ACCA Members show no confidence in  the leadership

ACCA's council election processes are a sham. No matter what the membership decides the leadership overrides it by casting hundreds of votes. So the only way to register a protest is to ignore the election altogether.

The AGM held on 8 May 2003 heard that out of a membership of over 90,000 only 5,655 members (6.28%) voted, this includes the 844 votes cast by president

Members were asked to elect individuals to 11 council seats. The highest vote of 3,458 (3.84%) was recorded by Jacqueline Cole. The 11th spot was filled by Valerie Culley with 2,804 votes (3.04%).  In any decent organisation an election result with this low turnout and vote would be declared 'void'.  But not at ACCA. The leadership and its cronies now have no moral mandate to govern, claim expenses, travel the world or make any decisions.

By some perverse logic, ACCA President Jonathan Beckerlegge told that AGM that the low turnout indicated that the membership was satisfied with leadership's policies. When asked by Prem Sikka to provide any evidence to support this assertion, Beckerlegge was unable to, possibly because his speech writers had not anticipated the question.

Any observer of politics knows that people boycott polls because they have no confidence in the system, its integrity, honesty or sincerity. ACCA members are right to boycott council elections. There is nothing on offer.

• ACCA council elections are neither free nor fair. Through the proxy vote system, the leadership rigs the system in favour of its cronies, so why should anyone bother to vote. 
• The leadership does not explain how it casts its proxy votes.
  
• The 180 word election council statement hardly gives anyone any opportunity to put forward any ideas, policies or suggestions for reform.
• If the candidates write an address that the management does not approve of, then the management changes the statement. They did this to Prem Sikka and changed his election statement without his consent. In local, national, European, trade union, mayoral and other elections the system encourages dialogue and further information by referring people to web sites and their e-mail addresses. But ACCA management deleted all references to web sites and e-mails from Prem Sikka's election statement.
  
• None of the candidates for the 2003 elections put forward any statement about policies, reforms, value for money or anything else. They all wanted to be elected on the basis of personalities and how they suck-up to the leadership.

ACCA council election's are a sham designed to provide a veneer of respectability to unsavoury practices. Members are right to boycott them.