Juin-JuiLLet-aoÃ»t 2012 | voL. 37 no 3 - Chambre de la sÃ©curitÃ© ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

message from management The Chambre, Securing Your Interests in Disciplinary Matters: It’s Everyone’s Business, Including the Banks! Dany Bergeron, B.B.A., C.L.U., C.A.A.S., FMA, FCSI Chair of the Board Luc Labelle, M.Sc. President and Chief Executive Officer The disciplinary process, through which the Chambre sees to it that breaches of the rules of ethics committed by its members are punished, is the best tool available to the Chambre to protect the public. The process ensures that the collective reputation of the representatives who are self-regulated by the Chambre remains intact and, where necessary, that undesirable elements are kept out of the fields of practice entrusted to our supervisory powers. Our syndic plays a crucial role in fulfilling the Chambre’s mission to protect the public. In performing her duties, she investigates the professional conduct of representatives who are members of the Chambre and appear to have violated An Act respecting the distribution of financial products and services (the “Distribution Act”), the Securities Act or their regulations. Traditionally, all industry players recognized the effectiveness of the tools available to the Chambre’s syndic to carry out her investigations. They cooperated willingly, providing the information she needed to bring violators before the disciplinary committee, where appropriate. However, a few months ago, the situation changed. Since then, several banks have refused to cooperate fully with the syndic’s investigations. To justify their refusal, they argue that the syndic’s jurisdiction is limited to representatives’ pursuit of mutual fund activities and that the syndic does not have jurisdiction in matters involving dismissals due to a lack of probity, honesty or integrity with respect to a representative’s banking activities, even if the situation involves the conduct of a former representative attached to a firm associated with the bank. We believe that helping the Chambre and its syndic to protect the public by giving her the means to file a disciplinary complaint has always been everyone’s business… including the banking institutions! In the Chambre’s opinion, the Distribution Act was never intended to establish a distinction through which the syndic is blocked from accessing the evidence she requires regarding a representative’s activities. On the contrary! We believe that helping the Chambre and its syndic to protect the public by giving her the means to file a disciplinary complaint has always been everyone’s business... including the banking institutions! Faced with a situation which can only worsen over time, the Chambre has unhesitatingly supported its syndic in her fight before the courts 6 SÉCURITÉ FINANCIÈRE | vol. 37 n o 3
message from management to obtain an injunction against one of the uncooperative institutions, the CIBC Bank, to compel it to communicate the documents and information she has asked it to provide. It is essential that the syndic obtain a judgment that clearly recognizes her capacity to act and confirms the full extent of the syndic’s effectiveness within the Chambre’s disciplinary process. On the side of the banks, some have argued that by amending the Distribution Act in November 2011, the government revealed its “intention” to give the Autorité des marchés financiers (the “AMF”) a power that runs parallel to the Chambre’s disciplinary process, thereby now allowing the AMF to investigate Chambre members and institute judicial proceedings against them before the Bureau de décision et de révision (BDR), in the place and stead of the Chambre. As reported in the media, some have argued that the rival system involving the AMF and the BDR is necessarily more efficient because the statute that created the AMF gives its investigators greater powers of inquiry than those of the Chambre’s syndic under the Distribution Act. One institution even went as far as to suggest that the Chambre entrust its investigations to the AMF so as to better fulfil the legislature’s presumed “intent” and protect the public. Mr. Alain Paquet, the Minister for Finance, wasted no time in publicly refuting the position attributed to him in this regard. This is for the best, because the ideal situation for the self-regulation of our members requires not only that the Chambre’s disciplinary powers exist in harmony with those of the AMF but, in particular, that the Chambre be able to exercise them on equal terms and in close cooperation with its regulator. Otherwise, it will be those who violate the rules who, unfortunately, will ultimately benefit from flaws in the system, to the detriment of the public. We will do everything in our power to avoid such a situation. In the meantime, though, the banks are certainly not helping… Dany Bergeron, B.B.A., C.L.U., C.A.A.S., FMA, FCSI Chair of the Board Luc Labelle, M.Sc. President and Chief Executive Officer SÉCURITÉ FINANCIÈRE | vol. 37 n o 3 7
Page 1 and 2: L e m a g a z i n e d e s p r o f e
Page 3 and 4: Sommaire Le nouveau conseil d’adm
Page 5: message de la direction qu’elle a
Page 9 and 10: ACTUALITÉS Appel de candidatures p
Page 11 and 12: ACTUALITÉS Deux prix ont été rem
Page 13 and 14: ACTUALITÉS L’assemblée généra
Page 15 and 16: ACTUALITÉS Rapport financier La Ch
Page 17 and 18: ACTUALITÉS 7. Clarifier les règle
Page 19 and 20: Conformité Le projet de Règlement
Page 21 and 22: conformité • L’obligation de c
Page 23 and 24: Règlementation L’implication ou
Page 25 and 26: vrai ou faux Vrai ou faux TESTEZ VO
Page 27 and 28: Activités des sections régionales
Page 33 and 34: Saviez-vous que Saviez-vous que D
Page 35 and 36: FORMATION CONTINUE Une nouvelle act
Page 37 and 38: avis disciplinaires DOSSIER : CD00-
Page 39 and 40: AVIS DISCIPLINAIREs Culpabilité et

Juin-JuiLLet-aoÃ»t 2012 | voL. 37 no 3 - Chambre de la sÃ©curitÃ© ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?