I have already commented this morning upon the report from the BEIS committee on the future of auditing in the UK. There are two paragraphs I do, for personal reasons, wish to particularly highlight. They are these:
90. The Government cannot unilaterally change the international accounting standards, but it can seek to tighten the law. Stopping imprudent distributions makes companies more resilient and encourages management to think longer term and tackle problems earlier. The principle of prudence should be made explicit in the law and its interpretation.
91. The Government and the FRC should lead international efforts to improve accounting standards. If the Government wants to achieve its ambitions of a Global Britain advancing UK influence and interests, then it should be prepared to spell out how it wants to lead international standards on key sectors such as accounting and audit.
I am now creating the Corporate Accountability Network. It would have been called the Accounting Standards Network if that had been possible, but under UK law it is not: the term ‘accounting standards' is regulated, and reserved for use by those who it is clear have failed us, badly.
it is not: the term ‘accounting standards' is regulated, and reserved for use by those who it is clear have failed us, badly.
The Corporate Accountability Network (CAN) will exist to challenge the accounting profession at its very core. It will seek to transform the way private sector companies, in particular, tell the world about their activities through the medium of their accounts.
As I have noted here of late, the way anyone sees the world very largely depends upon the stories that we tell. In turn, these stories depend upon both the perspective of the narrator and their intended audience. Nowhere is this more true than for private sector businesses. The stories they have to tell are delivered in their accounts. And current accounting rules require that the story be narrated by the company and only to the providers of capital to it. No other perspective does matter according to the current rules of accounting. As a result little information of use to anyone but shareholders is included in accounts at present. Today's BEIS report highlights all the failings that flow from that.
The CAN thinks that the public purpose of accountancy, and so accounts, needs to be restored. This means that it must be recognised the providers of capital to a company are not the only group who have an interest in the activities that a company undertakes. The other stakeholder groups who we think should be considered when preparing accounts are:
- Those people a company does, or might, trade with;
- Employees, whether present or retired, and those looking for a job;
- Regulators;
- Tax authorities;
- Civil society in all its forms.
The Corporate Accountability Network (CAN) wants to change the way we see the activities, contributions and costs of companies by changing the way they present their accounts to the world so that all those companies' stakeholders can understand what they are doing. It is important to note that in 1975 the UK Accounting Standards Steering Committee agreed with this logic. It was only from 2005 that the restriction in scope to the providers of capital alone was adopted.
To achieve its goals the CAN will promote four strands of work:
- A new conceptual framework for accounting that takes the needs of all stakeholders into account;
- Promoting new sample accounting standards, focussing at first on the reporting required by smaller businesses and the reporting required to meet employee needs;
- A campaign to require that all accounts be published in full on public record;
- The creation of accounting tools to assist adoption of these approaches before they become mandatory.
To increase its chance of success the CAN proposes to work with:
- The accountancy profession;
- Accounting firms;
- Universities;
- The business community;
- Trade unions and other employee organisations;
- Government agencies;
- As wide a range of civil society groups as possible.
If the CAN succeeds these outcomes will be achieved:
- Accountancy's public purpose will have been restored;
- The risk from trading with limited companies will have been reduced;
- Local economies will have more data to appraise risk, and so be stronger;
- Companies will, by being more accountable to their stakeholders, change their behaviour.
The result should be:
- Improved trading relationships for both customers and suppliers;
- Better employee relationships, and maybe fairer employment practices;
- Better regulatory compliance;
- An improved understanding of the contribution business makes by paying and collecting taxes;
- A much-improved understanding of the role of business in the community, to the benefit of business themselves as well as to the communities that host their activities.
If you want to support this work, please let me know. If no one lese will rise to the BEIS committee's challenge the Corporate Accountability Network will.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
A historic day for all those working to reassert prudence as the basis for the ‘true and fair view’ for accounts. The BEIS report demonstrates that the era of ‘accouting standards’ repressing Company Law has come to an end. The Corporate Accountability Network is a proposal whose time is now! Thank you Richard for all your work to reassert the Rule of Law over the unique constellation of conflicts of interest known as ‘accounting standards’. Alan MacDougall
Thanks Alan
Very good and about time.
Would you invite and add ShareSoc and the UK shareholders Association UKSA as they are for good governance and have a large membership and have a mix of influence on MPs and a bit of the regulators for 30 years and just need the guidance of what to push. Maybe a talk to 40 of their members would do it.
I’m open….
Happy to do
Done
Thanks
Count me in and happy to help in any way I can. It’s about time we got back to some rational view of who accounts and audits are for.
I will mail you
Excellent idea. What about including directors of progressive corporates who recognise the need to work with a wider range of stakeholders on a wider set of accountabilities but see themselves held hostage by shareholders and the City. Similarly progressive fund managers.
Reporting and auditing on a wider set of issues to different stakeholders is yet another reason to break this role away from the current audit firms.
Agreed
And we will be approaching businesses…..
Good luck with that – it’s just what this area of operations needs and seems to cover the basics.