text:
Wikipedia:OpenFacts

The BerliOS OpenFacts Project is a free knowledge database for the collaborative creation of software documentation. Its founders were inspired by the Wikipedia project's approach to collaborative writing of encyclopedia articles, and use the same MediaWiki software to power the site, although they are running a very old version of mediawiki, before it was even called mediawiki.

The original intended purpose of the OpenFacts wiki was to allow any open source project to maintain their documentation collaboratively online. In addition, OpenFacts pages can also be used for feature suggestions or problem reports for other projects.

However the primary use (aside from wiki spamming) of this wiki over the years, has been to maintain a Wikipedia Status page which allows people to monitor (and of course, change) the perceived server status of Wikipedia. On the status page, Wikipedia's server status is measured in terms of speed and availability. In addition, comments are posted by most people that change the status. Some of these also provide reasons for the status, when they are known. However, following the adoption of multilingual error pages on Wikipedia, the link to Wikipedia Status was removed. An alternative offline contingency site was proposed but there has been no action yet.

The Questions and suggestions page on this wiki has, in the past, listed many requests for changes. Currently this is flushed out and there's hardly anything on there, but it still clearly indicates a failure of the site administrators to take any action or even respond to requests. It's safe to assume that site administrators have also failed to deplay any Anti-spam features, and have no plans to upgrade to a modern version of the mediawiki software. Surprisingly people (or anti-spam bots?) editing the wiki have managed to continually revert spam edits, despite constant bombardment of wiki spam.

Even so, open source project seeking a reliable wiki-style documentation space (with a 'recent changes' page which isn't plastered with spam edits), would do better looking elsewhere.

As of 10 September 2012, OpenFacts is completely offline.

The documentation material which is on there is released into the public domain unless otherwise noted.

References and external links

 * OpenFacts project
 * BerliOS homepage

title: Wikipedia:OpenFacts


text:
Talk:Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln

"......with ramifications that reach until today"
How so? The article doesn't explain this at all...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:10, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hopefully the significance is clearer now. Jim Killock (talk) 18:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 6 June 2018

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 12:02, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln → Hugh of Lincoln (blood libel) – Hugh was not a saint, and the title "Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln" is that used by the cult's proponents. Hugh of Lincoln is taken by the saint of that name, so it would need something in brackets for disambiguation, eg "Hugh of Lincoln (blood libel)", which reflects what happened (there is no controversy that this was a blood libel) Jim Killock (talk) 09:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose WP:NATURAL found in GBooks. In ictu oculi (talk) 11:00, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose The very sources used in this article use this name - see Britannica, Catholic Encyclopedia, the Transactions of the Jewish Historical Society. Even Find a Grave agrees. Google Scholar shows that this is a common name for the child - even into the 2000s (see the search for Peter Dan's article on "COMPETING TRUTHS: ANTI-SEMITISM, BLOOD LIBEL AND THE MAINTENANCE OF EVIL" from 2008). If there is another common name that would be fine - but the mere fact that he was never officially declared a saint does not mean that we can't use the word saint in the title if most sources refer to him as such. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:13, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Common name in the sources. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Semi-protected edit request on 16 January 2023
There is no one source to support the statements in the article that the claim was false. Not one, yet it is stated several times as fact? These claims need to be changed to alleged or similar etc. No sources at all either way, so it cant be claimed to be a false claim? 2A00:23C4:22D:CA01:7C0C:9C9:58A1:AA60 (talk) 12:57, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ~ Eejit43 ( talk ) 00:34, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
 * it’s extremely clear what they are saying and what they think needs to be changed actually. You are obfuscating clearly, likely because you have no agenda or bias. Peppapignig (talk) 15:04, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * No, that's just the standard response. You'd need to write "change xxxx to xxxx". Martinevans123 (talk) 15:52, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Infobox and "Saint"
There's some need to follow standard practice on the Infobox and also to avoid reverts. While the fact this and other similar children were regarded as saints is repugnant, it is important to recognise that they had a status as a saint and not to effectively whitewash this fact. Likewise, we do not want to make it look like the veneration is an actual signal that there was something holy about the figure.

Also "Little Sir Hugh" the name of a later derived song, and not the name given to the putative saint while he was venerated.

What do pages on other unofficial saints do? Is there guidance somewhere? Jim Killock (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2024 (UTC)

 * I've replaced the infobox with infobox person. Valereee (talk) 13:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm not quite convinced this is right, as it obscures the historical status they had. Consistency is best. Is there a policy on infoboxes or is it a discretionary matter? Jim Killock (talk) 18:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Why aren't you convinced this is right? Other local "saints" use infobox person as well. glman (talk) 19:42, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * As I say standardisation would be my preference; the pause I have is simply that WP needs to be clear and consistent. Simon of Trent for instance details the cult in the infobox; William of Norwich, Harold of Gloucester, Robert of Bury also follow this pattern. Where and why they were venerated, that the cult was suppressed, etc, are important facts. William of Norwich presents it best, IMO stating plainly at the top "cult suppressed". Jim Killock (talk) 22:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't think it obscures the fact. The fact is mentioned in the lede's second sentence. But if you want to change it back to the saint infobox, I don't object. Do we have information that could fill in the "suppressed" parts? Valereee (talk) 13:18, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think we need a larger discussion if we want to return. It's a misuse of the infobox IMO, as these figures were never venerated by the church. The only use for "suppressed" saints are those that venerated and then suppressed (such as Margaret the Virgin), while these figures were never saints in the first place. For example, putting "No" in the "canonized_date" box is clearly not intended usage of this infobox. glman (talk) 13:26, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks, @Glman for The only use for "suppressed" saints are those that venerated and then suppressed (such as Margaret the Virgin), while these figures were never saints in the first place., I am not very familiar with these things. Okay, @JimKillock, maybe the solution for concerns about consistency, a discussion somewhere, maybe WT:MOS with notification to WP:WikiProject Catholicism, WP:WikiProject Infoboxes, Template talk:Infobox saint? Probably not something we can decide here at this obscure talk page. Valereee (talk) 13:50, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I think that's a solid approach - we definitely need a wider consensus, as there are clearly several similar cases. glman (talk) 13:59, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Agree, I would also prefer a wider discussion.
 * To be clear tho, these children were "venerated" as "saints"; it is the case that they were never officially agreed to be saints by the Papacy, but the need for this step was a late development roughly dating to this period. Prior to that, it wasn't considered necessary for the central church to agree to someone's sainthood. Clearly some people including two English Kings did claim Hugh as a saint, for their own unpleasant reasons. His veneration as a saint is precisely how the idea of blood libel was circulated, thus making this less clear isn't entirely helpful, in my view.
 * However it is done, ensuring that their status is clear, accurate and relevant information about the cult is presented seems the most important thing. Jim Killock (talk) 20:59, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
 * “ While the fact this and other similar children were regarded as saints is repugnant[…]” Why is that repugnant? Peppapignig (talk) 15:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Because their "sainthood" comes from false blood libel narratives. glman (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

Biased article
It is simply assumed without evidence that the accusations were false. 2601:6C3:8300:D50:16D2:5DC0:B933:BA7 (talk) 03:51, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: Talk:Little Saint Hugh of Lincoln


text:
HMS Endurance

Two Royal Navy ships have been called HMS Endurance after Sir Ernest Shackleton's Endurance, the ship crushed in the ice of the Weddell Sea during his 1914–1915 Antarctic expedition. The ships' motto, Fortitudine Vincimus (By Endurance We Conquer), was Shackleton's family motto.

 * HMS Endurance (1967), pennant number A171, served as the British Antarctic ice patrol vessel from 1967 to 1991. She was built in Denmark in 1956 as Anita Dan and purchased by the Royal Navy in 1967.
 * HMS Endurance (A171), was a class 1A1 icebreaker which was in service between 1991 and 2008 as the replacement for the first HMS Endurance. She was built in Norway in 1990 as Polar Circle and leased by the Royal Navy in 1991, then purchased and renamed in 1992. She was scrapped in Turkey in 2016.

Battle honours
Ships named Endurance have earned the following battle honours:
 * Falkland Islands, 1982

title: HMS Endurance


text:
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants

The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) is the national professional organization of Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) in the United States, with more than 428,000 members in 130 countries. Founded in 1887 as the American Association of Public Accountants (AAPA), the organization sets ethical standards and U.S. auditing standards. It also develops and grades the Uniform CPA Examination. AICPA is headquartered in Durham, North Carolina, and maintains additional offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., and Ewing, New Jersey.

History
AICPA and its predecessors date back to 1887, when the American Association of Public Accountants (AAPA) was formed. The Association went through several name changes over the years: the Institute of Public Accountants (1916), the American Institute of Accountants (1917), and the American Society of Public Accountants (1921), which merged into the American Institute of Accountants in 1936. At that time, the decision was made to restrict future membership to CPAs.

The number of committees grew continually over the years. In the 1940s, there were 34 committees. By 1960, there were 89. By 1970, the number had grown to 109.

In 1999, the nearly 120 existing committees underwent a re-organization with approximately half of the standing committees being replaced with a volunteer group model that placed an increased emphasis on the use of task forces. The increased use of task forces allowed for more targeted efforts with the task forces being given a specific assignment then disbanding upon completion of that assignment. Also in 1999, the first tracking and management of task forces began."

In January 2012, the AICPA entered into a joint venture with their equivalent in the UK, the Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA), a partnership that produced the Chartered Global Management Accountant (CGMA) designation. In 2014, the AICPA and the CIMA co-created the Global Management Accounting Principles (GMAPs).

The AICPA and CIMA membership bodies remain and provide all existing benefits to members.

In August 2019, the AICPA proposed a new standard to give auditors more guidance on auditing accounting estimates. This standard replaced SAS No. 122, Section 540, Auditing Accounting Estimates, Including Fair Value Accounting Estimates, and Related Disclosures. It also amended a few other sections of the AICPA Professional Standards.

Uniform CPA examination
The Uniform CPA Examination must be taken and passed by all CPAs who wish to be licensed. The exam is developed and scored by the Board of Examiners (BOE), a committee that consists of CPAs, state board regulators, psychometricians, and educators.

Professional standards setting
AICPA sets generally accepted professional and technical standards for CPAs in multiple areas. Until the 1970s, the AICPA held a virtual monopoly in this field. In the 1970s, however, it transferred its responsibility for setting generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) to the newly formed Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB). Following this, it retained its standards setting function in areas such as financial statement auditing, professional ethics, attest services, CPA firm quality control, CPA tax practice, business valuation, and financial planning practice. Before passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley law, AICPA standards in these areas were considered "generally accepted" for all CPA practitioners.

In the early 2000s, in response to events such as Enron's announcement that its financial statements couldn't be relied on and WorldCom's bankruptcy filing, Congress passed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (SOX).

Credentials, designations, and scholarships
AICPA offers credentialing programs in certain subject areas for its members. The credentials are similar to state board certifications for attorneys, which also recognize subject matter-specific expertise. The AICPA offers the:

 * Certified Public Accountant (CPA)
 * Accredited in Business Valuation (ABV) credential
 * Personal Financial Specialist (PFS) credential
 * Certified in Financial Forensics (CFF) credential
 * Certified Information Technology Professional (CITP) credential, which had been established in 2000.
 * Certified in Entity and Intangible Valuations (CEIV) credential.

Aong with CIMA, AICPA issues the Chartered Global Management Accountant (CGMA) designation, which was established in 2012. Based on global quality standards for ethics and performance, CGMA designees are considered experts with credibility of advanced proficiency in finance, operations, strategy and management.

The institute offers a number of scholarships for high school students, undergraduate, and graduate students, and working professionals. This includes:

 * The AICPA Foundation High School Scholarship
 * The AICPA Legacy Scholarships
 * The Minority Doctoral Fellowship Program
 * The William (Bill) Ezzell Scholarship Program

Public interest campaigns
AICPA also runs public interest programs, including the Feed the Pig campaign and the 360 Degrees of Financial Literacy site. Feed the Pig, a national public service campaign sponsored by the AICPA and the Ad Council, provides personal finance resources for young Americans. 360 Degrees of Financial Literacy is a national volunteer effort of the nation's CPAs to help Americans understand their personal finances and develop money management skills.

In 2022, the AICPA and the National Association of State Boards Accountancy announced that a new Uniform CPA exam would be released in 2024 as part of the CPA Evolution initiative. The new exam is based on a “Core + Discipline” model and will include core testing in accounting, auditing, and tax, as well as three Discipline sections (candidates must select one to complete).

WebTrust
WebTrust is a family of e-commerce assurance and auditing programs co-developed by the AICPA with the Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA). Accounting associations in the UK, Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong also participate in the program. A specialized variant of the program exists for certificate authorities. A 2005 academic book noted that while cost of a WebTrust seal is considerably higher than that of similar products from its competitors (BBB On-Line, TrustE and VeriSign), the scope of a WebTrust certification is more comprehensive than those of its competitors, although this fact is usually lost on consumers who have trouble differentiating such seal programs, which explains the rather limited market penetration of WebTrust. A 2009 academic paper which chronicled in some depth the adoption followed by the abandonment of the WebTrust seal at a large US telecom company, noted that the management did not find the cost-benefit tradeoff worthwhile: the $100,000 per year cost for WebTrust being about twenty times higher than that of a TrustE seal.

Government relations
AICPA has an office in Washington, D.C. and a political action committee. On behalf of its members, the AICPA monitors and advocates on legislative and other matters that affect the accounting profession. Working with state CPA societies and other professional organizations, the AICPA provides information to and educates federal, state and local policymakers regarding key issues. Whether serving as an information resource or offering recommendations, the AICPA represents the profession while protecting the public interest.

The AICPA's Political Action Committee is a contributor to U.S. Congressional representatives and Senators from both parties who sit on various legislative committees of relevance to CPAs.

External roles
The AICPA is a leading member of the International Federation of Accountants and the Global Accounting Alliance, and the Tax Professionals United for Taxpayer Relief Coalition.

The AICPA is an affiliate of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of the Caribbean.

Code of professional conduct
Members of the AICPA must attest annually to meeting the requirements for their membership types, complying with the AICPA's bylaws and upholding the AICPA's Code of Profession Conduct. Members are subject to audit and, if found to be non-compliant, may be expelled from the AICPA.

AICPA personal financial satisfaction index
Since Q3 of 2018, AICPA has been publishing the personal financial satisfaction index on a quarterly basis that indicates the general understanding of economic factors affecting the financial standing of a typical American. As the COVID-19 pandemic has strained the U.S. economy and put millions out of work, Americans have experienced the biggest drop in their personal financial satisfaction in more than a decade. The AICPA's Q1 2020 Personal Financial Satisfaction index (PFSi) measures 32.9, a 20 percent (8.29 point) decrease from the previous quarter. This is the largest quarterly drop the PFSi has experienced since the Great Recession (Q4 2009).


text:
Financial Accounting Standards Board

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) is a private standard-setting body whose primary purpose is to establish and improve Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) within the United States in the public's interest. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) designated the FASB as the organization responsible for setting accounting standards for public companies in the U.S. The FASB replaced the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants' (AICPA) Accounting Principles Board (APB) on July 1, 1973. The FASB is run by the nonprofit Financial Accounting Foundation.

FASB accounting standards are accepted as authoritative by many organizations, including state Boards of Accountancy and the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA).

Structure
The FASB is based in Norwalk, Connecticut, and is led by seven full-time Board members, one being the chairman, appointed by the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF) to serve five-year terms and are eligible for one term reappointment.

The qualifications to serve on the FASB include professional competence and realistic experience from professions like financial reporting, investment services, and financial planning. Board members also come from sectors such as academia, business, and legal, or government agencies.

FASB board members, as of February 22, 2023: The board is supported by more than 60 staff.

In December 2019, FAF board of trustees announced that Richard Jones would succeed Russell Golden as FASB's chair when his term expired at the end of June 2020.

Oversight
The FASB is subject to oversight by the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF), which selects the members of the FASB and the Governmental Accounting Standards Board and funds both organizations. The Board of Trustees of the FAF is selected by a nomination process that involves several organizations from investing, accounting, business, financial, and governmental sectors, but are ultimately selected by the existing Board. The selection process was amended as such in 2008 to reduce private sector influence on the Board of Trustees and its oversight of the FASB and GASB.

Inception
Marshall Armstrong, then-president of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA), appointed a group of seven men (collectively called the Wheat Committee after its head Francis Wheat) in 1971 to examine the organization and operation of the Accounting Principles Board, in order to determine what adjustments were needed to facilitate more accurate and timely results and avoid governmental rule-making. Their findings, "Report of the Study on the Establishment of Accounting Principles", were published in March 1972, and proposed several changes including establishing the Financial Accounting Foundation, separate from other professional firms, that would be overseen by the Board of Trustees. The FASB was conceived as a full-time body to insure that Board member deliberations encourage broad participation, objectively consider all stakeholder views, and are not influenced or directed by political/private interests. The Wheat Report also recommended developing the "Financial Accounting Standards Advisory Council, a 20-member advisory council that members serve an initial 1-year term, that could be renewed indefinitely, and to explicitly define the FASB research projects, to ensure timely and appropriate results.

The U.S Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued Accounting Series Release No. 150 (ASR 150), which states that FASB pronouncements will be considered by the SEC as having "substantial authoritative support", in 1973. That same year, the FASB issued its first standard, Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 1: Disclosure of Foreign Currency Translation Information.

Conceptual Framework
The FASB Conceptual Framework was established in 1973 as a comprehensible set of standards and rules intended to address and solve new emerging issues. The conceptual framework underlaid financial accounting by serving as the Board's reasoning behind its standards-setting decisions.

The conceptual framework provides two functions: to state the objectives of financial reporting and provide definitions of financial statement elements. The conceptual framework creates a foundation for financial accounting and establishes consistent standards that highlight the nature, function, and limitations of financial reporting.

Emerging Issues Task Force
The FASB formed the Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) in 1984. It was formed to provide timely responses to financial issues as they emerged. The group includes 15 people from both the private and public sectors coupled with representatives from the FASB and an SEC observer. As issues emerge, the task force considers them and tries to reach a consensus on what course of action to take. From conception until the 2003 AICPA GAAP Agreement, if consensus was reached on a topic, the group would issue an EITF Issue that was considered equivalent to a FASB pronouncement and included in GAAP.

International standard setting comparability
The FASB participated in an international conference on global accounting standards in 1991, The Objectives and Concepts Underlying Financial Reporting, co-sponsored by the International Accounting Standards Committee and the Fédération des Experts Comptables Européens.

Two years later, the FASB participated in the formation of the G4+1, a group of international standard setters. Its members included the United States, Australia, the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand. In August 1994 the group released a special report, Future Events: A Conceptual Study of their Significance for Recognition and Measurement.

In 1999, the FASB issued International Accounting Standard Setting: A Vision for the Future, a report which acknowledged the rapid changes taking place in the international accounting standard setting environment, and that convergence and development of high-quality international standards are coinciding goals.

Norwalk Agreement
In 2002, the FASB began to work on a convergence project in partnership with the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), the independent accounting standard-setting body of the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation. The two groups met on September 18, 2002, in Norwalk, Connecticut, to sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) which "committed the boards to developing high-quality, compatible accounting standards with a common solution."

This MoU, which came to be known as the Norwalk Agreement, outlined plans to converge IFRS and U.S. GAAP into one set of high quality and compatible standards. For ten years the FASB and IASB collaborated on a common objective not only to eliminate differences between IFRS and U.S. GAAP wherever possible, "but also to achieve convergence in accounting standards that stood the test of time."

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
The Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 was signed into law on July 30, 2002, to protect stakeholders and investors by improving the dependability and precision of corporate financial disclosures. The legislation also created the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB), and included accounting support fees from issuers of securities to FASB.

AICPA's GAAP agreement
In November 2002, FASB Chairman Robert Herz announced that FASB and AICPA came to the agreement that the AICPA would no longer issue Statements of Positions (SOPs) that are considered authoritative GAAP. They also concluded that consensus of the EITF will be required to be ratified by the FASB to become authoritative GAAP.

Investor Task Force
The FASB established the Investor Task Force (ITF) in 2005, which was an advisory resource that provided the Board with sector expertise and specific insights from the professional investment community on relevant accounting issues. The FASB then implemented SFAS 157 which established new standards for disclosure regarding fair value measurements in financial statements in 2006. That same year, the FASB added Investor Liaisons to its staff, who would be responsible for reaching out to investors to hear feedback on the various FASB activities.

Financial Crisis Advisory Group (FCAG)
The FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board created the Financial Crisis Advisory Group in 2008—an international group of standard-setting bodies—that coordinated responses "on the future of global standards in light of" the financial crisis of 2007–2010. The FCAG was composed of 15–20 senior leaders in finance and chaired by Harvey Goldschmid and Hans Hoogervorst with a mandate to investigate financial reporting issues uncovered by the global financial crisis. FCAG members included Stephen Haddrill and Michel Prada—a member of the International Centre for Financial Regulation (ICFR) and co-chair of the Council on Global Financial Regulation was a member of the Financial Crisis Advisory Group. Haddrill who was the only UK representative on the FCAG, is CEO of the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) in the United Kingdom and has a close interest in accounting standards.

The FCAG issued a report in July 2009 finding, among other things, that the FASB and SEC had been pressured by politicians and banks to change accounting standards to protect banks from the impact of their toxic mortgages. Just prior to the report to the G20, and in reference to the political pressure placed on standards setters "to make changes to fair value accounting rules over suggestions that it exacerbated the financial crisis" Haddrill cautioned, "Who do we want to set accounting standards? Not politicians, that's clear. But neither do we want experts vacuum-packed in a world of their own."

Accounting Standards Codification
On July 1, 2009, the FASB announced the launch of its Accounting Standards Codification,  an online research system representing the single source of authoritative nongovernmental U.S. GAAP, available from the FASB in multiple views; Professional view, Academic view, and Basic view. The Codification organizes the pronouncements that constitute U.S. GAAP into a consistent, searchable format. The Codification is not to be confused with the FASB's 1973 Conceptual Framework project.

Convergence to international comparability
In 2010, the SEC instructed the staff to create and implement a work plan that addresses whether, when and how U.S. GAAP should be merged into a global reporting model developed by International Accounting Standards Board (IASB)—the standards setting body designated by the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). The SEC staff research included including convergence with IFRS and an alternate IFRS endorsement mechanism.

In the resulting 2012 report the SEC Staff asserted that the IFRS standards were not sufficiently supported by U.S. capital market participants and lacked consistent implementation methods. The report goes on to say that, while the U.S. financial reporting community does not support IFRS as the authoritative mechanism for US financial reporting, there is support for "high-quality, globally accepted accounting standards" as demonstrated in the joint efforts of the IASB and FASB to develop converged financial reporting for revenue recognition and lease accounting.

The FASB and the IASB issued guidance on recognizing revenue in contracts with customers in 2014, establishing principles to report useful information to users of financial statements about the nature, timing, and uncertainty of revenue from these transactions. In May 2015 the SEC acknowledged that "investors, auditors, regulators and standard-setters" in the United States did not support mandating International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation (IFRS) for all U.S. public companies. There was "little support for the SEC to provide an option allowing U.S. companies to prepare their financial statements under IFRS." However, there was support for a single set of globally accepted accounting standards. The FASB and IASB planned meetings in 2015 to discuss "business combinations, the disclosure framework, insurance contracts and the conceptual framework." As of 2017, there were no active bilateral FASB/IASB projects underway. Instead, the FASB participates in the Accounting Standards Advisory Forum, a global grouping of standard-setters, and monitors individual projects to seek comparability.

Credit losses
On June 16, 2016, the FASB issued an ASU that improves financial reporting by requiring timelier recording of credit losses on loans and other financial instruments held by financial institutions and other organizations. The ASU also amends the accounting for credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities and purchased financial assets with credit deterioration, and requires enhanced disclosures to help investors and other financial statement users better understand significant estimates and judgments used in estimating credit losses, as well as the credit quality and underwriting standards of an organization's portfolio.

Variable interest entities
Under the new standard, the decision whether to consolidate is determined by two factors: a company's design and intention and a parent company's ability to direct that organization's actions in a way that significantly impacts its economic performance.

Pensions
In late 2006, the FASB issued Employers' Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans (statement 158). Under this update, if a pension or other post-retirement plan is overfunded, a company must recognize that overfunded amount as an asset, which can be reduced later if the plan becomes underfunded. Conversely, if a plan is underfunded, a company must recognize that underfunded amount as a liability, which can be reduced if a plan's funding increases in a period. These asset or liability determinations are recognized at the employer's year end in the same year that the plan funding takes place.

These enhancements were made in order to provide employees, investors, retirees, and users of financial statements more complete information about the status of a pension or other post-retirement plan, which is used to make informed decisions about organizations capabilities to fulfill plan obligations.

Stock options
The FASB issued a statement on Share Based Payments (statement 123(R)) in 2004, developed jointly with the IASB. This standard update requires companies to identify the cost of share-based payments (e.g., restricted share plans, employee share purchase plans, performance-based awards, share appreciation rights, and stock options) within their financials. The FASB updated this reporting standard with the goal of improving comparability, relevance and reliability of financial information.

Leases (balance sheet)
In February 2016, the FASB issued a new Leases standard, to improve financial reporting about leasing transactions. The new standard requires organizations to include lease obligations on their balance sheets, and affects all companies and other organizations that lease assets.

Derivative accounting
Upon electing to use hedge accounting, companies must establish a method to evaluate the effectiveness of hedging a derivative, and a method to determine the ineffectiveness of a hedge. The FASB further improved derivative accounting in 2017 with simplification measures included in ASU 2017–12.

Mark-to-market
Critics argue that the 2006 SFAS 157 contributed to the 2008 financial crisis by easing the mark-to-market accounting rule and allowing valuation of assets based on their current market price, rather than the purchase price. Critics claim FASB changes to mark-to-market accounting were made to accommodate "banks with toxic assets on their books." However, others from within the accounting profession assert that the mark-to-market system in fact provides greater transparency and stability by applying similar values to similar assets, regardless of whether they were bought or created internally by a firm. They contrast this with the alternate "mark-to-model" system—said to be riskier, less transparent, and results in incomparable and inconsistent reporting.

Others say mark-to-market provides the most practical choice when valuing most assets, if there is understanding of the long-term effects, and obligation to a global position. They counter that the banking issues went beyond failures in accounting and into major liquidity concerns, and that the accounting profession, FASB, and SEC were not responsible for the banking crisis.

A report from the Harvard Business Review agreed that the mark-to-market accounting is not the direct cause of the financial crisis, but the lack of knowledge related to accounting standards by investors fueled the fire. Most investors at the time assumed that all of banks' assets were appraised at market prices, and that the writing down of bonds would cause banks to violate regulatory capital requirements.

Materiality
The FASB issued a proposal regarding "the use of materiality by reporting entities" in an amendment of the definition of the legal concept of materiality in 2015, stating that "information would be considered material if it was likely to be seen by a reasonable person as significantly altering the total mix of facts about a company." This amendment raised concerns by auditors who believed leaving materiality as a legal concept would undermine judgments made by preparers and auditors to an attorney.

International comparability vs. convergence
Some industry professionals support development of a single, globally-shared set of accounting standards. Convergence proponents assert that a single set of standards would make it easier and more cost-effective for large multi-national corporations to report using one set of financial reporting standards for all countries. They believe it would make financial statements more comparable to one another, improving overall transparency and understanding of a company's financial health. Supporters also argue that a single set of standards would give investors access to crucial information more quickly and increase opportunities for international investments, resulting in economic growth.

Other professionals, however, are opposed to wholesale convergence of a single set of international accounting standards. Opponents share concerns that, due to different environmental influences around the world, such as differing stages of economic development and sources of funding, independent accounting standards are appropriate and necessary.

Convergence opponents have said that without vision and commitment to convergence, the standards wouldn't be effective unless they were enforced or provide significant benefits.

Many U.S. accounting firms are opposed to convergence because of the familiarity of GAAP, the unfamiliarity with international accounting principles, and other countries' accounting systems. U.S. firms and other CPAs have been reluctant to adapt and learn a new accounting system, and believe that IFRS lacks guidance compared to the GAAP. CFOs are also against converging to one set of standards, because of the associated cost.

FASB 11 concepts

 * Money measurement
 * Entity
 * Going concern
 * Cost
 * Dual aspect
 * Accounting period
 * Conservation
 * Realization
 * Matching
 * Consistency
 * Materiality

Accounting issues

 * Stock option expensing
 * SFAS 157
 * Mark-to-market or fair value accounting

Related associations

 * Financial Accounting Foundation
 * Governmental Accounting Standards Board

title: Financial Accounting Standards Board


text:
Governmental Accounting Standards Board

The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) is the source of generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) used by state and local governments in the United States. As with most of the entities involved in creating GAAP in the United States, it is a private, non-governmental organization.

The GASB is subject to oversight by the Financial Accounting Foundation (FAF), which selects the members of the GASB and the Financial Accounting Standards Board, and it funds both organizations.

Its mission is to establish and improve standards of state and local governmental accounting and financial reporting that will result in useful information for users of financial reports and guide and educate the public, including issuers, auditors, and users of those financial reports.

The GASB has issued Statements, Interpretations, Technical Bulletins, Concept Statements and Implementation Guides defining GAAP for state and local governments since 1984. GAAP for the Federal government is defined by the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board.

In January 2020, GASB appointed Joel Black to succeed David Vaudt as the chair. Black is also partner-in-charge of Mauldin & Jenkins LLC.

title: Governmental Accounting Standards Board


text:
International Accounting Standards Committee

The International Accounting Standards Committee (IASC) was founded in June 1973 in London at the initiative of Sir Henry Benson, former president of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. The IASC was created by national accountancy bodies from a number of countries with a view to harmonizing the international diversity of company reporting practices. Between its founding in 1973 and its dissolution in 2001, it developed a set of International Accounting Standards (IAS) that gradually acquired a degree of acceptance in countries around the world. Although the IASC came to include some organizations representing preparers and users of financial statements, it largely remained an initiative of the accountancy profession. On 1 April 2001, it was replaced by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB), an independent standard-setting body. The IASB adopted the extant corpus of IAS which it continued to develop as International Financial Reporting Standards.

Membership
The IASC was founded as a result of an agreement between accountancy bodies in the following countries:

Membership of the committee (later known as the board) was on an institutional, not at an individual basis. Each institution represented on the board could send a delegation of two representatives and a staff observer to committee meetings. Each delegation wielded one vote. According to the IASC's original Constitution, membership was limited to the founding member bodies. Other accountancy bodies could join as associate members. This allowed them to propose members for working parties and so to contribute to the setting of the standards, but did not give them representation or a vote at board meetings. In 1977, the IASC's Constitution was changed to allow for the appointment of two additional board members for four-year terms, on a rotating basis. In a further change to the Constitution in 1982, the terms of all board members were limited to five years. The distinction between founding and associate members was abolished, as all member bodies of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) became members of the IASC. Board members were since then appointed by the IFAC Council. Because of an agreement reached in 1981 between IFAC and the IASC, the founding member bodies continued to be reappointed (with the exception of Mexico in 1987) and de facto retained their permanent seats. Under these arrangements, the following changes in board membership took place:
 * Australia (Institute of Chartered Accountants in Australia (ICAA) and the CPA Australia (formerly known as Australian Society of Certified Practising Accountants (ASCPA))
 * Canada (Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (CICA))
 * France (Ordre des Experts Comptables et des Comptables Agréés (Order of Accounting Experts and Qualified Accountants))
 * Germany (Institut der Wirtschaftsprüfer in Deutschland (IDW) (Institute of Auditors in Germany) and the Wirtschaftsprüferkammer (WPK) (Chamber of Auditors))
 * Japan Nihon Kouninkaikeishi Kyoukai (Japanese Institute of Certified Public Accountants, JICPA))
 * Mexico (Instituto Mexicano de Contadores Públicos (IMCP) (Mexican Institute of Public Accountants)) (removed from the board in 1987 due to non-payment of dues; resumed in 1995).
 * the Netherlands (Nederlands Instituut van Registeraccountants (NIVRA) (Netherlands Institute of Registered Auditors))
 * the United Kingdom and Ireland (counted as one) (Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales (ICAEW), Institute of Chartered Accountants of Scotland (ICAS), Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland (ICAI), Association of Chartered Certified Accountants (ACCA), Chartered Institute of Management Accountants (CIMA), and the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA)
 * the United States of America (American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA))

 * The National Council of Chartered Accountants (South Africa, subsequently known as the South African Institute of Chartered Accountants, SAICA) became an associate member in 1974 and joined the board in 1978. Because of continued reappointments, South Africa became in effect a permanent member of the board. In 1995 the South Africans began sharing their representation on the board with the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Zimbabwe.
 * The Institute of Chartered Accountants of Nigeria became an associate member in 1976 and was a member of the board from 1979 to 1987.
 * The Consiglio Nazionale dei Dottori Commercialisti (Italy) joined the IASC board in 1983 and remained until 1995.
 * The National Federation of Certified Public Accountants Associations of the Republic of China became a member of IFAC Council in 1983 and in 1984 began a three-year term as the second accountancy body from East Asia, after Japan, represented on the IASC Board.
 * Denmark became a member in 1988, replaced in 1990 by the Nordic Federation of Public Accountants (represented by Danes, Swedes and Norwegians, since the Fins and Icelandics were not interested in participating).
 * Korea sent a delegation from 1988 to 1992.
 * A Jordanian delegation served on the Board from 1989 to 1995 which was constituted by the Arab Society of Certified Accountants.
 * The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI) became an associate member in 1974 and joined the board in 1993. In 1995, India began sharing the delegation with the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Sri Lanka.
 * The Malaysian Association of Certified Public Accountants became an associate member in 1975 (later joined by the Institut Akauntan Malaysia, the Malaysian Institute of Accountants), and was a member of the board from 1995 to 2000.

Between 1973 and the change in the IASC's Constitution which made all IFAC members IASC members, a total of 46 accountancy bodies were admitted as associate members, including: the New Zealand Society of Accountants (1974); the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Pakistan and the Pakistan Institute of Industrial Accountants (1974); the Singapore Society of Accountants (1975); the Hong Kong Society of Accountants (1975).

The IASC's constitution as revised in 1982 provided for a limited expansion of the board's membership beyond the organized accountancy profession. Up to four organizations having an interest in financial reporting could now be invited to be represented on the board. As a result, three non-auditor delegations were added over time, all remaining on the board until the end of the IASC:

 * 1986: The International Co-ordinating Committee of Financial Analysts Associations (since 1988 known as the International Council of Investment Associations).
 * 1995: The Federation of Swiss Industrial Holding Companies.
 * 1996: The International Association of Financial Executives Institutes.

Organization
At the core of the IASC was the committee, or board, consisting of delegations from the member bodies. The board typically met three to four times a year for two or three days in locations around the world. It was served by a permanent secretariat based in London. The technical agenda of the board was prepared by working groups known as steering committees, each appointed to develop proposals for a new or modified standard on a specific topic. Steering committee membership was on an individual, not institutional, basis, but appointment was based on recommendation by an IASC member body, industry organization or similar grouping.

From the start, the IASC adopted the practice of issuing draft standards (exposure drafts) for public comment before agreeing on a final standard. This allowed a degree of wider participation in the standard-setting work even though in practice a large proportion of the responses came from accountancy bodies, audit firms and national accounting standard setters. In 1981, the IASC established a Consultative Group, with a view to engaging a broader set of organizations in its work.

In 1996, the IASC set up a Standing Interpretations Committee (SIC), charged with issuing interpretations of standards on relatively narrow issues arising in practice.

Leadership of the IASC was provided by the chairman of the board and head of the secretariat (the Secretary, known since 1984 as Secretary-General):

Chairmen of the IASC

 * Sir Henry Benson (UK, 1973-1976)
 * Joseph Cummings (USA, 1976-1978)
 * John Hepworth (Australia, 1978-1980)
 * Hans Burggraaff (The Netherlands, 1980-1982)
 * Stephen Elliott (Canada, 1982-1985)
 * John Kirkpatrick (UK, 1985-1987)
 * George Barthès de Ruyter (France, 1985-1987)
 * Arthur Wyatt (US, 1990-1992)
 * Eiichi Shiratori (Japan, 1993-1995)
 * Michael Sharpe (Australia, 1995-1997)
 * Stig Enevoldsen (Denmark, 1998-2000)
 * Thomas Jones (US, 2000-2001)

All but Enevoldsen were from one of the founder member countries. All but Jones were partners in audit firms.

Secretaries and Secretaries-General

 * Paul Rosenfield (US, 1973-1975)
 * John Brennan (Canada, 1975-1977)
 * Roy Nash (US, 1977-1979)
 * Allan Cook (UK, 1979-1981)
 * Geoffrey Mitchell (Australia, 1982-1985)
 * David Cairns (UK, 1985-1994)
 * Liesel Knorr (Germany, 1995-1995)
 * Sir Bryan Carsberg (UK, 1995-2001)

Standards
Starting with IAS 1 Disclosure of Accounting Policies, published in 1975, the IASC issued 41 International Accounting Standards, each dealing with a specific financial reporting topic. Over time, standards were amended or replaced. When the IASC was replaced by the IASB, 34 standards were still extant and adopted by the IASB.

The original aim of the IASC was to issue 'basic' standards. In practice, this meant that the standards often reflected common, rather than best practices in the board member countries. Several standards contained alternative treatments (options), reflecting the diversity of practice. For instance, IAS 2 Valuation and Presentation of Inventories in the Context of the Historical Cost System (1975) allowed a variety of practices including the LIFO, FIFO and base stock methods. For this reason, the IASC was sometimes criticized for taking a 'lowest common denominator' approach. However, some of the early standards prescribed practices that were not yet commonly followed in many countries, including several board member countries. IAS 3 Consolidated Financial Statements and the Equity Method of Accounting (1976) required the presentation of consolidated financial statements by parents of subsidiary companies. This was well before the Seventh Company Law Directive (1983) made this mandatory in the member states of the European Economic Community. IAS 17 Accounting for Leases (1982) required the capitalization of finance leases, a practice that was as yet unusual or unknown outside the United States.

In 1987, the IASC adopted a new strategy of strengthening its standards to make them a suitable basis for financial reporting by companies seeking cross-border stock market listings. In doing so, it was encouraged by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) which in 1988 signaled its willingness to consider an improved set of IAS as the basis for preparing financial information in multinational prospectuses. As US capital markets were among the most important in the world, this meant above all that the IASC had to bring its standards more in line with US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (US GAAP) in order to gain acceptance by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), a key IOSCO member. In 1987, the IASC embarked on a project to revise its extant standards. The revisions included the elimination of options, the expansion of disclosure requirements and additional guidance for the application of the standards. The revisions were completed in 1992. As this did not yet satisfy IOSCO, the IASC embarked on a new work programme to revise its standards, and to add standards on topics that were not yet, or only partially covered, such as accounting for financial instruments. This 'core standards' programme was completed under strong time pressure in 1998 with the publication of IAS 39 Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement.

Impact
According to the IASC's Constitution, the member bodies were committed to use their 'best endeavours' with reporting companies, their auditors, governments and securities market regulators to ensure that published financial statements complied with IAS, and that audit reports referred to any non-compliance. In the absence of large-scale global surveys of corporate reporting practices for the 1970s and 1980s, it is not possible to assess with any degree of precision to what degree reporting companies adopted IAS. In the early 1980s, a number of Canadian listed companies began to assert compliance with IAS in their financial statements, but this seems to have been the case in few other countries. One explanation of this limited direct impact is that in most countries, national accountancy bodies had no authority to force companies to adopt IAS. This does not rule out an indirect influence of IAS, as national accounting standards in a range of countries incorporated elements of the national standards in national requirements.

The efforts of the IASC, from 1987 onwards, to improve its standards in order to make them an acceptable basis for cross-border listings led to greater recognition. During the 1990s, a number of major European companies began to prepare financial statements on the basis of US GAAP because of actual or planned listings in the United States. Others adopted IAS which was increasingly seen as a set of standards of sufficient quality for international capital markets. In 1998, German companies were allowed to satisfy their legal reporting requirements in Germany by publishing consolidated financial statements based on 'internationally recognized principles of accounting', which in practice meant either US GAAP or IAS.


text:
CPA

CPA may refer to:

Political parties and governmental organizations

 * Christian Peoples Alliance, a political party in the UK
 * Coalition Provisional Authority, a transitional government of Iraq 2003–04
 * Commonwealth Parliamentary Association
 * Communist Party of America, forerunner of Communist Party USA
 * Communist Party of Arakan, in Burma
 * Communist Party of Australia, 1920–1991
 * Communist Party of Australia (1971)
 * Comprehensive Peace Accord, a 2006 agreement in Nepal
 * Comprehensive Peace Agreement, a 2005 agreement in Sudan
 * Comprehensive Performance Assessment, a UK Audit Commission assessment
 * Comprehensive Plan of Action, a 1989 plan to stop the influx of Indochinese boat people
 * Congress Party Alliance, a political party in the Republic of China (Taiwan)
 * Council of Presidential Advisers, in Singapore
 * Cyprus Ports Authority

Other organizations

 * CPA Australia, a professional accounting body
 * CPA Canada, a professional accounting body
 * Canadian Payments Association
 * Canadian Payroll Association
 * Canadian Police Association
 * Canadian Poolplayers Association
 * Canadian Psychological Association
 * Centre de perfectionnement aux affaires
 * Chinese Progressive Association (Boston), in the US
 * College Park Academy, in Riverdale Park, Maryland, US
 * Commission on Preservation and Access, now Council on Library and Information Resources, in the US
 * Consumer Protection Association, in Myanmar
 * CPA (agriculture) (Cooperativa de Producción Agropecuaria), a type of agricultural cooperative in Cuba
 * Craft Potters Association, in the UK
 * Catholic Patriotic Association, a Catholic organization in China
 * Cyclistes Professionnels Associés, at Maison du Sport International in Lausanne, Switzerland

Project management and cost analysis

 * Cost per action, an online advertising measurement and pricing model
 * Cost per activity, an internat marketing cost policy
 * Critical path analysis, an algorithm for scheduling a set of project activities

Qualifications

 * Chartered Patent Attorney, in the UK
 * Certified Practising Accountant, in Australia
 * Chartered Professional Accountant, in Canada
 * Certified Public Accountant, in the US

Medicine and health care

 * Care Programme Approach, a British system of delivering community mental health services
 * Cerebellopontine angle, in the brain
 * Chronic pulmonary aspergillosis, a long-term fungal infection
 * Collaborative practice agreement, a legal document between pharmacists and physicians in the US
 * N6-Cyclopentyladenosine, a drug
 * Cyproterone acetate, a medication

Information technology

 * Chosen-plaintext attack, an attack model for cryptanalysis
 * Co-citation Proximity Analysis, a document similarity measure
 * Collaboration Protocol Agreement, a component of the ebXML standards
 * Commercial Product Assurance, a form of information security validation

Other uses in science and technology

 * Chirped pulse amplification, a technique for amplifying an ultrashort laser pulse
 * Closest point of approach, measured by marine radar
 * Coherent perfect absorber, a device which absorbs coherent light
 * Coherent potential approximation, a method in physics of finding Green's function
 * Chiral phosphoric acid, esters of phosphoric acid
 * Cyclopropane fatty acid, a subgroup of fatty acids
 * CPA superfamily, of transport proteins

Other uses

 * Cathay Pacific, ICAO airline code CPA
 * Certified Public Assassins, a team featured on Extreme Dodgeball
 * Classification of Products by Activity, a European standard classification of goods and services
 * Climate Pledge Arena, a multi-purpose indoor arena in Seattle, Washington
 * Código Postal Argentino, postal codes in Argentina
 * Community Postal Agent, of Australia Post
 * Community Preservation Act, a state law in Massachusetts, US
 * Continuous partial attention, a term coined by Linda Stone in 1998 to describe a kind of multitasking
 * Continuous payment authority, a type of regular automatic payment

title: CPA


text:
Victoria Bridge, Brisbane

The Victoria Bridge is a bus and pedestrian bridge over the Brisbane River. The current bridge, opened in 1969, is the third permanent crossing erected at this location. Since 24 January 2021, the bridge has been closed to general traffic, and now carries buses, pedestrians and cyclists only.

The Victoria Bridge, the Brisbane River's first road crossing has had a long and interesting history. Since 1865 there have been several versions of the bridge built to connect South Brisbane (near the South Bank Parklands and Queensland Cultural Centre) to the Brisbane central business district (CBD) at North Quay. Half of the road space on the bridge is now given over to the South East Busway. In the 2006 Brisbane City Centre Draft Masterplan, a new crossing immediately adjacent to the Victoria Bridge, tentatively named the Adelaide Street Bridge was recommended for a feasibility study.

1864 Brisbane Bridge
Construction of a bridge across the Brisbane River was first agreed to in 1861. The newly formed Legislative Assembly of Queensland forced the council to pay for the costs, to be financed by unsold crown land in South Brisbane which was transferred to the Corporation of Brisbane under the terms of the Brisbane Bridge Act of 1861. £70,000 worth of borrowings was acquired from the Bank of Queensland secured by mortgage of the bridge lands. Work began on the foundations for the first bridge across the Brisbane River, then known as the Brisbane Bridge, on 22 August 1864. The contractor, John Bourne, offered to convert the scaffolding he was constructing into a temporary bridge. In return for this and an annual payment to the council, he was allowed to charge a toll. This timber structure opened in June 1865. The Bank of Queensland suspended payments in July 1866 and the shareholders decided to wind the bank up, bringing about a halt to funding for the project. The Queensland Government was reluctant to take on responsibility for the bridge's construction because it didn't want to incur debt. The timber bridge quickly succumbed to marine wood worm Teredo Navalis and began to progressively collapse. The council wasn't able to fully repair the structure and its remnants took two years to fall away into the river, along with some components of the partly built iron bridge. After the bridge collapsed on 16 November 1867, the public had to resort back to using ferries to cross the river.

1874 Victoria Bridge
Following resolution of the issue of the debt owed to the liquidators of the Bank Of Queensland in 1871, an English company, Peto, Brassey and Co, agreed to complete the bridge. The new crossing was opened on 15 June 1874 by the Governor of Queensland, George Phipps, 2nd Marquess of Normanby who gave it the name "Victoria Bridge", and was an iron structure and a toll bridge. The bridge was paid for by significant council borrowings that were to be recouped by tolls. However a lack of revenue and widespread community objections to the tolls forced its transfer to the Colonial Government. The tolls were abolished at this time. The bridge included a turning span to allow tall-masted river traffic to pass upstream. A condition of the original Bridge Act was that the bridge "would not obstruct the navigation of the river Brisbane by sea-going vessels". Over time, the swing was little used and subsequently water and gas pipes were laid across it. After the Council lost a court action in 1885 brought by a ship owner when it refused to operate the swing, the Government swiftly passed legislation fixing the bridge. The next year, tram-lines were laid along the bridge. It carried a 6 in and a 9 in diameter pipe which supplied mains water to South Brisbane. This bridge was partially washed away in the 1893 Brisbane flood. In the meantime, ferries were used to transport people and goods across the busy river. This, however, led to the capsize of the ferry ‘’Pearl’’ disaster in 1896 with the loss of more than 40 lives. A temporary wooden structure was built covering the collapsed section of the old bridge while the new bridge was being built.

1897 Victoria Bridge

Another replacement bridge was built and entered service in 1897, lasting until 1969, when it was demolished. This second bridge was designed by Alfred Barton Brady. It was constructed of steel and wrought iron (superstructure), cast iron (structure) and stone (abutments and wing walls - purple hard stone/porphyry, brown freestone and Portland cement) and had two carriage ways and two footpaths. As early as 1943 evidence of the bridge buckling from the weight of increased traffic was noticed. Tram numbers on the bridge had to be restricted and cars limited to the outer lanes as a result.

A portion of the southern abutment of the previous bridge remains adjacent to the current bridge, including a pedestrian arch, a short remnant of tram track and a memorial to Hector Vasyli, a young boy who was killed in a traffic accident at that point when waving to servicemen returning from the First World War. The abutment is heritage-listed.

Current bridge
Planning commenced on a new bridge in 1953, however in 1957 an inspection revealed that there had been no deterioration since 1949, and with careful maintenance, its life would be indefinite. A new bridge, which was opened on 14 April 1969, was needed to meet growing traffic demands. It cost A$3.2 million and featured a modern design which has been described as sleek and elegant. For a short period both bridges were open, each operating in one direction only.

title: Victoria Bridge, Brisbane


text:
William Jolly Bridge

The William Jolly Bridge is a heritage-listed road bridge over the Brisbane River between North Quay in the Brisbane central business district and Grey Street in South Brisbane, within City of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. It was designed by Harding Frew and built from 1928 to 1932 by MR Hornibrook.

The style of the bridge's design is Art Deco, which was popular at the time. MR Hornibrook company built the bridge that consists of two piers that were built in the river and two pylons on the river banks, which support three graceful arches. The rainbow arch type, as it was described, was claimed to be the first of its type in Australia. It is a steel frame arch bridge with an unusual concrete veneer, treated to make it appear like "light-coloured porphyry".

When opened, during the worst year of the Great Depression, the bridge was known simply as the Grey Street Bridge. It was renamed to the William Jolly Bridge on 5 July 1955 in memory of William Jolly, the first Lord Mayor of Greater Brisbane. It was added to the Queensland Heritage Register on 6 August 1996.

History
The William Jolly Bridge was constructed between 1928 and 1932 following the formation of Greater Brisbane in 1925, and was one of the first major capital works of the new Brisbane City Council and bears the name of its first Mayor, William Jolly. At the time of construction, the only traffic bridge linking the Brisbane central business district and South Brisbane was the second Victoria Bridge, built in 1897 to replace an earlier bridge washed away in the flood of 1893. The William Jolly Bridge crosses the Brisbane River at the tip of the South Brisbane peninsula between Grey Street, South Brisbane, and at North Quay at the intersection of Skew and Saul Streets on the northern bank.

The tip of the South Brisbane peninsula is traditionally a point of crossing. A sandy beach marked the point of crossing for aboriginal tribes from the Moreton region, then later for Europeans who crossed the river near this point on the North Quay ferry, and then from the 1930s via the William Jolly Bridge. On the south bank, aboriginal and later European pathways and land use patterns formed the basis for subsequent traffic networks.

Prior to European settlement, the whole of the South Brisbane peninsula was known as Kurilpa, meaning the place of rats, due to the large number of bush rats to be found in the lush vegetation of the area. (The riverfront park adjacent to the bridge at South Brisbane is now called Kurilpa Point.). The first European use of the south bank occurred soon after the establishment of the Moreton Bay penal settlement in 1825 when convicts cleared the flats across the river in order to grow grain to feed the settlement. In 1830 the cultivation of the flats on the south bank was ordered to cease by the Commandant; however throughout the 1830s timber was being exported to Sydney from the south bank. Those en route to the outstations at Coopers Plains, Limestone Hill and Cleveland crossed the area.

On 10 February 1842, following the closure of the penal settlement, the Moreton Bay district was declared open for free settlement. As the point of entry and exit, South Brisbane prospered in the 1840s. In 1846 Brisbane was brought within the provisions of the Police Towns Act of 1839, and boundaries to the town were set.

The first ferry to convey passengers, horses and carriages began operation from Russell Street c. 1842. For over 30 years this was the only vehicular ferry crossing to North Brisbane (as the Brisbane CBD was then known) in this area, except for a brief period from June 1865-November 1867 when a temporary timber bridge, which was rapidly destroyed by marine borer, spanned the river.

Brisbane's first burial ground had been established on the northern bank where Skew Street is now located, (later moved to Hale Street where it became known as Paddington Cemetery, site now partially occupied by Suncorp Stadium), and to the rear of the burial ground a new gaol was established by 1860 and military barracks in 1864. Farming was established along the banks of the river, and development concentrated on Petrie Terrace. Land between the new burial ground and barracks was put up for auction in 1861, and from 1863 the auctioning of suburban allotments (now Paddington) encouraged the spread of the settlement along the ridges.

The North Quay Ferry, a row boat, crossed the river where the bridge now stands, and the River Road (now Coronation Drive) was established as a track which serviced properties towards Toowong. The extension on the Main Line railway from Ipswich to Brisbane in 1875 isolated the strip of riverfront residences from the working-class houses in Milton and Paddington, and this contributed to the relative lack of development along the northern bank of the Milton Reach of the river in subsequent years.

The opening of the Victoria Bridge on 15 June 1874 provided an important transport and communications link between the north and south banks of the river, and provided further impetus to the development of the south bank. The Victoria Bridge was funded by the Brisbane Municipal Council and a toll was imposed to recover costs. Eventually, responsibility for the bridge was taken over by the Queensland Government.

In the 1880s, the south bank experienced a development boom. The South Brisbane dry dock was opened in 1881, coal wharves at Woolloongabba and associated rail links were established c.1885, and South Brisbane railway station was established as the passenger terminus for suburban and country lines built during the 1880s. Industry and commerce was attracted to the area, and Stanley Street developed into a major retail centre and thoroughfare. The spread of housing included the development of large residences located along the ridges with views of the river, and industry developed along the southern bank of the Milton Reach.

The establishment of the South Brisbane municipality occurred on 7 January 1888. The development of the civic centre focused on the Stanley and Vulture Street intersection, with the construction of the South Brisbane Town Hall, Fire Station, Post Office and South Brisbane railway station. The boom of the 1880s collapsed, followed by maritime and pastoral strikes in the early 1890s, and the collapse of banks in 1893. Land and rent values plummeted to their lowest levels and hundreds of home owners applied to the council to work out their rates. A series of floods of the Brisbane River in 1893 resulted in the collapse of the Albert rail bridge at Indooroopilly in 1893, which diverted all rail traffic to South Brisbane, and the collapse of Victoria Bridge on 6 February 1893 which cut vital transport and communications links with the central city. A report in the Telegraph on 8 February 1893 described the event as: "'What a terrible hiatus in the course of business alone has been caused by the collapse of Victoria Bridge. Once again, for practical purposes, the metropolis is divided into two separate towns. No bridge, no telephone, no telegraph, and vastly inadequate ferry accommodation.'"Urban expansion on both sides of the river continued with the opening of the new Victoria Bridge in 1897 and the advent of electric trams. The first encroachment of industry into the residential enclave along the high northern embankment occurred above the North Quay ferry terminal in 1897 with the construction of the Helidon Spa Company's extensive works from the North Quay–River Road intersection. The residential enclave was further reduced when the Morrow-Rankin (later Arnott's Biscuits) factory was established upstream from the Helidon Spa works in 1913.

On 3 October 1903, the Queensland Government gazetted the proclamation which constituted the City of South Brisbane. From 1908 the South Brisbane City Council tried to bring all the wharves in the South Brisbane Reach under its control and encouraged further commercial and industrial development along the river front. As finance permitted, provision of services such as gas, electricity, road sealing, water supply and an adequate system of drainage and sanitation improved the living and working conditions in the area and generated a demand for residential accommodation and improved cross-river communication.

In the immediate period after World War I, residential growth created continued demand for public transport, particularly through and from the South Brisbane peninsula. Land resumption for road widening was enacted in both Stanley and Melbourne Streets, and in September 1925, South Brisbane City Council is noted as having a population of 40,000 persons. In 1930 the completion of the Sydney to South Brisbane interstate railway benefited the local economy with a demand for factory and manufacturing sites. Health factors, noise and nuisance associated with industry and proximity to wharves and docks all contributed to the changing perception of the area bounded by Grey and Boundary Streets, Montague Road and the river. As a result, when the time came to resume land in connection with the construction of the Grey Street Bridge, there was scant opposition.

The Grey Street Bridge was conceived as a bypass for motor traffic between the southern suburbs and western suburbs of Brisbane to avoid increasing traffic congestion on the Victoria Bridge and on CBD streets such as George Street.

By the time Greater Brisbane was formed in 1925, the need for further cross river links had been established. Traffic across the Victoria Bridge had increased 76% from 1912 to 1925, and in 1923 it was noted that traffic tonnage had increased 49.5% in 15 months. The Victoria Bridge also contributed to traffic congestion in the Brisbane CBD as all traffic between the suburbs on the north and south sides of the river had to pass through the CBD. The 1897 Victoria Bridge had a paved deck with bituminous surfacing on wrought iron troughing. Between 1920 and 1922 this paving was replaced by concrete, causing traffic congestion. In 1922, the need for additional traffic on Victoria Bridge was identified, and the Mayor of Brisbane noted the need for cross river traffic as pressing and urgent. The Victoria Bridge structure was investigated in 1923 to determine its strength for further loading, and Walter James Doak, Bridge Engineer of the Queensland Railways, noted that the bridge is now loaded to rather more than its orthodox capacity under live load, but it was considered that there was no immediate danger of collapse. His recommendations included various repairs, and that a second bridge should be built.

The first meeting of the Greater Brisbane Council in March 1925 passed a motion concerning the employment of experts to investigate what cross river facilities were required and their best locations. Mayor William Alfred Jolly was Chairman of the Bridges and Ferries Committee, and recommended that three experts be employed. A motion was passed on 20 May 1925 to appoint a Cross River Commission, which reported on 11 January 1926 (chairman Roger Hawken, Professor of Engineering at the University of Queensland, William Muir Nelson and Ronald Martin Wilson). The report showed 11 proposed river crossings, and considered costs and savings made due to the reduction in haulage costs etc., and the need for a railway bridge was also discussed. A bridge at Grey Street would be a bypass for motor traffic between the southern suburbs and western suburbs of Brisbane to avoid increasing traffic congestion on the Victoria Bridge and on CBD streets such as George Street. A crossing at Kangaroo Point (where the Story Bridge was later built) was estimated to cost 6 times the Grey Street crossing, and further reports were commissioned from William John Earle, the City Planner, and Eneas Fraser Gilchrist, the City Engineer. These reports proposed the Grey Street bridge be two level for road and rail traffic, and a second bridge from Wellington Road to Sydney Street, New Farm, with a major ring road called the Main Parkway Boulevard, be constructed.

On 7 June 1926 Council decided to build a bridge from Grey Street, South Brisbane. However, Gilchrist Avenue (named after EF Gilchrist City Engineer), which is on the other side of the rail line to the proposed Main Parkway Boulevard, is in essence part of the proposed traffic system for the Grey Street Bridge as per Earle's recommended ring road system. The existing Gilchrist Avenue's original drawings are dated 25 June 1930.

The Council called applications for a bridge engineer to design a steel or reinforced concrete bridge on 10 July 1926. Harding Frew, a local but prominent civil engineer, was appointed Engineer for the bridge on 12 November 1926.

Problems were encountered with the design of the bridge due to the depth of rock below the river bed increasing from approximately 14 to 23 m on the southern bank. Due to the costly foundation work, a bridge type with long spans was chosen. Harding Frew considered five bridge types, each a variation on a theme, stating in his report that: "'it is frankly admitted that the purely economical aspect alone has not been given as much weight... as the consideration of utility, with good taste, combined with minimum maintenance cost. ... The maintenance requirements for, and performance of, steel bridges was also noted as a concern.'"Harding Frew recommended bridge type A and the Council adopted his recommendation, of which some of the details of approaches etc. changed from design to construction. The chosen bridge design was to be of concrete-encased steel with arched ribs which rise through the deck. The final decision of the type of bridge, from the five under consideration, was essentially aesthetic, and was influenced by the so-called Rainbow Arch Bridge, carrying Robert Street, St Paul, Minnesota across the Mississippi River. Harding Frew acknowledged this in his report, including photographs of the bridge, and stated that:"'the time has come when some improvement in the appearance of our city bridges should be looked for in Queensland. ...The questions of utility and aesthetics should also be weighed carefully, especially in relation to a city's importance, its civic pride, and its future.'"The selected bridge design differed from the St Paul bridge in that it has three major spans whereas the St Paul bridge only has one, and this has been suggested as possibly making the William Jolly Bridge unique.

The council resumed large areas of land bounded by Roma, Saul and Skew Streets, and between Skew Street, Eagle Terrace and North Quay on the northern side, and on the southern side, east of Grey Street between Montague Road and Melbourne Street. The final position of the bridge was determined by Harding Frew's recommendations (Earle and Gilchrist's were slightly upstream from the present site) and was accepted by Council in late 1926. The bridge was to have a North Quay underpass, and the estimated total cost was £700,000 including viaducts, compulsory acquisitions, roadways, approaches and contingencies. This caused dismay, and the Commissioner for Main Roads considered that the cost should be contained to £500,000 by reducing the North Quay roadworks, minimising resumptions and building a different type of bridge.

Nevertheless, Council called tenders and MR Hornibrook Ltd submitted the lowest of £384,850 and this was accepted on 8 May 1928. Work commenced in August 1928 and was completed in March 1932.

An artist's impression at the time of construction shows trams crossing the bridge with overhead cables, a monument of some kind at the intersection of Skew and Saul Streets, and a different number of viaducts on southern side to those actually built.

An incident occurred on 17 February 1927 which highlighted the potentially disastrous situation of having only one bridge across the Brisbane River. The cargo steamer Chronos was taken upstream by a rising tide and the bow was wedged under the Victoria Bridge. Tugs managed to pull it out eventually, but the rising tide could have dislodged a span of the bridge and dumped it in the river, and this was highlighted in the press at the time. As mentioned, the depth-to-rock over much of the length of the William Jolly Bridge posed a major problem in the design of the foundations. The original design had the piers supported on timber piles, with inclined piles to resist the thrust from the small arch. Piles were driven immediately to the south of the pier, but it became impossible to drive them into the rock and the design was changed to utilise reinforced concrete caissons (heavy, hollow, vertical reinforced concrete cylinders), and the contractor was noted as being completely in accord with this decision. The southern approach spans piers founded on timber piles all driven to rock, or to such depths as it was possible to drive them without damage, and the river piers are founded on reinforced concrete caissons. To achieve this the Sand Island method was invented by Manuel Hornibrook (1893-1970).

The Sand Island is an artificial island constructed by placing sand within a closed ring of sheet piles driven into the bed of the river. Two islands were constructed for each pier (one for each of the cylindrical caissons) with the caissons being 28 ft in diameter at the base. The pier on the sloping mud bank also used this method with rectangular caissons. Hornibrook is quoted as stating: "'...as far as I am concerned the idea is an original one....The idea came to me one morning about 3 o'clock. I was so much taken up with it that I got out of bed and commenced to design a scheme to carry out the piers for the Grey Street Bridge.'"The use of Sand Islands was highly successful and very accurate, and overcame the problem of requiring the cutting edge to be placed directly on dry ground. The material was dredged out of the centre of the caisson and the cylinder progressively sank; however it was necessary to ensure that the caisson was fixed securely to rock and it was therefore essential to ensure man-access into the cylinder. This was achieved by using an air-lock system, but as the men worked under high pressure they could possibly suffer from the bends and an hospital air-lock was located at the surface for repressurisation if required. The foundations for the bridge were very deep, and the experience gained in the construction of this bridge, and later the Story Bridge, was considered of great value and to be a major achievement.

The steelwork was fabricated at the Evans Deakin & Company plant at Rocklea, and the arches had just been fixed in place when, on 5 February 1931 a major flood swept timber falsework away but fortunately the steelwork remained in place.

The steelwork was encased in gunite, a sprayed dry mix concrete, the process of which was based on an invention in the United States at turn of century to spray plaster of paris in the reconstruction of skeletons of prehistoric animals. Between 1904 and 1909 this method was modified to spray sand and cement using a machine known as a Cement- Gun. Gunite was copyrighted in 1912 and continued as a proprietary trademark until 1967, when it became a generic term. The process involves a mixture of sand and cement which is loaded into one chamber, a stream of the dry mixture is forced along a delivery pipe to the gun, and on discharge is mixed with an annular jet of water. It was only in the 1920s that the process spread internationally, and it is difficult to ascertain whether other examples of bridges using the Gunite process, beside the St Paul Minnesota bridge, exist. It would appear that the use of Gunite in the arches, beams, deck members and hangers of the main spans, is a major early use of the process in Australia. The Opening Booklet for the bridge states: "'The encasing of broad flange beams with concrete applied under pressure introduces new methods to Brisbane.'"The southern approach of the bridge, to the south of Montague Road, was designed to have wider footpaths and roadway than the remainder of the bridge to conform with the decision of the council to utilise this portion of the approach, so that access might be had to abutting buildings (directly) from the bridge roadway.

The concrete balustrades were made by the Hume Pipe Company, and were centrifugally cast in their factory at West End. The Hume brothers invented the centrifugal casting method, for the casting of concrete pipes etc., and their firm was established in Adelaide in 1910. The mould for the grotesques, which decorate the bridge, was made by Karma Eklund, daughter of the State Manager, Hugo Eklund.

The structural steelwork including angles, plates, channels etc. was almost wholly imported from Great Britain. Broad flange beams were supplied from Belgium, the largest being 30 x 12 in which were larger than Australian rolled beams at the time. The use of large sections in the southern approaches allowed longer spans thereby reducing the number of piers. The cement and aggregate was supplied by the Queensland Cement and Lime Company.

Provision for a major water pipe never eventuated, and the closer spacing of stringers in the centre to support a tramway was not utilised. The decorative towers were intended to support overhead cables for the proposed tramway. The bridge originally crossed the North Quay underpass on two continuous, reinforced-concrete girder spans, each 33 ft with girders of variable depth. These have since been replaced by precast, prestressed concrete deck units above Coronation Drive, which links onto the Riverside Expressway, and in the process the footpath widths have been reduced.

The extent of work included in the bridge contract excluded some retaining walls, roadways etc. on the northern side which were designed by the council. A statement was presented to the council on 14 November 1933 showing the official final cost as £688,387/12/5. The Grey Street Bridge opened on 30 March 1932. The bridge was officially opened to traffic on 30 March 1932 by Sir John Goodwin, the Governor of Queensland, just eleven days after the opening of the Sydney Harbour Bridge. A large crowd gathered on both sides of the river and 600 invited guests were in attendance.

There was great community interest in the massive public works under construction at the time. It was the era of the Great Depression and massive public works, and Vida Lahey, a distinguished Queensland artist, painted the bridge at least three times during its construction. She also painted other public works including Anzac Square, the State Government Offices (Anzac Square Building), and the Central railway station. Although there was widespread public interest in the bridge, it was eclipsed within ten years by the much larger and more prominent Story Bridge.

An unusual feature of the Grey Street Bridge is that the arches rise through the deck. It is noted that those living in Brisbane tend to regard this as normal for a bridge of this type; however this is in fact most unusual and few bridges around the world, including the Sydney Harbour Bridge, have this feature. The problem confronting Harding Frew was not the span-t- rise ratio of the arch itself, but rather its effect on the design of the deep foundations required at the site.

The bridge was designed to alleviate the traffic on the Victoria Bridge, but by as early as 1939 it was carrying 45% of the cross river traffic and was effectively doing more than it was designed to achieve. On 5 July 1955, the Council decided to rename the bridge the William Jolly Bridge, in honour of William Alfred Jolly (1881-1955). Jolly was Alderman of Windsor Town Council from 1912 to 1925, including 5 years as Mayor. On 21 February 1925 he was elected first Mayor (later Lord Mayor) of the Greater Brisbane Council for six years until his retirement in 1931. John William Greene was the lord mayor when the bridge was opened. Jolly had moved the motions which led to the construction of the bridge. The Greater Brisbane Act gave the council a charter which vested in the council the power to frame its own legislation and the Council proceeded with a bold policy of civic improvements, including the Grey Street Bridge, the newBrisbane City Hall, Anzac Square, the tramways, water supply and sewerage.

Originally the bridge, roadways and footpaths were illuminated by spherical glass light fittings on cast metal mountings on both sides of the arches and the decorative arches of the tower-like elements. These fittings were replaced by the present lighting in 1964.

Many of the balustrades have been replaced, and prior to 1972 the complete roadway was resurfaced with asphalt. The bridge was first painted in 1974. A cream colour was chosen to reflect the approximate colour of newly poured concrete. Floodlighting was also introduced in 1974.

The original two-span overpass over North Quay, later over Coronation Drive, was replaced by the present single-span structure using precast, prestressed concrete deck units in 1988.

Description
The William Jolly Bridge crosses the Brisbane River at the tip of the South Brisbane peninsula between Grey Street, South Brisbane, and North Quay at the intersection of Skew and Saul Streets on the northern bank. The bridge carries four lanes of traffic with pedestrian paths to either side, and retaining walls return at right angles to the bridge at the northern end supporting North Quay above. The bridge spans between ground level on the higher northern bank, ramping down to Grey Street inland from the southern bank. To achieve this, the bridge was constructed with three major spans of arched ribs across the river, with two smaller arches at the northern embankment and a single arch at the southern embankment, and a viaduct consisting of 16 spans ramping down to Grey Street to the south. The southern ramping section curves towards the southeast in plan, crossing Montague Road to align with Grey Street. The two smaller arches at the northern embankment are no longer extant, and have been replaced by precast, prestressed concrete deck units above Coronation Drive, which links onto the riverside expressway.

The bridge is constructed of concrete encased steel, with the three major spans of arched ribs rising through the deck. The roadway is partly supported by hangers from the arches which project above, and cross girders and stringers below. The ramping southern section roadway is supported by longitudinal broad flange beams supported by rows of piers, with the southern end abutment being earth filled between reinforced concrete retaining walls. A misconception at the time of construction was that the concrete encasing was decorative and was only used to hide the structural steelwork of the bridge. This was incorrect as the bridge was designed as a reinforced concrete structure, with the steelwork acting as reinforcing and the concrete carrying a major part of the load. However, the concrete is also used in a decorative manner to represent oversized coursing on the main piers and voussoirs on the arched ribs.

Other decorative features include grotesques to the outer face of some balustrades, and a floral-like motif at either side of the top of the four ornamental tower-like elements. These four tower-like elements frame both entrances to the bridge, surmounting the end piers of the cross-river section, and each consists of an arched opening to a projecting balcony with a stepped crown surmounted by a metal spire. These were originally intended to have the functional purpose of supporting the overhead cables for the proposed electric tramway. The bridge has cast concrete balustrades, and carefully detailed elements such as the curved ends to the concrete encased cross girders beneath the roadway, and the termination blocks for the upper portions of the arched ribs. Openings in the cross girders below the roadway, intended for a major water pipe which was not installed, are evident.

A pedestrian stair with iron balustrade is located on the southern side of Montague Road and rises through the southwestern footpath. A stair is also located within the North Quay retaining wall on the northeastern side of the bridge connecting North Quay and Coronation Drive. This stair has a solid concrete balustrade, and is no longer accessible from below.

Street lighting has been installed along the length of the bridge, and traffic lights are located at the northern end.

Traffic use
The William Jolly Bridge is shared by vehicular traffic, pedestrians and cyclists. It connects Grey Street in South Brisbane to Roma Street on the western edge of the Brisbane central business district. It was constructed with the intention of building tram lines over it and although the tracks were never installed, anchor points for tramway overhead were installed at the top of each arch. These overhead anchor points remain in situ.

Congestion
The bridge has two lanes for motor traffic in each direction, and a footpath on each side of the bridge.

Although designed to reduce congestion on the existing Victoria Bridge and within the CBD, the bridge created new congestion issues of its own, as it put considerable pressure on the Normanby Fiveways intersection making it one of Brisbane's most congested and dangerous intersections.

By 2006, the Brisbane City Council reported that on a typical weekday, 42000 vehicles crossed the bridge and at peak times both ends of the bridge suffered from congestion. The Go Between Bridge, opened in 2010, was intended to relieve some of the congestion on the William Jolly Bridge; however it has not achieved the level of use anticipated and operates under capacity, possibly because the Go Between Bridge is a toll bridge while the nearby William Jolly Bridge remains free to use.

In popular culture
In 2003 the bridge was a location for the filming of Inspector Gadget 2. From 2009, the bridge is being used as a canvas for artistic light shows. Two towers, five metres high, are used to project images onto the bridge. The cost of the project was $2,000,000.

Heritage listing
William Jolly Bridge was listed on the Queensland Heritage Register on 6 August 1996 having satisfied the following criteria.

The place is important in demonstrating the evolution or pattern of Queensland's history.

The William Jolly Bridge was constructed between 1928 and 1932 following the formation of Greater Brisbane in 1925, and was one of the first major capital works of the new city Council being part of a bold policy of civic improvements under the provisions of the Greater Brisbane Act. The construction of the bridge was seen as a symbol of the unification of Greater Brisbane, and the bridge bears the name of the new city Council's first Mayor, and later Lord Mayor, William Alfred Jolly, who was Chairman of the Bridges and Ferries Committee and who had moved the motions which led to the construction of the bridge.

The William Jolly Bridge is located at the tip of the South Brisbane peninsula, a location which traditionally has been a point of crossing of the Brisbane River from pre-European settlement. Aboriginal and later European pathways and land use patterns formed the basis for subsequent traffic networks which are reflected in the location of the bridge and associated traffic systems. It was Brisbane's second traffic bridge and provided an important transport and communications link between both sides of the river, as well as further impetus for the development of the South Brisbane peninsula.

The place demonstrates rare, uncommon or endangered aspects of Queensland's cultural heritage.

The design of the bridge is unusual in its use of three major spans of arched ribs which rise through the deck, which give the bridge a distinctive appearance and a landmark quality.

The place is important because of its aesthetic significance.

The design of the William Jolly Bridge was intended to reflect the city's importance and its civic pride. Constructed of concrete encased steel, the bridge has a monument-like quality, with grotesques and representations of oversized coursing on the main piers and voussoirs on the arched ribs.

The design of the bridge is unusual in its use of three major spans of arched ribs which rise through the deck, which give the bridge a distinctive appearance and a landmark quality.

The place is important in demonstrating a high degree of creative or technical achievement at a particular period.

The William Jolly Bridge demonstrates a high degree of technical achievement in its design, its use of Gunite (sprayed dry mix concrete), and in the development of the Sand Island method used for the construction of its river piers.

The place has a special association with the life or work of a particular person, group or organisation of importance in Queensland's history.

The William Jolly Bridge was designed by AE Harding Frew, a distinguished Brisbane engineer, and was a major work by Queensland contractors Evans Deakin and Co and MR Hornibrook Ltd.

title: William Jolly Bridge