Just to recap: we ran a website poll late last month which revleaed that 45% of UK accountants believed institutes were no longer relevant. Nevertheless institute presendent Richard Dyson took us to task in a confident speech, criticising (in some detail) our 'limited' survey. OK it wasn't comprehensive but 800 of our readers responded - a respectable number.

However, if I were to condemn the poll (which, of course, I'm not about to), I wouldn't do so on the grounds of a limited reach. I might, though, point to the fact that it revealed little that was new.

When I joined Accountancy Age in 1999 we ran a similar survey. We ran the results under the headline: FDs - institutes are 'irrelevant'.

In these pre-internet days (at least in survey terms) we had to conduct the survey by telephone. And we restricted it to finance directors as we wanted to test business attitudes. Again the numbers were respectable - more than 200 of our target group responded. And even then (some eight years ago) some 36% said their institute had become an irrelevance.

More interestingly, when the responses were broken down, the ICAEW topped the dissatisfaction league, with 40% of finance director members complaining that it was irrelevant to their everyday work. CIMA came next with 37% followed by CIPFA with 30%. ACCA was top of the institutes for member satisfaction.

So Pope still Catholic, bears still defecate in the woods and most accountants still view their qualification as a passport and little more.