a professional opinion, arrived at by using judgement
  • Encourage auditors to resist adding ‘boilerplate’ clauses to audit reports

At the moment we are some way from achieving this nirvana, but the aim of the Aileen Beattie Lecture is to encourage some creative thinking about the profession. John has certainly provided that.

I’m sure Aileen would have approved.

 

Have your say





Your comments:


Ian Doig

Friday December 12, 2008, 23:52

I had the priviledge of working with Aileen on a number of joint ICAS/CIPFA projects when I was the Director of CIPFA in Scotland. Aileen was a credit to the whole accountancy profession & to ICAS in particular. It is very appropriate that ICAS is honouring Aileen's name by linking it with an annual lecture &/or a piece of innovative research in her name.

The recent financial services meltdown is a suitable subject . It gives a new perspective to the need to re-define the responsibility of auditors to act as watchdogs & to fulfil a fiduciary duty towards shareholders & investors, in return for their audit fees.

In the case of many banks & building societies, there was absolutely no 'watchdog warning to investors from their auditors that problems were looming. Shareholders & investors (the majority of whom are laymen in accountancy) rely on the auditor's independent & professional judgement for robust assurance that all is well with the company, that the accounts give 'a true & fair view' &, in particular, that the company is not heading for the rocks.

Surely executive directors of banks & building societies must have been reporting fictitious (or at least grossly inflated) profits in the past. The banks & building societies compounded the error by basing generous remuneratiion for senior executives on, with hindsight, creative accounting & very dubious financial reports & assumptions that turned out to be erroneous & based on wishful thinking, rather than based on prudence & robust evidence based on hard facts.

The financial services meltdown has been a very shabby business, which has damaged the reputation of the entire accountancy profession. It will also put even greater tension on the expectation gap between shareholders & investors on the one hand & the 'independent' auditor of the company on the other hand.

I do hope that ICAS (& the other CCAB bodies?) can provide professional leadership & innovation to establish the principles for a much tougher & compulsory corporate governance code, that both firms & auditors would be required by law to comply with. A concommitant requirement would be a set of heavy penalties for non compliance, including the ultimate deterent of expulsion from ICAS & the other CCAB bodies

Otherwise, why should shareholders & investors pay for an expensive audit, & indeed for the services of well remunerated non-executive directors, if the watchdogs do not bark when problems are looming & the firm is becoming at risk?

Another undesirable outcome is that audit firms will undoubtedly react by seeking to limit their liability, in case they are sued. Auditors are worried - & they are right to be worried!


Tags:

blog
Jobs for CAs (link opens in new window)Advertisement