In his opening address to the Investment Dealers Association of Canada’s annual conference in St. Andrew’s by-the-Sea, N.B., on Monday, IDA president and CEO, Joe Oliver, discussed the alternatives for regulatory reform, and called on securities dealers to agitate for change.

After evaluating the pros and cons of the various models — national regulator, pan-Canadian commission and the current system improved by the Uniform Securities Law (USL) project — Oliver concluded, “Ultimately, the decision is political. That means the private sector must maintain the pressure for reform. Don’t let the decision makers off the hook. Keep pushing for the best possible model.”

In his speech, Oliver did not reveal which model he thought was the best possible. However, he was most critical of the pan-Canadian proposal advocated by the Ontario Securities Commission’s chair, David Brown.

“For any plan to have a hope of winning national support, it is critical that the governance, appointment of the commissioners and regional staffing preclude a dominating role for Ontario,” he said. “That is the stated and unstated reason for resistance to this model. Control by Toronto is viewed as even less attractive than control by Ottawa.”

As for the USL proposal, Oliver expressed concerns, too. “We would like the project to be more comprehensive, obtain agreement of every commission, and have all the provinces enact enabling legislation quickly. Otherwise, the Uniform Act will leave out major policy areas, fail to be national in scope and put off ultimate implementation too far in the future.” He is also concerned about ongoing coordination, which has not been discussed.

As for the national model, Oliver reported that the IDA board has approved a comment to be submitted to the federally constituted Wise Person’s Committee.

He called on other dealers to follow suit. Comments are due by June 30. “Members have expressed their frustration and concern about slow progress in regulatory reform. Now is your opportunity to comment at a pivotal time. Soon it will be too late.”

Oliver seemed to favour this model, noting its big advantages of the potential for regulatory efficiency and a level playing field through uniform rules. But he also warned that there are big risks, in that it would require a massive restructuring of the current system. “Otherwise, it would open the door to the nightmare scenario — multi-layered federal and provincial regulation.”

He also cautioned that the issue of regulatory content hasn’t been addressed, and that federal institutions don’t have the best track record.