ACCA leadership is used to silencing dissenters. Just before the May 1999, an 'inner' elite got together to depose the President elect because they feared that he might democratize the Association and scrutinize the chief executive's control. But the 'inner' elite failed to give Ray Gardiner any chance of speaking in his self-defence. The official magazine has not carried even  one word from him. Why?

The official statement in the June issue of the in-house magazine accused Ray Gardiner of making misleading statements and almost 'perjury'. When Austin Mitchell MP asked why in the light of the allegations against him, Ray Gardiner is not being disciplined, ACCA President John Brockwell replied (no doubt after careful discussions with chief executive), "ACCA's Council gave careful consideration to the course of action it should take with respect to Ray Gardiner, including the possibility of disciplinary action being brought against him. It decided that disciplinary action was not appropriate"(letter dated 5 July 1999). Of course, ACCA did not want to discipline Ray Gardiner because it fears that on a public platform and in front of the press Gardiner might discuss the real reasons for the coup against him.

But ACCA cannot have it both ways. It can't pretend to be a professional body and then not discipline its senior people for making allegedly misleading sworn statements. This point has not been lost on the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). Under pressure, ACCA President John Brockwell has now written to Austin Mitchell (letter dated, 26 July 1999) to explain that the Association is looking at the possibility of disciplining Gardiner. However,  the seekers of  'truth' should not hold their breath. What the leadership promises and what it does are not always the same. The bets are that ACCA leadership wants to go through the motions, but will eventually do nothing.