Your proposition may be good
But let's have one thing understood Whatever it is, I'm against it! And even when you've changed it or condensed it I'm against it!
In addressing the reform of Canada's securities laws, we all need to be careful lest these words from Groucho Marx become too true. Much of what's on the regulatory policy agenda these days is fundamental in nature and warrants careful, non-partisan consideration. This is long-view stuff. It challenges each side to be wise instead of clever and to give ground if necessary so that progress can be made.
Yet, look at the past 10 years. That's how long initiatives for plain disclosure of fees and investment performance have been under debate. Now, a decade later, the investment industry says it's still not ready for implementation. It's hard not to see this as simple foot dragging especially as, over the same decade, the industry's quibbled and quarrelled about a commonsense requirement that mutual fund investors be given a concise, plain language summary of key information at or before the point of sale.
Likewise, despite almost 20 years of criticism over conflicts of interest rife in mutual fund sales and compensation practices, the industry continues to fight tooth and nail against reform of this shabby aspect of its business model. Whole generations of regulators have come and gone while fund companies, dealers and their lobbyists filibustered on this issue.
And then there's the battle over whether advisors and dealers should be required to act in their clients' best interests. Industry pushback against this initiative has been extensive, making it clear they're prepared to dig in for a very long siege.
This story originally appeared as an Inside track op-ed in the online version of Investment Executive. To read the rest of the article on our website, click here.
|