In Quebec, the Professional Code establishes a single framework applicable to all professional bodies. Beyond this, specific legislation has been adopted for bodies whose members enjoy an exclusive field of practice. For example, under the Professional Code and Chartered Accountants Act, chartered accountants are licenceted to practice as public accountants and to use the title “auditor”.
Recently, with the adoption of Bill 46, CGAs and CMAs were granted the right to practice public accounting under certain conditions related to the necessary standards of qualification and regulation—conditions that they have not yet met. CGA and CMA accounting bodies may grant their members a licence to practice as public accountants and to use the title “auditor” if their members have met the standards adopted by that accounting body by regulation. Only these future holders of specific licences may practice as public accountants.
Bill 46 specifically requires that the CGA and CMA accounting bodies, in making the first regulations applicable to their members regarding the practice of public accounting, use standards that are analogous to the recognized standards currently required to practice public accounting in Quebec. These recognized standards are those applied by the Ordre des comptables agrées du Québec and by the ICAO in Ontario. Deleting paragraph 181(1)(b), requiring public accountants to meet provincial requirements for performance of their duties, would have the effect of allowing CGAs or CMAs not qualified to perform public accounting to do so.
I would like to address another issue outlined in our submission. It has been argued that paragraph l8l(l)(b) could impede the mobility of accounting professionals, which is otherwise provided for under Chapter 7 of the Agreement on Internal Trade. Under Chapter 7, which takes effect on April 1, 2009, provinces and territories maintain the authority to establish the standards they deem necessary for their jurisdiction and also retain the authority to determine those professional areas that require exemptions to full mobility provisions, on the grounds of consumer protection, among other considerations.
There is a significant concern that a "public accountant" from another jurisdiction could obtain automatic certification in public accountancy in either Ontario or Quebec under the revised Chapter 7 provisions of the AIT. As such, a legitimate objective exemption for automatic certification in public accounting is being actively sought in Quebec, and by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Ontario and the independent provincial Public Accountants Council in Ontario before the entry into force of revised Chapter 7 provisions.
As already noted, the concern for consumer protection would be further compounded should provisions regarding mandatory qualifications set out in subclause181(1) be deleted from Bill C-4.
I would also like to speak briefly about the independence provisions of Bill C-4, which are contained in clause 181. It has been suggested that they be amended to simply require that professional accountants comply with independence standards established by their regulatory bodies, that is the CA, CGA or CMA. However, we note that there are significant differences among the independence standards established by each body. For this reason, we support keeping the minimum standards that are established under Bill C-4.
This would avoid any confusion in determining the applicable independence standard and would prevent potential disputes. We note that these provisions, contained in Bill C-4, mirror those that are found under the Canada Business Corporations Act.
I will now give the floor to my colleague, Thomas Warner, who will conclude our presentation.