• About
• Publications
• Exemptions
• Notices
• What's new?
• International
• Speeches
• Information for investors
• Contact us
• Site map
• Home

Securities Commission Policy in Respect of Approval of Trustees and Statutory Supervisors

APPENDIX
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS

We would be pleased to receive any views, observations or comments that you may wish to make to us about this paper and would be grateful to have our attention drawn to any important considerations that we may have overlooked. We would also appreciate it if submissions were to include views in respect of the questions set out in the paper (repeated below). Submissions must reach the Commission by Friday 6 July 2001.

Part II

1. Is there a useful role for trustees and statutory supervisors to play in representing the interests of security holders?

2. If yes, in respect of question I, do the prescribed rights and duties of trustees and statutory supervisors empower them to adequately represent the interests of security holders?

Part III

3. Is there a need for a regulatory body to consider applications for approval of persons to act as trustees and statutory supervisors?

4. If yes, in respect of question III, is the Commission the appropriate regulatory body to manage this process?

5. Are there more desirable alternatives to the present system of approval?

Part IV

6. Are the Commission's current criteria for the approval of trustees and statutory supervisors satisfactory?

7. Are the Commission's current procedures for the approval of trustees and statutory supervisors necessary?

8. Should the Commission require an applicant to have a minimum amount of paid up capital?

9. Should the Commission approve individuals to act as trustees?

10. Is the dishonesty criterion (paragraph 38) satisfactory?

11. Should the professional membership criterion (paragraph 39) be amended to allow applicants a greater level of flexibility in terms of their board membership?

12. Does the independence criterion (paragraphs 44 and 45) impose an unnecessary entry barrier to potential applicants or a business barrier to established trustees and statutory supervisors?

13. Should personal guarantees be required from applicants?

14. Is the duration period of approvals (five years) too short, about right or too long?

15. Should approvals, of either trustees or statutory supervisors, be for an unlimited duration?

Part V

16. Is there a need for ongoing oversight of trustees and statutory supervisors?

17. If yes, in respect of question XVI, is the Commission the appropriate body to conduct this role?

18. If yes, in respect of question XVII, should the trustee / statutory supervisor be required to report to the Commission on the occurrence any change in matters material to the Commission's approval of that person and in any event, on an annual basis to the Commission?

19. If yes, in respect of question XVIII, should such an annual report be made available to investors on request?