So far so good. Thanks to Ms Mary Harney's intervention, and persistence, the hearing into possible professional misconduct of some of the members of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland (ICAI), starting tomorrow, will have a representative of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. While that representative will only have observer status, he/she can report back to the Minister who, in turn, can introduce regulatory legislation, if necessary. That is a welcome move towards greater transparency which is badly needed. Tomorrow's meeting will be in sharp contrast to previous ICAI disciplinary meetings; these were held in secret and the findings were never published. However, ICAI's foot-dragging response to Ms Harney's initial request to have an observer present at the meetings has not enhanced the standing of the institute. Some accountants felt there were serious legal difficulties acceding to the Department's requests, arguing that the presence of a third party at the proceedings would amount to publishing the proceedings, and any charge laid against the ICAI members involved. It was only when Ms Harney amended section 192 (2) of the Companies Act 1990 that the ICAI acceded to the request. The institute had no option. Under the amended section, the accountants were forced to allow the presence of an observer. ICAI's main rival, the Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), criticised Ms Harney for introducing the amendment without having consulted the main professional bodies (the Chartered Public Accountants did likewise). But the ACCA, unlike the ICAI, felt there was no need for a change as its disciplinary meetings were totally transparent. This is what ACCA's international president, Mr David Leonard, told the 315 graduates last week. "We were the first accountancy body and we remain the only accountancy body to hold open disciplinary proceedings. The practice of open hearings is in place. Nothing is held in camera and media are welcome to attend. An independent chairman is employed, in most cases a lawyer. It is standard for 25 per cent of committee members to be from outside the ranks of ACCA and indeed the profession".

How does ICAI's more transparent approach now compare with ACCA's? There is a good mix of personnel on the three-man committee of the inquiry, so it has the potential to carry out a thorough look at the complaints. The committee comprises Mr Justice Blayney, Mr Brian Duncan and Mr Paddy Shortall. Mr Blayney, the inquiry's chairman is a former Irish rugby international and became a Supreme Court judge in October 1992. Before being appointed to the High Court, in the early 1980s, he was a legal adviser to the original Pro-Life Amendment Campaign (PLAC). Mr Brian Duncan, is a fellow of the Institute of Actuaries, a former Irish Life director and former VHI chief executive. Mr Paddy Shortall, is a chartered accountant and insolvency expert. As liquidator of Merchant Banking he made a report to the High Court alleging breaches of company law and the court ordered him to send the report to the DPP. However, no action was taken which led to Mr Shortall complaining about the inactivity in a TV programme. The committee was set up on foot of the McCracken Tribunal of Inquiry (Dunnes Payments). The ICAI members mentioned in the report included former Taoiseach, Mr Charles Haughey; Dunnes Stores trustee, Mr Noel Fox; and Dublin accountancy firm, Oliver Freaney.

The ICAI while moving in the right direction particularly as the findings of the inquiry will be published, still appears to have blinkered vision. Surprisingly, the press is to be excluded from the hearings. That begs the question; what is the ICAI afraid of?

The ability of the accountants to regulate their own affairs will be judged by how they handle the complaints. The inquiry has its own in-built restrictions; it has no subpoena powers, so it cannot force people to attend, and cannot discover documents. Nevertheless, it will be in the accountants' own interests to ensure that the findings are clear and unambiguous. Failure, or a half-hearted finding, could lead to the setting up of a statutory body to oversee the workings of the accountancy bodies.