This is about a piece in the Observer news paper at the weekend that reported how Blair was trying to get Bush to give UK companies an exemption to the Sarbanes-Oxley bill. This is the new regulation of federal securities bill that has everyone hopping up and down. I'm hoping Bush says 'get lost' because I'm not a believer that we are any better off here, fraud wise.
What caught my eye in the article was the posturing about the effect the new regulations would have on non-executive directors. Quoting from the Business & Media from Page from the Observer, Sunday 11th August 2002:
"A number of leading City organisations are worried that the law raises the prospect of criminal proceedings being taken against innocent directors who fail to detect frauds perpetrated by their colleagues."
and
"At a time when we want the best-quality people to be non-executive directors, the threat of still penal and legal consequences is a major deterrent to the very people we're trying to attract. They'll just say it's not worth the risk." -- Peter Wyman, President of the Institute of Chartered Accountants
To me this is just proof, from the horses mouth, that the whole idea of non-execs regulating companies doesn't work. If the good ones are afraid they can't spot fraud what's the point in having them there?
