07-22-2009, 05:51 AM
Dear,
Interesting posts and informative material from Uzair.
The confusion was started by ICAEW in fact. It never declared any other streamline for training contracts in Pak except for ICAP members. Had it been the case the people debating here must have pointed out far before since this issue was vigorously discussed. The webpages of ICAEW which now talk about the training opportunities in Pakistan for all students (excluding ICAP members) didn't even on-air this info on their website ever before. I don't say Uzair is not right but am telling you my experience of visiting ICAEW's website which I had been doing frequently, specially in the days when we got authorization of our firm.I am currently posting from my blackberry. I will confirm from my record and let you know if there had been any clarification from ICAEW regarding which categories of students we could intake. I doubt such clarification was sought and given but at the moment I am not confirmed what was the exact outcome.
It's really a question about the status of authorization of our firms if ICAP members are no more required to undergo such training.
As far as differentiating the qualifications with reference to origin, route or exemption mode etc is concerned the fingers raised on Pakistan are simply hilarious and show the affected sentiments about homeland. When 2 years training was a condition then these people used to say that end of times has come, no improvement is possible at all and Pakistan has become worst place for professionals.ICAP was criticised for changing its policies over the time without giving an ear to the clarification that this is a changing world.However, now when training condition has been removed this mentality didn't comment on ICAEW who is non-pak body and has changed their decision in a short while (as it is a changing world), but found new way to portray their mindset against Pakistan and ICAP. I suggest them to take an ACCA from Pak to UK and let him win the quest of finding a job or even training contract in competition with British and with UK qualified ACCAs. Reasons are enormous.I don't discuss rare cases!
Further, if some one will visit ICAEW's website, he/she will see that certain designations are given exemptions for ICAEW's qualification. However, there is a condition that such exemption is not available to such other designation-holders who carry it without qualifying its exams as a result of mutual recognitions with other bodies in the world that are not accepted by ICAEW for exemption or equivalence.
So dears, such treatments are also prevelant all over the globe and are not out of the world at all. Is there a need to quote further examples?
I think no body should abstain others from doing CA after ACCA or CIMA be it from ICAEW or ICAP or whatever. Every qualified person has the wisdom to take such decisions. If some body does not find his-self upto it, it's his personal issue. Every one knows why Pakistan, ICAP, (even ICAEW) and circumstances are criticised by people sitting out. I wonder why ICAI (of Ireland) is not being criticised. The qualification of some guys does not make them to fly back even they are supposed to have qualified from masters' land. They wonder why master slave rule does not apply in their case. The experiences prove that there is confusion and frustration which has been time and again expressed on the forum. Example can be quoted using their own words posted here.
In fact this is not a master slave issue. There could be so many reasons which require lots of time to discuss which I know will be wasted if invested.
By the way if some ACCA (may be affiliate or member presently) will make telephonic calls to the partners of CA firms located in Pakistan, (more specifically Islamabad that is probably the localized residential place of such ACCA), to inquire about the availbility of training arrangements for ICAEW's CA on the basis of ACCA designation, what would it mean for? This is a simple question!!! No offense should be taken.
Regards,
KAMRAN.
Interesting posts and informative material from Uzair.
The confusion was started by ICAEW in fact. It never declared any other streamline for training contracts in Pak except for ICAP members. Had it been the case the people debating here must have pointed out far before since this issue was vigorously discussed. The webpages of ICAEW which now talk about the training opportunities in Pakistan for all students (excluding ICAP members) didn't even on-air this info on their website ever before. I don't say Uzair is not right but am telling you my experience of visiting ICAEW's website which I had been doing frequently, specially in the days when we got authorization of our firm.I am currently posting from my blackberry. I will confirm from my record and let you know if there had been any clarification from ICAEW regarding which categories of students we could intake. I doubt such clarification was sought and given but at the moment I am not confirmed what was the exact outcome.
It's really a question about the status of authorization of our firms if ICAP members are no more required to undergo such training.
As far as differentiating the qualifications with reference to origin, route or exemption mode etc is concerned the fingers raised on Pakistan are simply hilarious and show the affected sentiments about homeland. When 2 years training was a condition then these people used to say that end of times has come, no improvement is possible at all and Pakistan has become worst place for professionals.ICAP was criticised for changing its policies over the time without giving an ear to the clarification that this is a changing world.However, now when training condition has been removed this mentality didn't comment on ICAEW who is non-pak body and has changed their decision in a short while (as it is a changing world), but found new way to portray their mindset against Pakistan and ICAP. I suggest them to take an ACCA from Pak to UK and let him win the quest of finding a job or even training contract in competition with British and with UK qualified ACCAs. Reasons are enormous.I don't discuss rare cases!
Further, if some one will visit ICAEW's website, he/she will see that certain designations are given exemptions for ICAEW's qualification. However, there is a condition that such exemption is not available to such other designation-holders who carry it without qualifying its exams as a result of mutual recognitions with other bodies in the world that are not accepted by ICAEW for exemption or equivalence.
So dears, such treatments are also prevelant all over the globe and are not out of the world at all. Is there a need to quote further examples?
I think no body should abstain others from doing CA after ACCA or CIMA be it from ICAEW or ICAP or whatever. Every qualified person has the wisdom to take such decisions. If some body does not find his-self upto it, it's his personal issue. Every one knows why Pakistan, ICAP, (even ICAEW) and circumstances are criticised by people sitting out. I wonder why ICAI (of Ireland) is not being criticised. The qualification of some guys does not make them to fly back even they are supposed to have qualified from masters' land. They wonder why master slave rule does not apply in their case. The experiences prove that there is confusion and frustration which has been time and again expressed on the forum. Example can be quoted using their own words posted here.
In fact this is not a master slave issue. There could be so many reasons which require lots of time to discuss which I know will be wasted if invested.
By the way if some ACCA (may be affiliate or member presently) will make telephonic calls to the partners of CA firms located in Pakistan, (more specifically Islamabad that is probably the localized residential place of such ACCA), to inquire about the availbility of training arrangements for ICAEW's CA on the basis of ACCA designation, what would it mean for? This is a simple question!!! No offense should be taken.
Regards,
KAMRAN.