If the financial collapse of Enron, the U.S. responded by deploying the strict Sarbanes-Oxley, the United Kingdom (Not immune, as the story Marconi suggested by the phenomena of corporate malpractice) has not been watching: on 23 July, the Financial Reporting Council has published the "Combined Code on Corporate Governance."
The UK approach is however fundamentally different from the U.S., and more "ancient". The United Kingdom, even after the serious financial scandals and crack in the early '90s hit companies such as Maxwell, BCCI, Polly Peck, Clows Barlow, is the first country to have initiated a discussion on the topic of corporate governance which resulted in 1992 in drafting the Code of best practice by a committee which included representatives of the City and the public sector and chaired by Adrian Cadbury. The recent Combined Code is that the revision (the third, and more effective in ten years), designed by a committee chaired by Derek Higgs, the rules prepared by the Cadbury Committee. The new rules proposed by the Higgs Committee aim to strengthen the role of non-executive directors within the board. The route choice, and now confirmed, from London was not the "iron fist" of legislation, but self-regulation by the stakeholders (meeting in the Financial Reporting Council, a private), and since 1993 the authority of these rules is ensured by the inclusion car tax between the listing rules of the obligation for directors to state whether you have complied with and, if not, why. So rules based on "comply or explain". A
EU Commissioner Frits Bolkestein has shown, since Enron, are not among those who believe Europe's overall security of the USA (and the news in recent months seem to bear him out) and presented on May 23 a action plan aimed at strengthening the rules of corporate governance in Europe, in which there are both legislative measures (introduction for companies listed in an annual statement on corporate governance and standards aimed at facilitating the exercise of shareholders' rights) that non-binding recommendations (to reinforce the role of non-executive directors and to establish a European Corporate Governance Forum in order to select the best experiences of various countries). Brussels, bound by the extensive regulatory differences between member countries, seems to seek a "third way" between legislation and regulation. The positive experience so far, however, the British could - through increased use of self, able to overlap more flexibly to the different national experiences - a useful model for the EU.
0 comments:
Post a Comment