Some senior members of CPA Australia’s NSW division want a comprehensive review of the national organisation that could lead to the removal of chief executive Alex Malley.
But voluntary members of the NSW council, which is elected by members. are reluctant to speak publicly because they fear recriminations from the headquarters in Melbourne.
A CPA member with knowledge of the council said views on Mr Malley were “mixed” and some councillors were reluctant to criticise him because of the conservative nature of the profession and a reluctance to create trouble.
…”I don’t think there isn’t any part of the membership that doesn’t feel there needs to be a review,” the member said. “A number of people are pushing from the inside. I would like to think that sense would prevail.”
The AFR socked it CPA yesterday:
Imagine an ASX listed company replacing direct board elections with an “owners’ council” where shareholders elect representatives who then in turn elect half the members of this council, while the board appoints the other half.
Then that “representative” council votes on the membership of the board, from a slate of candidates that reflects significant input from a sub-committee of that same board. Is there any reasonable chance this would be considered acceptably democratic?
I think not. Indeed, it sounds to me more like the concept of “democracy” practiced in many post-communist and communist-controlled countries.
There is simply no scope for members to unite to “overthrow” directors. They simply don’t have the voting power to do so, let alone be considered as a candidate.
Followed by:
And today at The Australian:
A marathon emergency board meeting held by embattled accountancy organisation CPA Australia last night showed no sign of resolving the crisis surrounding its highly paid chief executive, Alex Malley.
The CPA board, sapped by a wave of resignations over the past fortnight, was scheduled to meet yesterday in Melbourne for six hours amid speculation another director planned to resign or Mr Malley might be convinced to quit. By 6pm — two hours after the meeting was due to end — there was no word from inside CPA’s Southbank bunker.
Let me offer the board some free media advice. The AFR and now other papers smell blood in the water. They will have a list of stories ready to go that literally endless. The campaign to oust Malley will not stop.
The analogy you need to understand your situation is that of a sitting prime minister that is under attack from a ruthless suitor that wants his job. He hides in the shadows destabilising the organisation with leaks. The media laps up and amplifies the scandal, so much so that the organisation begins to shed its solidarity. The leaks intensify, the media frenzy grows, the organisation begins to fall apart.
No matter how it started, once the process reaches its crescendo it will not stop until the prime minister is gone. The media does not just report on reality, sometimes it creates it.
So, the CPA faces a choice. To let the organisation sink with its CEO or let him go. He need not be sacked. He can retire with with honours. But go he must to satisfy the ravening media beast on its doorstep.
Honestly, there appears plenty of reason for it but at this stage that is almost irrelevant. Malley used the media to build his empire. Now it has been used to tear it down.
It happens, and is now all that matters.
