• About
  • Offices
  • Careers
  • News
  • Students
  • Alumni
  • Payments
  • EN | FR
Background Image
Bennett Jones Logo
  • People
  • Expertise
  • Knowledge
  • Search
  • FR Menu
  • Search Mobile
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
View all
Practices
Corporate Litigation Regulatory Tax View all
Industries
Energy Infrastructure Mining Private Equity & Investment Funds View all
Advisory
Crisis & Risk Management Public Policy
View Client Work
International Experience
Insights News Events Subscribe
Arbitration Angle Artificial Intelligence Insights Business Law Talks Podcast Class Actions: Looking Forward Class Action Quick Takes
Economic Outlook New Energy Economy Series Quarterly Fintech Insights Quarterly M&A Insights Sustainability & the CIO
People
Offices
About
Practices
Industries
Advisory Services
Client Work
Insights
News
Events
Careers
Law Students
Alumni
Payments
Search
Subscribe

Stay informed on the latest business and legal insights and events.

LinkedIn LinkedIn Twitter Twitter Vimeo Vimeo
 

Canadian Securities Administrators Publish Comment Letters on Proposed National Policy 25-201 Guidance for Proxy Advisory Firms

April 20, 2015

Written By Will Osler, J. Paul D. Barbeau, Matthew R. Olson and Tessa E.J. Guenther

On April 24, 2014, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) published for comment proposed National Policy 25-201 Guidance for Proxy Advisory Firms. Issuers, law firms and other market participants submitted comment letters which were recently published by the CSA. The proposed policy, including the comment letters received, may be downloaded from the website of the Alberta Securities Commission (PDF).

The purpose of the proposed policy is to address concerns of market participants about services provided by proxy advisory firms by providing non-mandatory guidance on recommended practices and disclosure for proxy advisory firms on conflicts of interest, transparency, development of proxy voting guidelines and communications with the public.

Background

On June 21, 2012, the CSA published for comment Consultation Paper 25-401 Potential Regulation of Proxy Advisory Firms. The purpose of the consultation paper was to facilitate discussion about services provided by proxy advisory firms and to explore the need for the CSA to address concerns of market participants surrounding proxy advisory firms. Based on comments received on the consultation paper, the CSA subsequently published for comment the proposed policy.

Key Provisions of the Proposed Policy

Conflicts of Interest

The potential for conflicts of interest in the proxy advisory industry may compromise the independence of advice provided by proxy advisory firms. The CSA expects firms to identify, manage and mitigate actual or potential conflicts of interest and to consider doing so by, among other things:

  • establishing policies and procedures to mitigate actual or potential conflicts of interest that could influence research, analysis, voting recommendations or proxy voting guidelines;
  • designing and implementing internal safeguards and controls to monitor policies and procedures and adopting a code of conduct to mitigate actual or potential conflicts of interest, (which have the endorsement of the CEO and board of directors of the firm); and
  • regularly evaluating the effectiveness of processes to ensure they remain appropriate (including appointing an appropriately qualified person for monitoring and assessing compliance by the firm of its processes).

In addition, proxy advisory firms are expected to disclose actual or potential conflicts of interest to their clients in a timely manner, and, where possible, to post or describe on their websites their policies, procedures, safeguards, controls and code of conduct.

Transparency and Accuracy of Vote Recommendations

The CSA promotes transparency in the processes leading to voting recommendations, so that market participants can appropriately evaluate the merits of such guidance. The CSA expects proxy advisory firms to ensure that voting recommendations are determined in a consistent manner, based on up-to-date publicly available information and prepared in accordance with a methodology aimed at reducing the risk of errors.

Proxy advisory firms may consider taking the following steps:

  • regularly evaluating the effectiveness of internal controls and procedures;
  • implementing a quality assurance process to review voting recommendations before they are provided to clients;
  • establishing and, where possible, disclosing policies and procedures describing the methodology used in the analysis as well as internal safeguards and controls to increase the accuracy and reliability of the information and data used in the preparation of voting recommendations; and
  • ensuring that they have the resources, knowledge and expertise required to prepare well-researched and analyzed voting recommendations, by hiring and retaining individuals with the appropriate competencies.

Development of Proxy Voting Guidelines

Proxy advisory firms are encouraged by the CSA to ensure that their proxy voting guidelines, which may have influence on corporate governance practices of issuers, avoid a "one-size-fits-all" approach and to consider the following when developing such guidelines:

  • establishing, maintaining and applying written policies and procedures describing the process followed in developing and updating proxy voting guidelines;
  • regularly consulting with clients, other market participants and the public and taking into account local market or regulatory conditions;
  • having the resources, knowledge and expertise required to develop and update voting guidelines; and
  • where possible, posting on their website their proxy voting guidelines, policies and procedures and consultations leading to the development of proxy voting guidelines.

Communications with Clients, Market Participants, the Media and the Public

The CSA encourages proxy advisory firms to foster understanding of the activities of such firms by:

  • communicating to their clients in their reports: (i) any actual or potential conflicts of interest arising from the voting recommendations; (ii) the approach or methodologies used, factors considered and weight given to such factors in determining the vote recommendations; (iii) information that is factual or that comes from analytical models or assumptions and their reasons for voting recommendations; (iv) the extent to which proxy voting guidelines are used when making voting recommendations; (v) the nature of any dialogue with the issuer in the preparation of voting recommendations; and (vi) any known or potential limitations or conditions in the research and analysis used in the preparation of voting recommendations;
  • correcting any factual error or inaccuracy found in a report in a timely manner;
  • establishing policies and procedures governing their communications with clients, market participants, the media and the public and posting such policies and procedures on their websites; and
  • establishing a contact person to manage communications with clients, market participants, the media and the public.

Next Steps

The CSA has not given an indication regarding next steps for the proposed policy, and at this time it is unclear whether it will be adopted as drafted, revised or even abandoned altogether. Bennett Jones will continue to monitor the proposed policy and provide updates on further developments.

Please note that this publication presents an overview of notable legal trends and related updates. It is intended for informational purposes and not as a replacement for detailed legal advice. If you need guidance tailored to your specific circumstances, please contact one of the authors to explore how we can help you navigate your legal needs.

For permission to republish this or any other publication, contact Amrita Kochhar at kochhara@bennettjones.com.

Key Contact

  • William S. Osler KC William S. Osler KC, Partner

Related Links

  • Insights
  • Media
  • Subscribe

Related Expertise

  • Capital Markets

Recent Posts

Announcements

Bennett Jones Wins Big at Benchmark Litigation Awards

May 09, 2025
       

In The News

Managing Risk Amid Tariff Chaos

May 09, 2025
       

Speaking Engagements

Insights on Tariff Strategy and Cross-Border Trade Compliance

May 08, 2025
       

In The News

John Manley on NPR’s Morning Edition on Mark Carney’s White House Visit

May 06, 2025
       

Speaking Engagements

Brendan Sigalet on Clean Investment Tax Credits

May 05, 2025
       

Speaking Engagements

Due Diligence for Tenants at ICSC CANADIAN LAW

May 02, 2025
       

Announcements

Bennett Jones Lawyers Named Among Canada’s Top Litigators By Benchmark Canada

May 01, 2025
       

Announcements

Twenty-Six Bennett Jones Lawyers Ranked in Lexpert's Special Edition on Infrastructure

April 30, 2025
       

Announcements

Jesslyn Maurier Appointed to Ontario Chamber of Commerce’s Board of Directors

April 29, 2025
       
Bennett Jones Centennial Footer
Bennett Jones Centennial Footer
About
  • Leadership
  • Diversity
  • Community
  • Innovation
  • Security
Offices
  • Calgary
  • Edmonton
  • Montréal
  • Ottawa
  • Toronto
  • Vancouver
  • New York
Connect
  • Insights
  • News
  • Events
  • Careers
  • Students
  • Alumni
Subscribe

Stay informed on the latest business and legal insights and events.

LinkedIn LinkedIn Twitter Twitter Vimeo Vimeo
© Bennett Jones LLP 2025. All rights reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Use
Logo Bennett Jones