skip to navigation skip to content

1992

217 items listed, ordered by date. Items per page: 25 | 50 | 100 | All 

1. Corporate Governance Committee Correspondence 1992-1994.

Correspondence on subjects such as rights of executive directors to seek external professional advice and be re-imbursed, comments on comments on the draft report, the interests of of the 'private' shareholder as well as the interests of the institutional ones.

2. Correspondence, January to March 1992, with CRW Wysock Wright about part-time Chairmen.

Correspondence is largely between Wysock Wright and Sir Brian Corby, Prudential.

3. Correspondence, dated November, from Clive Boxer, Davies Arnold Cooper and Laurence Cockcroft of Transparency International and KG Wilton.

Davies, Arnold, Cooper proposes insurance for non-executive directors. Transparency International asks for support for its cause. Wilton proposes greater involvement of institutional shareholders.

4. Letter from Dermot de Trafford, Institute of Directors, 7 January 1992.

Expresses concerns about the misuse of information.

5. Record of meeting with Hugh Collum, 100 Group, 14 January 1992

Comments on the papers circulated for the 20-21 January 1992 meeting.

6. Letter, dated 14 January 1992, to MG Lickiss

Letter is responding to MG Lickiss' comments on his draft [Standards of financial reporting and auditing] and clarification of focus of the Committee.

7. Correspondence between Sir Adrian Cadbury and Dick Taverne, QC, chairman of PRIMA Europe January to February 1992.

Covers some aspects of institutional investors and also their relations with non-executive directors in two articles.

8. Price Waterhouse submission to the Cadbury Committee on Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance, 5 February 1992

Covers aspects of board of directors, internal controls, financial reporting, auditing.

9. Letter, dated 21 February 1992, from Dr Maurice Gillibrand and submission to the Committee.

Submission covers communication between boards and stakeholders, executive and non-executive directors, corporate reporting.

10. Papers to committee meeting on 26 February 1992 including implications of committee's proposals and EC company law proposals.

Includes report of a meeting with EC to discuss possible conflicts with the Committee's proposals and summaries the present position of the EC company law proposals.

11. Shearman & Sterling's memo to clients, 'Executive pay: the heat is on'.

Covers the background to complaints about high levels of executive pay and reform proposals.

12. A paper, dated 12 March 1992, giving CBI preliminary evidence to the Committee.

The paper covers the role and duties of directors, the responsibilities of institutional shareholders, auditors responsibilities and liabilities, accounting standards and pension fund management issues.

13. Fax, 12 March 1992, with extract from NYSE's Appendix H.

Extract refers to Audit Committee and in particular to independence of its members.

14. Letter, dated 24 March 1992, from Sir Ron Dearing.

Main purpose of the Committee was to strengthen the position of the auditor and clarify the responsibilities of the directors. Two vulnerabilities identified were accountability to the worker and the small shareholder.

15. Letter and note, dated 24 March 1992, from JP Charkham.

The note suggests a definition of corporate governance that includes employees, alternative working for the foreword and some suggestions on tenure.

16. Letter, dated 24 April 1992, from Chris Holder, Arthur Andersen covering views expressed at Cadbury Committee on Corporate Governance Dinner, 30 March 1992.

The views cover the range of auditing issues, non-executive directors, responsibilities of directors, divided boards and other matters.

17. Letter, 7 July 1992, from JP Dobrowolski, Argos plc.

Comments on the role of internal auditors.

18. Correspondence, dated 10 April 1992, from JE Rogers, the National Association of Pension Funds.

Correspondence concerns increased voting by institutional shareholders with samples from Royal Insurance, General Accident and Lloyds Bank.

19. Papers from the Ditchley Conference, an international discussion 'Role & Governance of Companies' 24-26 April 1992, including Sir Adrian Cadbury's opening statement.

Includes Sir Adrian Cadbury's handwritten notes for the opening remarks, and on the two plenary sessions, various briefing notes, reports of the three groups and a list of attendees.

20. Letter from Richard C Breeden, US Securities and Exchange Commission, 27 April 1992.

Sir Adrian Cadbury had advised RC Breeden of forthcoming draft report and offered to send him one. Nigel Peace has added handwritten post-it note saying he will contact Walter Stahr (also of US SEC) to discuss.

21. Correspondence from Ron Dearing, Financial Reporting Council, including responses to the draft report from ICAEW, Rowena Mills Associates, Delta plc and Sears plc between 1 May 1992 and 23 July 1992.

Includes comments on differentiation between executive and non-executive board members, role of auditors and non-audit fees. Memo from Nigel Peace included.

23. Letter, dated 7 May 1992, from Sir Ron Dearing, Delta plc on behalf of the Financial Reporting Council.

Comments on potential for statements of conformity to become meaningless, possible progress to an international accounting regime and institutional shareholders, plus detailed comments.

24. Correspondence, dated May and June 1992, between Prof JM Samuels and Nigel Peace with supporting paper on directors' remuneration.

Paper concerns availability to shareholders of information about executive remuneration, based on an examination of Annual Reports.

25. Revised questions and answers brief for the launch of the [draft] report, 22 May 1992.

Includes 2 pp of 11 questions apparently compiled by ICAEW referring specifically to auditing and accounting aspects.

26. Evidence submitted to the Committee prior to publication of draft report, 26 May 1992.

Lists organisations, companies and individuals who submitted evidence to the Committee, and meeting notes and published documents.

27. Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance Draft Report issued for public comment, 27 May 1992.

The draft report was issued after considering the views of many who were consulted or submitted evidence. The views came from institutes, companies and individuals. The Committee also considered relevant published documents. The draft report included the Code of Best Practice.

28. Letter from Sir Ron Dearing, Financial Reporting Council, 27 May 1992

Highlights two issues - (1) recommendations do not have clout and legislation would have been better (2) have not done enough to bring the pay of executive board members under a strong framework of control and accountability to shareholders.

29. Main criticisms of [draft] report in press comment following launch on 27 May 1992.

This note summarises the criticisms only - it does not summarise the favourable comments.

30. Letter from Sir Nicholas Goodison, TSB Group, 29 May 1992.

Letter expresses support for the draft report.

31. Letter, dated 31 May 1992, from Tony Morton and comments on the draft report.

Comments on voluntary nature of compliance, internal control systems and comments on specific paragraphs.

32. Correspondence with a variety of bodies and people.

Acknowledgements for copies of draft report, dinners and international spread of Committee's report.

33. Report on a pilot study on attitudes toward the issues of corporate governance, a presentation by Angus Maitland, Burson-Marsteller at CBI/B-M conference on Corporate Governance 10 June 1992 and reply by Nigel Peace.

Reports the results of a survey. Auditors are least likely to benefit while non-executive directors benefit most. Responsibility for compliance lies with company management and institutional shareholders or Stock Exchange, while expresses doubts over self-regulation.

34. Memo, undated (c1992), about directors' remuneration.

Notes on directors' remuneration in the US, especially shareholder input, in particular the SEC proposals.

36. Letter from Sir Ron Dearing, Financial Reporting Council, 4 June 1992

Further comments on the Committee's report, specifically the Code of Best Practice and auditors role.

37. Testimony of Richard C Breeden, Chairman of US Securities and Exchange Commission, concerning executive compensation, 4 June 1992.

The paper covers performance and remuneration, enhanced disclosure for investors while not supporting government regulation of compensation packages.

38. Letter, dated 8 June 1992, from DJ Hughes with acknowledgement by Nigel Peace.

Comments that serious problems shareholders face, on remuneration committees and the Caparo case. Includes memo from Nigel Peace.

39. Letter, dated 10 June 1992, from Ron Dearing, Financial Reporting Council and Companies House form 288.

Suggests an additional entry on the form about directors understanding their duties.

40. Letter, dated 15 June 1992, from Neville Bain, Coats Viyella giving comments on the draft report and Code of Best Practice.

Includes comments on audit committees, the role of auditors, board effectiveness and internal system controls.

41. Letter, dated 16 June 1992, from Stewart Douglas-Mann, Guinness Mahon & Co.

Comments on the wording re independence of non-executive directors.

42. Comments, dated 17 June 1992, by JC Dwek, Bodycote International plc, letter and reply by Nigel Peace.

Comments that fraud is very difficult to prevent and comments on non-executive directors and auditing, especially their resignation advice.

43. Letter, dated 17 June 1992, from Gavin Fryer with background information and reply by Nigel Peace.

Comments on enforcement, adoption and efficacy, control structures, role of the board of directors, audit committees and director accountability.

44. Letter, dated 18 June 1992, Annual Report analysis from Jonathan Chaytor and FT article.

Comments on institutional investors, non-executive directors and internal auditors.

45. Letter, dated 23 June 1992, from Top Pay Research Group.

Comments on the provisions for non-executive directors to take advice and their roles and responsibilities, independence of auditors, directors' remuneration.

46. Letter, dated 24 June 1992, from EA Bradman.

Comments on voluntary nature of the code, non-executive directors, the role of audit committees, directors' contracts and the independence of auditors.

47. Letter, 24 June 1997, from Edward Adeane, Hambros and reply by Nigel Peace.

Seeks and gives clarification on the meaning of independent in relation to non-executive directors.

48. Address to the Annual Conference of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales, Eastsbourne 25-27 June 1992, The role of Directors by Graham Corbett.

This is a workshop exercise on the role of the directors in Eurotunnel delivered at the ICAEW conference . It is used to comment on unitary boards, separation of roles of Chairman and Chief Executive, non-executive directors and institutional investors.

49. Paper by Mick Newmarch to ICAEW 1992 conference.

Mick Newmarsh covers the issues of shareholders and their participation in management, non-executive directors, audit and remuneration committees, separation of roles, financial reporting and auditor fee independence.

51. Letter, dated 30 June 1992, from Jane E Lyon, Union of Independent Companies.

Comments on the application of the code to smaller companies.

52. Letter and comments, dated 30 June 1992, from Tim Knowles.

Comments on non-executive directors, financial reporting, auditing and institutional shareholders.

53. Correspondence, dated July / August 1992 between Sir Adrian Cadbury and Tony Hirst, Association of Independent Museums.

Hirst expresses concern about the suggestion that non-executive directors should only serve on one board.

54. Letter, dated 1 July 1992, from AR Threadgold, POSTEL.

Comments on separation of roles of Chairman and Chief Executive, independent non-executive directors and directors service contracts and the independence of auditors.

55. Comments on the draft report of the Cadbury Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance by the Law Society, July 1992. w

Legal Practice Directorate Memorandum no. 271. It comments on the application of the code to smaller companies.

56. Draft letter about publication of final report, July 1992.

Reviews commercial publishing options generally and mentions publishing the code separately.

57. Letter, dated 2 July 1992, from JJLG Sheffield, Norcros.

Comments on potential for two-tier boards, non-executive directors entitlement to take independent professional advice, internal control systems and going concern.

58. Letter, dated 2 July 1992, from DS Mitchell, ICSA and proposals to be debated by the Institute with handwritten note by Nigel Peace.

An invitation to make a presentation about the draft report to an evening meeting open to all company secretaries.

59. Letter, dated 3 July 1992, from AC Bryant, Bryant Group.

Comments on non-executive directors vs directors and audit committees.

60. Letter, dated 3 July 1992, from Dermot Glynn, NERA and presentation, dated June 1992.

Includes a paper on European accounting, audit independenc and regulation.

61. Letter, 5 July 1992, from AL Hempstead.

Comments on lack of audited accounts for a fund managed by the Nationwide Building Society.

62. Letters, 6 July 1992, from ICSA , extract from Administration and letter from Joanthan Charkham, Bank of England.

Comments on the role of the company secretary in corporate governance and directors' access to information.

63. Memo, dated 6 July 1992, and summary of audit trustee proposal by AJ Merret and Allen Sykes with comments by Price Waterhouse.

Suggests appointing an 'audit trustee' appointed by lenders and creditors rather than the board.

64. Letter, 7 July 1992, from RJ Alexander, London and Manchester Group plc.

Author suggests that an 'Appointed Accountant' with responsibility for preparing financial reports, should be employed.

65. Letter, 7 July 1992, and comments from TJ Grove.

Comments on appearing to be written with best interests of directors, and aspects of auditing.

66. Letter, 7 July 1992, from Swiss Bank Corporation.

Comments on the delegation of powers by the board to the subcommittees.

67. Letter, 7 July 1992, from John Lavery and Simon Pallett, Newcastle upon Tyne Polytechnic.

Comments on self-regulatory approach, separation of roles of Chairman and Chief Executive and non-executive directors, directors' remuneration and financial reporting.

68. Letter, 7 July 1992, from Dr Victor Studentsov.

Letter requests a copy of the draft report.

69. Letter, 8 July 1992, from DEF Green.

Comments on independence of auditors, audit committees and non-executive directors.

70. Letter, 8 July 1992, from Michael Jackaman, Allied Lyons plc.

Letter informs that Allied Lyons complies with the code although the appointmentof non-executive directors is informal and would prefer a voluntary code.

71. Letter, 8 July 1992 from AG Biggart.

Comments on involvement of non-executive directors in strategic direction of companies.

73. Letter, 9 July 1992, from Stanley Kalms, Dixons.

Warns against a prescriptive approach, that effectively promotes two-tier boards.

74. Letter, 10 July 1992, from Anthony Habgood, Bunzl.

Comments on implications of widening the pool for non-executive directors, audit committees and accounting standards, different board structures.

75. Letter, 10 July 1992, from NC Kelleway, Rikard Keen & Co.

Comments on auditing, complying with a code of best practice, non-executive directors, internal control systems and going concern recommendations.

76. Handwritten letter, 10 July 1992, from WH Melly.

Comments on employee shareholders, directors pay-offs and pension funds.

77. Letter, 10 July 1992, from CM Stuart.

Comments on non-executive directors roles, internal control systems, the role of auditors.

78. Letter from PJ Butler, KPMG Peat Marwick, 10 July 1992.

Letter supports Sir Adrian remaining as figurehead to deal with matters arising in following two years.

79. Letter, 11 July 1992, from Ian J Mitchell.

Comments on information for the small shareholder, going concern and extended comments on take-overs and fraud.

80. Letter, 13 July 1992, from Gerard Howe, Howe Associates.

Comments on distinctions between executive and non-executive directors, compliance with the code, separation of roles and board appointments, committees, directors remuneration, auditors and other services to organisations.

81. Letter, 13 July 1992, from Sir George Russell, Marley plc.

Comments on differentiation between executive and non-executive directors, access to independent advice, and communication with shareholders.

82. Letter, 13 July 1992, from RM Head, BPB Industries.

Comments on the role of the Company Secretary, achieving effective governance, potential two-tier boards, remuneration committees, audit committees, financial reporting and going concern.

83. Letter, 13 July 1992, from DE Reid, Tesco plc.

Comments on non-executive directors, the separation of roles of Chairman/Chief Executive, audit committess and auditing and financial reporting.

84. Letter, 14 July 1992, from JBH Jackson.

Comments from his perspective of 'professional chairman' and strongly in favour of unitary boards.

85. Letter and comments, dated 14 July 1992, from Allen Sykes.

Comments on the need for independent directors, institutional investors.

86. Letter, 14 July 1992, from John Salter, Denton Hall Burgin & Warrens.

Comments that a Cadbury 2 Committee is needed to consider enviornmental management systems.

87. Letter, dated 14 July 1992, to the Editor of the International Financial Law Review.

Letter refutes the claim that non-executive directors should only hold one such directorship.

88. Letter, dated 14 July 1992, to the Editor of the Sunday Telegraph, from Sir Adrian Cadbury.

Letter refutes the claim that non-executive directors should only hold one such directorship.

89. Letter, 14 July 1992, from Brian Houlden, Warwick Business School.

Comments that there is no need for additional legislation and on areas outside the Committee's Terms of reference. Includes an excerpt from Reed International Annual Report and the FT, 26 June 1992.

90. Letter, 15 July 1992, from HS Axton, Brixton Estate plc.

Comments on board structures, internal control systems, enhanced disclosure in interim reports and going concern requirement.

91. Letter, 15 July 1992, from Sir Colin Southgate, Thorn EMI plc.

Comments on the tone which suggests no director is to be trusted only non-executive directors.

92. Letter, 15 July 1992, from Sir Colin Corness, Redland plc.

Comments on position of auditors, potential to create two-tier boards, number of non-executive appointments and on the Code of Best Practice. Includes original and photocopy.

93. Letter, 15 July 1992, from Graham Nicholson addressed to the President of ICSA.

Comments on the code only applying to holding companies.

94. Letter, 16 July 1992, from Financial Reporting Council with submissions for other organisations, Paul Girolami (ICAEW), Rowen Mills Associates, Delta plc, Sears plc

Financial Reporting Council comments on the draft report and includes 2 commenting letters and earlier ones. It also makes suggestions on how to alter the text while commenting on the auditors role, non-audit fees of the auditor.

95. Extract from IFMA Update, 16 July 1992.

Comments that the Code of Best Practice may not be practicable for small companies and there is too clear a distinction between executive and non-executive directors.

96. Draft response of ICAEW, dated 16 July 1992.

Comments on voluntary approach, timing of implementation of compliance, which companies it should be applied to, auditor endorsement, costs, executive and non-executive directors and auditing. Detailed comments are included for some paragraphs.

97. Letter, 16 July 1992, from Gary Allen, IMI plc.

Comments on responsibilities of directors and potential for two-tier boards, non-executive directors, access to independent advice and the role of the auditors.

98. Letter, 17 July 1992, from New Bridge Street Consultants and comments.

Comments on the calibre of non-executive directors, their remuneration and selection, the role of the board, committees of the board, independent advice and auditing.

99. Letter, 17 July 1992, from Law Society of Scotland.

Broadly welcomes the draft report, while believing the code should be applied to all companies.

100. Letter, 20 July 1992, from the General Electric Company, plc.

Comments on non-executive directors and the effectiveness of the board, audit committess, expanded disclosure in interim results and changing auditors.

101. Letter, 20 July 1992, from David Fifield.

Comments on ownership models, accountancy work, short-termism.

102. CBI response to the Cadbury Committee draft report on the financial aspects of corporate governance, PC 27 92, 20 July 1992.

Comments in detail on sections of the draft report, approving the self regulation approach, questioning statements of compliance requirement, commenting on the role of non-executive directors, remuneration, auditing and shareholders' role.

103. Letter, 20 July 1992, from Institute of Business Ethics.

Comments on responsible leadership by boards and their remuneration, independence of non-executive directors.

104. Letter, 20 July 1992, from Andrew Robb, Pilkingon plc.

Comments on potential two-tier boards, non-executive directors, auditing.

105. Sir Adrian Cadbury's letter to Law Society Gazette, 20 July 1992.

Response to negative comments about likely compliance and shareholders representatives on the Board.

106. Letter, 21 July 1992, from Paul Girolami, Glaxo.

Comments on directors and non-executive directors roles, auditors and Code of Best Practice.

107. Letter, dated 21 July 1992, from the Foreign and Colonial Investment Trust PLC.

Comments on 'going concern', and number of non-executive directorships.

108. Letter, 21 July 1992, from Slough Estates plc.

Comments on the Code of Best Practice, financial reporting and possible regulation.

109. Letter, dated 22 July 1992, to Sir Andrew Hugh Smith, Sir Ron Dearing, Jim Butler and Sir Adrian Cadbury.

About the publication of the final report or separate code and involvement of commercial publishers.

110. Letter and comments, dated 23 July 1992, from Blenyth Jenkins, the Institute of Directors.

Comments in the context of the wider context of corporate governance, while focussing on internal control, self-regulation and enforcement, interim financial reporting and auditing.

112. Comments, dated 23 July 1992, from the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants.

Comments on the separation of roles, non-executive directors , internal control systems, audit and remuneration committees and various aspects of auditing.

113. Letters from Richard Lloyd, Chairman of Vickers, 23 July 1992.

Letter to Nigel Peace gives specific comments on the draft report which is generally welcomed.

114. Comments, dated 24 July 1992, from Catherine Gowthorpe, Lancashire Polytechnic Business School.

Comments at length on non-executive directors - the qualities required, their financial interests and selection. Also includes comments on the board and in detail on aspects of auditing.

115. Letter and report, dated 24 July 1992, from the Institute of Internal Auditors.

Comments on codes for standards of conduct, the role of internal auditors and an auditing committee, fraud and compliance with the code.

116. Letter, dated 28 July 1992, from Serious Fraud Office.

Comments on auditors' statutory protection and the role of non-executive directors.

117. Letter, dated 28 July 1992, from BDO Binder Hamlyn.

Comments on Code of Best Practice, audit committees, directors' contracts, reporting and aspects of auditing.

118. Letter, dated 28 July 1992, from Ian Harrison, Courtaulds plc with comments on the draft report.

Comments on the requirement for interim financial reports to include balance sheets, access to professional advice for non-executive directors and the roles of directors at an AGM.

119. Letter, dated 28 July 1992, from Grant Thornton.

Comments on implementation by self-regulation vs legislation, applicability to smaller companies, non-executive directors and going concern.

120. Letter, dated 28 July 1992, from McKenna & Co.

Letter covers enforcement of the code, the role of non-executive directors, separation of the roles of Chief Executive and Chairman, shareholders' role and that of the auditors with respect to fraud.

121. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from TF Mathews, Building Societies Commission.

Largely concerns building societies and the ratio of executive to non-executive directors.

122. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from David Jinks, Cadbury Schweppes.

Comments on potential for two-tier boards, enforcement, involvement of investors, various aspects of auditing, going concern and disclosure of directors' remuneration.

123. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from WM Rees and Saleem Sheikh, City of London Polytechnic and paper on corporate governance and corporate control.

Includes a paper entitled 'Corporate governance and corporate control: self-regulation or stautory codification? A comment on the draft report of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance.

124. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from Ewen Macpherson, 3i and findings from ukplc concerning the draft report.

Comments on board of directors, non-executive directors, audit committees, reporting and the involvement of shareholders.

125. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from JC Kay, Gaskell plc and comments on the draft report.

Comments on alternative accounting treatments, application to smaller companies and non-executive directors.

126. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from JNC James, Grosvenor Estate Holdings.

Comments on non-executive directors access to independent financial advice.

127. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from LE Linaker, IFMA and list of association members.

The comments raise the issue of compliance for smaller companies and the possibility of distinctions between executive and non-executive directors.

128. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, and paper on contracting from K Cleaver, P Ormrod, University of Liverpool.

Comments on contracts in corporate operations, accounting techniques and disclosure.

129. Letter, dated 29 July 1992, from CA Mallin, University of Liverpool.

Comments on non-executive directors' roles and independence, board remuneration and auditing.

130. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, from JD Traynor, CRH plc.

Expresses concerns about emphasis on control and monitoring, and the influence of accountants and auditors. It continues to make specific points.

131. Letter, dated 30 July 1992 from Institute of Investment Management and Research and accompanying comments.

The document gives detailed comment on specific paragraphs in the draft code.

132. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, from Lord Toombes of Brailes with further comments.

Rolls-Royce's comments on potential differences of responsibilities between non-executive and executive directors.

133. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, and comments from NN Graham Maw, Rowe & Maw.

Comments on the Code of Best Practice and sets out the author's own code besides commenting on other issues in the report, especially enforcement of the Code.

134. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, from RWD Hanson, Hardys & Hanson plc.

Comments on the cost of implementation for smaller companies.

135. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, from Mark Gifford-Gifford, Centre for Management Studies, University of Exeter.

Comments on the Terms of Reference and standards of practice in unlisted companies,in addition to specific points.

136. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, from PM Elliott, English China Clays.

Comments on various committees, financial reporting, auditing and the going concern disclosure.

137. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, and comments from Anthony Williams, Hay Management Consultants.

Comments on disclosure of remuneration, performance pay and access to the Audit Committee.

138. Letter, dated 30 July 1992, from Pannell Kerr Forster.

Among topics covered are: unitary boards, audit committees, financial reporting, auditing and going concern.

139. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Maureen Howe, Legal and General, and response to the draft code.

Welcomes the code and comments with concerns about possible two-tier board and time-limited contracts for non-executives.

140. Correspondence, dated June and July 1992, from RHF Croft, Jeremy Orme, both of SIB and accompanying letter and document on auditing.

These documents concentrate on auditing and its role in investment businesses. The Board supports the Auditing Practices Board, believing its primary function is to form and express an opinion.

141. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, and comments on the draft report from BT O'Driscoll, ICI Group.

The main comments relate to terms of reference of the Committee, internal control and internal audit.

142. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Sir Richard Greenbury.

Letter comments on board structure, especially unitary boards, the duties of directors to shareholders and the responsibilities of the external auditors.

143. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Sir Andrew Hugh Smith, London Stock Exchange.

Comments on statements of compliance with the code of best practice as an obligation but not a requirement of listing, responsibilities of the directors and financial reporting.

144. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, and comments from Stoy Hayward.

Comments on the draft report in detail on unified boards, separation of roles, board structures, non-executive directors, executive directors and directors' training. It also comments in some depth on audit committees, auditing, internal control systems and financial reporting.

145. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Clark Whitehill & Co.

The response comments on the application of the Code to smaller listed companies, the effectiveness of internal control and the Caparo case.

146. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Neville Russell, accountants, and which includes comments on the draft report.

Comments on potential difficulties with a voluntary code and its review, for smaller companies, emphasis on non-executive directors and goes on to specific points.

147. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, and detailed comments from Arthur Andersen.

Contains detailed comments on the draft report. The main recommendation relates to the supervisory function of the board.

148. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Association of Investment Trusts.

Comments on the challenges that smaller companies may have in complying with the Code.

149. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, from Howard Davies, CBI and a detailed CBI response to the draft report.

Includes summary of CBI response (13 points) and the full response under headings such as statement of compliance, review of code, board structures, separation of roles, non-executive directors, directors' remuneration, auditing and going concern. Also includes the draft response before approval by the CBI Council.

150. Letter, dated 31 July 1992, and comments from Coopers & Lybrand.

Main comments are on auditing, quality of boards and appointment to boards, monitoring compliance with the Code, two-tier boards and audit committees.

152. Partial copy of 'In the Supreme Court of the state of California' Bily v Arthur Young, Shea v Arthur Young, S017199.

Contains the first two pages of the filing regarding the extent of an accountant's duty of care in the preparation of an independent audit of client's financial statements extends to persons other than the client.

153. Letter, dated 3 August 1992, from Julian Hepplewhite, Alliance and Leicester, transmitted by fax.

Comments on internal control systems requirements, going concern, auditing, submission of questions to the AGM and who should deal with specific types of question.

154. Correspondence, dated 3 August 1992, with the Brian Thompson, Institute of Chartered Secretaries and Administrators.

Comments on the tone of the report, enforcement of the Code of Best Practice and the auditor's role in reviewing compliance with the Code. Other comments include sizeable subsidiaries, board procedures and directors' service contracts.

155. Letter, dated 4 August 1992, from Bill Morrison, Auditing Practices Board.

Comments on the practicality of auditors commenting on corporate governance compliance while proposing an alternative method and also comments on interim reporting.

156. Letter, dated 4 August 1992, to JP Charkham, Bank of England, enclosing comments on the draft report.

Comments in the manner of a learned paper, highlighting some alternatives or where the report could have been stronger and monitoring compliance.

157. Letter, dated 4 August 1992, from Sir Alick Rankin, Scottish & Newcastle plc.

Comments on the division between executive and non-executive directors, pensions governance, shareholders and gives detailed comments on specific paragraphs.

158. Letter, dated 4 August 1992, from SAT Foster, South Western Electricity plc.

Comments on different responsibilities of directors and auditors and the section in the draft report on the Board.

159. Letter, dated 5 August 1992, from MN Karmel, British Bankers' Association.

Comments on independence of non-executive directors. This seems to be intended to be an addition to comments sent in July 1992, but not traced.

160. Letter, dated 5 August 1992, from JF O'Mahony, Ladbrooke Group plc.

Comments on the availability of high calibre non-executive directors, unitary boards, internal auditors and auditor rotation.

161. Letter, dated 5 August 1992, from Malcolm Bruce, Liberal Democrat Trade and Industry Spokesman.

Comments on the rejected statutory approach, the role of non-executive directors, separation of roles, audit committees and commends employee involvement. Quarantining auditors is advocated.

163. Letter, dated 6 August 1992, from MA Smith, SG Warburg & Co.

Comments on the timescale for implementation, making compliance with the Code of Practice an obligation to achieve Stock Exchange listing, smaller companies, separation of roles, independence of non-executive directors, the requirement for a 'going concern' statement and aspects of auditing.

164. Letter, dated 7 August 1992, from Ernst & Young.

Questions the likely effectivess of parts of the Code including subjectivity of statement of compliance. Comments on non-executives and their role vs independent directors, unitary boards, audit committees, financial reporting and various aspects of auditing.

165. Letter, dated 7 August 1992, from JE Rogers, National Association of Pension Funds.

Comments on various paragraphs in section 4 in detail and also on auditing.

166. Letter, dated 10 August 1992 from RC Grayson, British Petroleum company plc.

Comments on the perceived division of roles for executive and non-executive directors and auditors responsibility to review a company's (non)/compliance with the Code. Further comments on internal controls are included.

167. Letter, dated 10 August 1992, and comments from IL Rushton, ABI.

Comments on issues of compliance and its enforcement. It also includes detailed comments by paragraph on non-executive directors, various aspects of boards, committees, financial reporting, auditing and shareholders.

168. Comments, dated 10 August 1992, from GT Southern, Humberside County Council.

Comments on board structures and accountability, shareholder participation and auditors.

169. Briefing notes for lunch with regional city editors, 10 August 1992.

This document updates the editors about responses received, the challenges of enforcement and criticism. Also on the back are hand written notes about the role of non-executive directors, cost-benefit, small companies and directors' pay.

170. Letter, dated 11 August 1992, from David Adams, British Rail Pension Trustee Company Limited.

Includes the Company's corporate governance policy. Comments on the need to enforce compliance, accounting standards and reporting requirements, separation of roles and roles of non-executive directors.

171. Summary of responses by companies up to 12 August 1992.

Collates and summarises 70 reponses to the draft report from companies and business organisations.

172. Summary of responses by accountants up to 14 August 1992.

Collates and summarises 24 reponses to the draft report from accountants. Covers comments on the contents of the draft report and additional topics with appendices on example sections on non-executive directors, suggested action plan and the response by the Auditing Practices Board.

173. Letter and comments, dated 14 August 1992, from the Association of Authorised Public Accountants.

Comments on various aspects of auditing, duties and responsibilities of directors and their contracts.

174. Letter, dated 14 August 1992, and comments from RF Hussey, Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland.

Questions the feasibility of the timescale for compliance, while supporting voluntary compliance. Most recommendations are supported as they are already recommendations of the Institute.

175. Summary of responses by shareholders up to 14 August 1992.

Summarises reponses from 21 institutional and private shareholders.

176. Letter, dated 18 August 1992, from DF Macquaker.

Main comment relates to internal controls, based on experience in the public sector.

177. Fax, dated 19 August [1992], from Sir Adrian Cadbury to Nigel Peace, about wording of 5.34, clipped to letter from MJ Harding, Ernst & Young, dated 3 August 1994.

Asks Nigel Peace's opinion of alternative working for para 5.34. This may have been prompted by comments on the draft report from among others Ernst & Young as it is clipped to a letter saying they may have been wrong in their criticisms.

178. Correspondence, dated August 1992, from McMullen & Sons and to Andrew Hugh Smith about specific cases.

Expresses concerns about the 'Continuing Obligation' as the companies have some shares listed on the London Stock Exchange.

179. Letter, dated 21 August 1992, and comments from Andrew C Woods, the Investor Relations Society.

Comments on shareholder responsibilities, communications between companies and shareholders, executive remuneration and accounting standards.

180. Letter, dated 25 August 1992, from KPMG with comments on the draft report, transmitted by fax.

The comments are the conclusions from a discussion held with a group of non-executive directors and some of the firm's partners. Topics included: the responsibilities of directors, going concern statements, shareholders responsibilities, auditing and internal control.

181. Letter, dated 27 August 1992, with comments from the Society of Labour Lawyers.

Comments on compliance and enforcement of the code and possible extensions.

182. Letters, dated 28 August 1992 from Sandy Easterbrook of Mallesons Stephen Jacques and accompanying paper on the issues of the AWA case.

Includes a detailed paper on the implications of an Australian judgement regarding auditor negligence and the duties and responsibilities of the board of directors, including non-executive directors.

183. Thoughts on corporate governance, 28 August 1992.

The document concentrates on financial control and reporting.

186. Responses to the draft report: note by the chairman. CFACG(92)14, 10 September 1992.

Covers the entire report and the issue of who will take the work on after the report is published.

187. Comments, dated 15 September 1992, from Roger Morton.

Comments on institutional shareholders, and shareholder voting and communication during takeover bids.

188. Meeting on 17 September 1992, Committee's conclusions on proposed revision to draft report.

Covers all sections of the report with suggested replacement wording.

189. Letter, dated 17 September 1992, and paper on corporate governance and the private shareholder, from Derek H Broome.

Paper sets out a proposal to bring institutional and private shareholders together.

190. Letter, 18 September 1992, from JP Charkham.

JP Charkham mentions conversation with Michael Angus about separation of roles.

192. Letter, dated 22 October 1992, from Walter Stahr, US Securities and Exchange Commission and papers by Richard C Breeden and Lipton & Lorsch, plus fact sheets.

Includes papers on 'Shareholder communication and executive compensation' given at the open meeting of the SEC 15 October 1992, plus fact sheets on executive compensation disclosure and regulatory reform of communications among shareholders. Also includes Lipton and Lorsch 'Modest proposal for improved corporate governance, 20 Aug 1992.

193. The questionnaire on corporate governance arising out the Oxford Law Colloquium 1992 and the collated answers to it, 27 October 1992.

Questionnaire covered the Code of Best Practice, executive remuneration, activities of directors and others and auditing.

195. Letter, dated 3 November 1992, and the results of a survey by Pauffley & Co, from Nick Glanvill.

Reports the results of a survey to establish how recommendations by the Committee and the Accounting Standards Board were received.

197. Letter, dated 13 November 1992, from Michael Lawrence, 100 Group of finance directors.

Letter of thanks to Sir Adrian for talking about the progress on the Cadbury report.

198. Correspondence, dated 18 November 1992 between Sir Adrian Cadbury and PVS Manduca and HM Priestly, both of the Association of Investment Trusts.

Comments on the high proportion of non-executive directors in investment trusts and includes a draft guidelines about non-executive directors of investment trusts. Relevance of the code to investment trusts

199. Corporate governance/Cadbury Committee: research. Note for meeting on 1 December 1992.

Document sets out terms of reference for research into compliance with the Cadbury proposals. ICAEW intends to fund a programme of research.

201. Memo to Sir Adrian setting out criteria for distribution of draft report, dated 25 November 1992, and sample letter to company and extracts for Stock Exchange Daily Official List.

The memo mentions *draft* report but date suggests distribution of final report. It should go to all listed companies, investment trusts and USM listed companies. Also included is a half page of Sir Adrian's handwritten notes concentrating on aspects of the role and responsibilities of boards.

203. Correspondence, December 1992, from Ellen R. Schneider-Lenne and APH Herd.

Herd comments that companies should not find the recommendations too onerous and that the Committee will be responsible for implementing and monitoring the implementation of the Code. Scheider-Lenne is replying to comments that the number of outside directorships should be limited to one.

204. Handover notes (mostly handwritten), December 1992, from Nigel Peace to Gina Cole.

The notes cover the 'live' administrative issues. Note about contract with Gee for publishing the final report.

205. Correspondence , December 1992, praising the work of the Committee and its final report.

Includes congratulatory letters from: Accounting Standards Board, CBI and press release, press release from Institute of Directors, press release from CBI (Confederation of British Industry) and Coats Viyella. Also includes acknowledgement from Department of Trade and Industy about staff.

207. Press conference on 1 December 1992, draft opening statement by Sir Adrian Cadbury, includes launch of Committee's draft report and handwritten notes by Sir Adrian Cadbury.

The main item is the press conference for the final report but is usefully set beside the notes for the launch of the draft report.

208. Press conference Tuesday 1 December 1992, briefing notes.

Notes to enable consistent answers to be given to questions from the press.

209. Letter, dated 3 December [1992], from Viscount Watkinson.

Sent after the launch of the final report.

210. Letter, dated 10 December 1992, from Brian Thompson, ICSA.

ICSA advises it will publish a schedule of matters that boards should consider.

211. Letter, dated 11 December 1992, from CJ Eaglen.

Concerns legal aspects of corporate governance. Clearly, seems to have been earlier correspondence between Eaglen and Sir Adrian.

212. Typescript of an article, entitled 'The Role of the Finance Director in Corporate Governance' for Finance Directors Bulletin, January 1993 edtion and related correspondence.

In addition to the typescript of the article there is some information on the publication, Finance Directors' Bulletin.

213. Correspondence, dated 22 December 1992, between Sir Adrian Cadbury and IA Ziff, Stylo plc.

Ziff raises the issue of the significant delay between the market and the small shareholder receiving information.

214. Letter and comments, dated 27 July 1992, from Donald B Butcher, representing the UK Shareholders' Association.

Comments on and suggests approaches on various aspects of AGMs, creating two classes of non-executive directors. Butcher supports rotation of auditors.

215. Letter, dated 12 November 1992, from Beharrell, Thompson.

Raises SEC approach to corporate governance, compliance with Code of Best practice, auditors and the cost of compliance. It includes the documents from the SEC about executive compensation.

216. Letter, dated 6 August 1992, from Geoffrey Mulcahy, Kingfisher.

Comments on the tone of the draft report, non-executive directors, remuneration, audit and code compliance as a listing requirement.

217. Handwritten notes, headed Stock Exchange Listing Advisory Cttee, 8 June 1992

Handwritten notes recording the comments on the draft report circulated for public comment from people present at the meeting. Includes list of attendees at the meeting.

The Cadbury Archive at Cambridge Judge Business School consists of papers compiled and preserved by Sir Adrian Cadbury from his time as Chairman of the Committee on the Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance.

For more information about this archive or to enquire about access to original documents, please:

Contact us

Information & Library Services
Cambridge Judge Business School
Trumpington Street
Cambridge
CB2 1AG

Tel: +44 (0)1223 339599
Fax: +44 (0)1223 339701
Email:


More contact information