Gouvernance

Le Sénat du Canada a adopté jeudi soir le 28 avril le projet de loi S-211, la Loi sur la lutte contre le travail forcé et le travail des enfants dans les chaines d’approvisionnement, et a envoyé la législation à la Chambre des communes. Après quatre tentatives antérieures, dont la première remonte à 2018, l’adoption par le Sénat du projet de loi S-211 marque le progrès le plus important de l’histoire pour la législation sur l’esclavage moderne au Canada.

Le projet de loi S-211 propose une approche de transparence qui obligerait les entreprises et les institutions gouvernementales à faire rapport annuellement sur le risque de travail forcé et de travail des enfants dans leurs chaînes d’approvisionnement, ainsi que sur les politiques et les processus de diligence raisonnable qu’elles ont mis en place pour détecter et limiter ces abus. Les rapports seraient accessibles au public et les entreprises qui font défaut seraient passibles d’amendes pouvant aller jusqu’à 250 000 $.

Le projet de loi modifie également le Tarif des douanes pour permettre de bannir l’importation au Canada de marchandises produites par le travail des enfants. Dans sa forme actuelle, le projet de loi S-211 est une version modifiée et améliorée des projets de loi précédents déposés par la sénatrice Miville-Dechêne en 2020, et du projet de loi C-423, déposé par le député John McKay en 2018.

À la prochaine…

Dans La Presse, M. Décarie relaie une information intéressante pour la RSE et l’ISR : « Huit poids lourds pour une croissance plus durable et inclusive » (25 novembre 2020).

Extrait :

Ce sont les poids lourds de l’investissement au Canada. Ensemble, ils totalisent plus de 1600 milliards d’actifs sous gestion et ils ont décidé de mettre leur masse financière dans la balance en vue de forcer les entreprises à mieux présenter les données touchant les enjeux environnementaux, sociaux et de gouvernance qui les concernent dans leur bilan d’activités.

Pour la première fois, les huit plus grands acteurs financiers au pays ont signé une déclaration commune qu’ils vont dévoiler ce mercredi et qui a le mérite d’être claire en formulant une demande simple : plus de transparence afin de permettre une meilleure prise de décision d’investissement qui tienne compte de facteurs autres que seulement financiers.

« La façon dont les entreprises définissent et abordent des enjeux tels que ceux qui concernent la diversité et l’inclusion, le capital humain et les changements climatiques peut contribuer de manière significative à la création ou à l’érosion de valeur. Les entreprises ont l’obligation de divulguer leurs principaux risques commerciaux ainsi que leurs occasions d’affaires aux marchés financiers, et elles doivent fournir des informations financièrement pertinentes, comparables et utiles à la prise de décision », résume la déclaration des huit PDG.

On le sait, chacune des huit organisations a ses propres critères d’investissement responsable et sa grille d’évaluation des enjeux environnementaux, sociaux et de gouvernance (ESG), mais en regroupant leurs voix, leurs PDG sont d’avis qu’ils auront une plus grande force de persuasion.

C’est notamment l’avis de Neil Cunningham, PDG de l’Office d’investissement des régimes de pensions du secteur public (PSP), qui estime que la déclaration commune a le mérite d’envoyer un message au marché tout en sensibilisant les entreprises à l’importance de mieux rapporter leurs performances en matière d’enjeux ESG.

Standardiser la transparence

Investissements PSP gère 168 milliards d’actifs à partir de ses bureaux montréalais où travaillent plus de 750 professionnels de l’investissement. Neil Cunningham a observé que les entreprises qui mesurent et qui rapportent le plus fidèlement leur performance par rapport aux facteurs ESG vont mieux faire à long terme que celles qui ignorent ou minimisent ces enjeux.

Les PDG des huit plus grands gestionnaires de fonds de retraite du Canada se rencontrent deux fois par année avec le gouverneur de la Banque du Canada pour discuter des grands enjeux de l’heure. Lors d’une rencontre en mai dernier, ils ont convenu de l’importance de coordonner leurs efforts en matière d’enjeux ESG.

On est dans la vie de tous les jours des compétiteurs à la recherche d’opportunités de placement. On a tous des politiques d’investissement responsable et on s’est dit qu’il valait mieux se regrouper pour convaincre les entreprises d’adopter des normes qui vont permettre d’assurer une croissance économique plus durable et plus inclusive. 

Neil Cunningham, PDG de l’Office d’investissement des régimes de pensions du secteur public (PSP)

« Lors de notre dernière rencontre, il y a deux semaines, on a décidé de faire cette déclaration commune afin d’amener plus d’entreprises à rapporter leurs performances selon les normes du Sustainability Accounting Standards Board et celles du Groupe de travail sur l’information financière relative aux changements climatiques », explique Neil Cunningham.

À la prochaine…

David Larcker, Bradford Lynch, Brian Tayan et Daniel Taylor publient un texte qui revient sur la transparence des ghrandes entreprises américaines en matière de COVID-19 « The Spread of Covid-19 Disclosure » (29 juin 2020). Un document plein de statistiques et de tendances sur la transparence… vraiment intéressant sachant que l’enjeu de la question n’est pas à négliger.

Extrait :

The COVID-19 pandemic presents an interesting scenario whereby an unexpected shock to the economic system led to a rapid deterioration in the economic landscape, causing sharp changes in performance relative to expectations just a few months prior. For most companies, the pandemic has been detrimental. For a few, it brought unexpected demand. In many cases, supply chains have been strained, causing ripple effects that extend well beyond any one company.

How do companies respond to such a situation? What choices do they make, and how much transparency do they offer? How does disclosure vary in a setting where the potential impact is so widely uncertain? The COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique setting to examine disclosure choices in a situation of extreme uncertainty that extends across all companies in the public market. This devastating outlier event provides a rare glimpse into disclosure behavior by managers and boards.

Why This Matters

1. The COVID-19 pandemic provides a unique opportunity to examine disclosure practices of companies relative to peers in real time about a somewhat unprecedented shock that impacted practically every publicly listed company in the U.S. We see that decisions varied considerably about whether to make disclosure and, if so, what and how much to say about the pandemic’s impact on operations, finances, and future. What motivates some companies to be forthcoming about what they are experiencing, while others remain silent? Does this reflect different degrees of certitude about how the virus would impact their businesses, or differences in managements’ perception of their “obligations” to be transparent with the public? What does this say about a company’s view of its relation and duty to shareholders?
2. In one example, we saw a consumer beverage company make zero references to COVID-19 in its SEC filings and website, despite the virus plausibly having at least some impact on its business. In another example, we saw a company claim no material changes to its previously reported risk factors when managers almost certainly had relevant information about the virus and the likely impact on sales and operations. What discussion among the senior managers, board members, external auditor, and general counsel leads to a decision to make no disclosures? What should shareholders glean from this decision, particularly in light of peer disclosure?
3. The COVID-19 pandemic represents a so-called “black swan” event that inflicted severe and unexpected damage to wide swaths of the economy. What strategic insights will companies learn from this event? Can boards use these insights to prepare for other possible outlier events, such as climate events, terrorism, cyber-attacks, pandemics, and other emergencies? Should these insights be disclosed to shareholders?

À la prochaine…

Un groupe de travail du Financial Reporting Council (FRC) a publié fin avril 2016 un bilan de la 1e phase de son travail : « Phase 1 Report of the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) ». Qu’en retenir ?

Objectifs

We support the objectives of the TCFD and welcome that it is focussing on financial risks and in particular those that could have a potential impact on future cash flows. We believe that this is important in identifying the boundary of information that would be relevant to investors’ decision-making. As with any project with multiple objectives there will be instances where a trade-off is necessary. Consistent principles are important, but absolute uniformity in disclosures detracts from careful consideration and communication of information that is relevant for its users. Whilst climate related risks will be important to many companies any recommendations must be proportionate and balanced, to avoid excessive focus on one set of risks to the detriment of disclosures of the other principal risks and uncertainties a company faces. Boards must retain responsibility for determining what disclosures, if any, on climate related risks are relevant and material. This requires an understanding of the potential impacts of climate change and legislative responses, and the application of judgement. Identification of factors to be considered by management when making such an assessment will be helpful.

Portée

The recommendation should provide preparers and their boards an understanding of the factors to consider when assessing, mitigating and, where necessary, reporting the climate change risks they might face. Factors to consider might include the sensitivity of its business model to climate related legislation (for example, the existence of low carbon substitute products or processes); the energy use and carbon emissions of the company, its products and suppliers; the company’s investment planning periods; and the geographical location of operations and its distribution channels. High risk sectors could then be used to illuminate those factors.

Utilisateurs

We note from the Phase 1 Report that the intended users for the information goes beyond those making direct investments in companies to those further back in the capital supply chain. We welcome this to ensure more informed capital allocation decisions. However the disclosure recommendations will need to take into consideration the needs of the intended audience and be dependent on the type of preparer as different considerations will apply for climate related risks arising from companies reporting on their own operational activities in their annual report and those investing in a portfolio of assets or advising on investment activities. We also encourage the TCFD to consider the placement of information outside the annual report when recommending disclosures that might go beyond the needs of the annual report’s intended audience. We encourage reporting of more detailed voluntary information for investors or other users outside the annual report so that it does not detract from the key messages.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian

Au Japon, le Financial Services Agency a annoncé que le Financial System Counsel a publié le rapport intitulé « Working Group on Corporate Disclosure – report on Promoting Constructive Dialogue » (19 juillet 2016).

Petit extrait de ce document :

III. Enhancing disclosure of non-financial information

Non-financial information includes a wide array of information such as governance, social and environmental matters as well as business policies/strategies and MD&A. In recent years, there has been further growing interest in such non-financial information in response to the initiatives to bolster corporate governance and the increasing demand regarding social and environmental issues.

Companies are required to disclose in their Annual Securities Reports information that is necessary and appropriate for the public interest or protection of investors. Accordingly, for example, in cases where social or environmental issues have a material impact on the business or performance of the issuing companies, they are required to disclose such issues in the « MD&A » and « Risk Factors » of the Annual Securities Reports. Also, in recent years, in addition to the improvement of disclosure requirements of governance information in Corporate Governance Reports, a substantial number of companies have taken to disclosing diverse and technical non-financial information in the form of CSR reports and Environment Reports in order to satisfy the wide-ranging information needs of investors and other stakeholders.

To ensure that companies provide non-financial information which meets stakeholders’ needs through creativity and ingenuity, it could be one option to encourage companies to provide non-financial information through voluntary disclosure.

Also note that it might be necessary in the future to make some non-Financial information subject to mandatory disclosure requirements; therefore, it is important to make clear the approach to take for information whose disclosure should be obligatory. In view of the criminal punishments and other heavy sanctions applied to false statements in the Annual Securities Reports, and of the necessity to concisely disclose the information that is truly material for investment decisions, we believe that it would be appropriate to take into account the following elements holistically when considering whether certain non-financial information should expressly be made obligatory:

• Whether the information is truly necessary for investors in making investment decisions;
• Whether the information has become prevalent in the securities market, and has been provided to investors to keep them from being misled;
• Whether the cost borne across the market would be considerable, including, for example, the cost borne by disclosing companies as a
• consequence of making the information disclosure mandatory, and the cost borne by investors to acquire and evaluate the information;
• Whether the request to disclose non-financial information will adversely discourage companies from disclosing useful information, and as a result the overall quality and quantity of information disclosure will decline;
• Whether the disclosure of non-financial information is required by other laws.

Also, as mentioned under « Basic approach, » in order to improve accessibility to corporate information, there are the needs of those investors, especially overseas institutional investors, that companies compile the information that is released across multiple disclosure documents into a single document in an easy-to-understand fashion. In order to address investor needs of this kind, we believe that it is important for companies to consider the way of voluntary disclosure through creativity and ingenuity; some examples may be to unify the information contained in multiple disclosure documents into a single document, or to systematically include hyperlinks to multiple disclosure documents on a single web page.

(…)

3. Investment decisions made from a mid- to long-term perspective

In order to ensure that the corporate disclosure of information leads to sustainable growth and increased corporate value over the mid- to long term, it will be necessary to take further steps encouraging investors to use the information disclosed by companies to make investment decisions grounded in a mid- to long-term perspective.

Such steps may include the following:

• Discuss dialogue between institutional investors and the investee companies of investment, as well as the way in which voting rights are exercised at the Council of Experts Concerning the Follow-up of Japan’s Stewardship Code and Japan’s Corporate Governance Code, so as to make stewardship responsibility more effective in boosting corporate value over the mid- to long term and ensuring sustainable corporate growth.
• Individual investors are generally expected to have the mid- to long term in mind, with shareholders holding shares for over three years on average accounting for about 70%. In view also of the expansion of the defined-contribution pension system and NISA (Nippon Individual Savings Account: a system for the tax exemption of small investments), further intensify education toward mid- to long-term-oriented investing in the context of the initiatives undertaken by the Japan Securities Dealers Association and other organizations to improve the literacy of individual investors.

À la prochaine…

Ivan Tchotourian