| CANADA
By Michelle Tan
In the first quarter of 2004, Fairvest examined
41 mergers and acquisitions, two conversions into income trusts,
12 continuations under different jurisdictions, 31 private placements,
two shareholder rights plans, 78 resolutions to adopt equity
compensation plans, 36 resolutions to amend option plans and
10 resolutions to re-price options during this period. A relatively
large number of companies (20) also proposed name- change resolutions.
As is typical for this period, a large number of shareholder
proposals (32) were submitted to the Canadian banks. Fairvest
has published a summary of these shareholder proposals, including
voting results, in our most recent issue of the Corporate Governance
Review (CGR); copies of Volume 16 No. 2 are available to clients
upon request.
Below is a summary of noteworthy governance news that occurred
in Canada during the first quarter.
Expensing Options
Becomes Mandatory
Effective Jan. 1, 2004, the Canadian Accounting Standards Board
(AcSB) established a new rule requiring public companies to
expense all stock-based compensation awards, including stock
options granted to employees, executives, and directors. This
is a revolutionary move, making Canada the first major jurisdiction
in the world to require companies to expense their stock options.
Prior to the new AcSB ruling, companies were given the choice
to report their stock option values using one of two methods:
the intrinsic value method or the fair-market value method.
The intrinsic value method allowed the company to include footnotes
in the company's notes to the financial statements, outlining
how much the stock options were worth and what effect these
options would have had if they had been expensed in the company's
financial statements. The fair-value method determined the value
of the options and incorporated them directly into the company's
income statement as an expense.
New Corporate
Governance Rules and Regulations
January was a busy month for the Ontario Securities Commission
(OSC). Three major rules and regulations that specifically address
corporate governance issues were released in their final draft.
The three Instruments received Ministerial approval and came
into force on Mar. 30, 2004.
National Instrument 52-108 Auditor Oversight is directed
towards increasing the public's confidence in the integrity
of financial reporting of reporting issuers, by promoting high
quality, independent auditing. Reporting issuers will be required
to have their auditor's report signed by a public accounting
firm that is: i) a member of the Canadian Public Accountability
Board (CPAB); and ii) in compliance with an restrictions or
sanctions imposed by the CPAB.
Multilateral Instrument 52-109 Certification of Disclosure
in Issuers' Annual and Interim Filings is expected
to enhance investor confidence in the integrity of the Canadian
capital market through the improved quality and reliability
of company's annual and interim disclosure. Company CEOs
and CFOs will be required to certify personally a number of
different documents, including annual information forms, interim
and annual financial statements, and interim and annual MD&As.
Multilateral Instrument 52-110 Audit Committees was
designed to encourage companies to establish and maintain strong,
effective, and independent audit committees with the end goal
of ultimately fostering increased investor confidence in Canadian
capital markets. Pursuant to the Instrument, all companies will
be required to have an audit committee to which the company's
external auditor must directly report. More specifically the
audit commit will be responsible for: i) overseeing the work
of the external auditor engaged in preparing an audit report;
ii) pre-approving all non audit services to be provided to the
company by the external auditor; and iii) reviewing the issuer's
financial statements, MD&As, and annual and interim earnings
press releases before they are publicly disclosed by the company.
In January, the OSC also released for comment their proposed
Multilateral Policy 58-201 Effective Corporate Governance and
Multilateral Instrument 58-101 Disclosure of Corporate Governance
Practices.
Opposing Options
ATI Technologies Inc. proposed a restricted share unit plan
that just squeaked by shareholders. Approximate numbers released
by the company show that 69.4 million of the 115.3 million votes
cast were in favor of the resolution at the company's
annual meeting on Jan. 27, 2004. These findings indicate that
roughly 40 percent of the shares voted were against the plan.
Prior to the meeting, the Ontario Teachers Pension Plan Board
had announced its intention to vote against the proposal, pointing
to the potential dilution represented by the resolution at approximately
14.3 percent of the company's outstanding shares. ATI
has faced serious criticism of its share incentive plans in
the past. At last year's meeting shareholders were incensed
at the company's proposal to increase the number of shares
reserved under the stock option plan by approximately 12.5 million
shares. As a result, the 2003 option plan amendment barely passed
with only 54.2 percent of shareholders voting in favor of the
resolution.
Controlling
Shareholder Proposal
At the Shaw Communications Inc. annual meeting held Jan. 21,
2004, shareholders were presented a request in the form of a
resolution from J. R. Shaw (the company's controlling shareholder)
seeking the elimination of all authorized but unissued Class
A common shares. While Shaw's articles specify that an unlimited
number of Class A common shares are authorized for issuance
at the discretion of the Shaw board, the amended articles would
provide that no Class A shares may issued in the future without
the prior approval of two thirds of the holders of the then
outstanding Class A shares. As holder of 77 percent of the Class
A shares, the Shaw family would gain firmer control over any
future Class A share issuances. The Shaw proposal was virtually
identical to one proposed at Rogers Communications Inc.'s 2003
AGM by its own controlling shareholder, Edward S. Rogers.
|