Letter: Auditors were not writing a dream ticket, just a first draft
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.JEREMY WARNER's item 'Cadbury's Mouthful' (Business, 9 January) is not only factually incorrect but does a disservice to an important aspect of the governance debate.
He refers to 'an outpouring' of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance, and to the recommendations contained in it as 'of the Cadbury Committee'. They are draft proposals issued by the Working Group on Internal Control whose membership is drawn from the accountancy profession and representatives of the preparers of accounts.
On the first page of the draft guidance this Committee recommended that: 'The accountancy profession, in conjunction with representatives of preparers of accounts, should take the lead in: a) developing a set of criteria for assessing effectiveness; b) developing guidance for companies on the form in which directors should report.' The debate is over how best to achieve those aims. Mr Warner would also have seen that the Working Group included practising finance directors, so it was not drawn up by auditors writing 'a dream ticket'.
The unforgivable error, given that Mr Warner knew that the document was a draft, is his allegation that companies are going to be made to implement it - 'public companies are often forced to comply with some pretty daft regulations and directives but this . . . really does take the biscuit.' The Working Group has opened up the debate, which will be between the preparers and users of accounts. There will be nothing to comply with until the debate has reached a conclusion.
Finally, I must formally make the point that I have nothing to apologise to anyone for, as this letter will have made clear. I have not had discussions with finance directors in private, as Mr Warner alleges.
Adrian Cadbury
Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance
The London Stock Exchange
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments