A bill to regulate advisors has been floated in the Ontario legislature. If passed, the Financial Advisors Act, 2014, would tighten the rules surrounding the profession.

Read: Supreme Court says act professionally, or else

“The current system includes a series of disconnected rules that evolved over time and fall under various government ministries,” says Sudbury, Ont. MPP Rick Bartolucci who tabled the private member bill. “While well intentioned, the status quo is a mishmash of policies that can allow unscrupulous financial advisors to slip through the cracks.”

Read: New index measures industry confidence

Highlights of the bill include:

•           an ‘Office of the Director’ to administer the Act;

•           director would have the power to address complaints, inspect registrants and complete investigations;

•           power to establish code of ethics;

•           financial advisors would have to be registered; and

•           financial penalties and license revocation for non-compliant registrants.

Read: When do I have to worry about regulation?

“We welcome this Bill, and hope it will be quickly passed,” states Greg Pollock, president and CEO of Advocis. “It is a win for everyone. For consumers, it will provide greater assurance that they are dealing with advisors who are truly accountable. For the industry, it will maintain public confidence and trust in our profession. And for government, it will establish an effective system of regulation that gets rid of bad advisors and preserves consumer access to highly qualified advice.”

Originally published on Advisor.ca
Add a comment

Have your say on this topic! Comments are moderated and may be edited or removed by
site admin as per our Comment Policy. Thanks!

See all comments Recent Comments


It’s good that industry is raising bar for the FA’s. Is CRA is listening to allow us to incorporate our business as they did for Doctors and other Professionals.
Can Regulators produce a simple formate of disclosure which covers everything and client read and sign and keep a copy to avoid confusion if any dispute arises. Client may come a bite you even you try hard to service them,go extra mile to help even you have paper confirmation generated by the Firm and mail to client. We need to protect ourselves from those type of clients for sure.

Friday, Feb 21, 2014 at 2:16 pm Reply


Couldn’t agree more with Frontierwm’s last line…more bureaucrats and paper regulations WILL NOT STOP the crooked advisor….they simply result in, at best, more administrative burden for the advisors with integrity and at worst in resources spent disciplining honest advisors for what are essentially paperwork errors. I guess it is mainly for political consumption, to make it look like you are doing something about a problem about which you can do very little. Any advisor who is being completely honest will tell you that they can think of a dozen ways to take advantage of clients with very very little chance of being detected by regulatory authorities…..what keeps us from doing it is our own integrity, not filling out forms and ticking boxes…there is simply no replacement for that integrity.

Regulators can (unfortunately) only provide limited protection for investors and they would be well-advised to put their limited resources into appropriate investigation and enforcement procedures rather than regulatory minutae which simply burden the already compliant advisors.

Wednesday, Feb 19, 2014 at 10:38 am Reply


I agree too. We don’t need anymore regulation. There is enough in place and hinders our ability sometimes to be able to provide that service to our clients. All of this when the people in the bank branches get to beat to a different drum.

If they want to weed out people, make it mandatory to have a university degree in finance/economics/accounting and have your CFP before you can advise anyone.

Monday, Mar 17, 2014 at 12:27 pm


The article doesn’t say much about this proposed legislation. Which financial advisers are they talking about? Licensed insurance agents, licensed mutual fund reps or stock brokers? Everyone in the industry now has to be licensed somehow, pass some sort of exam to be licensed and submit to a self-regulatory body of some kind (MFDA or IIROC). So why do we need another layer of regulation? Regulations and credentials won’t stop the crooked advisors from operating so what’s the purpose of this legislation?

Wednesday, Feb 19, 2014 at 6:32 am Reply


I am sorry but I am appalled by this article. What on earth have these overpaid regulators been doing all this time? Mr Pollock is too polite. I would have thought that all financial advisors have to be registered. Isn’t this what the NRD is all about? Because I have clients in 3 provinces, I have to pay 3 sets of fees to the NRD. And some financial advisors have been practising and have not been registered?? I want my money back! I get my fingers slapped if I submit a document 2 days after my client has signed it and one would think that I had committed treason – and yet some ‘financial advisors’ have not been registered!!!! I am disgusted!
David McDonald CFP (since 1998)

Tuesday, Feb 18, 2014 at 6:22 pm Reply