Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Finding Common Cause: The Renewed Quest for a National Securities Regulator

Contents:

Author Info

  • Jeremy Fraiberg

    (Osler, Hoskin & Harcourt LLP)

Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    Proponents of a national securities regulator suffered a setback when the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Ottawa’s proposed Securities Act to create such a body was unconstitutional. In its ruling, the Supreme Court nevertheless endorsed the possibility of a national regulator based on a model of cooperative federalism. The goal is still both feasible and desirable in view of the shortcomings of Canada’s current system of 13 provincial and territorial regulators. It remains to be seen, however, which provinces will cooperate with the federal government and, if so, on what terms.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.cdhowe.org/pdf/e-brief_136.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    Bibliographic Info

    Paper provided by C.D. Howe Institute in its series e-briefs with number 136.

    as in new window
    Length: 5 pages
    Date of creation: Jun 2012
    Date of revision:
    Publication status: Published on the C.D. Howe Institute website, June 2012
    Handle: RePEc:cdh:ebrief:136

    Contact details of provider:
    Postal: 67 Yonge St., Suite 300, Toronto, Ontario M5E 1J8
    Phone: (416) 865-1904
    Fax: (416) 865-1866
    Email:
    Web page: http://www.cdhowe.org
    More information through EDIRC

    Related research

    Keywords: Financial Services; Canada; national securities regulator; Securities Act;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    References

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdh:ebrief:136. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kristine Gray).

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.