会计论文怎么写 The Development Of Corporate Governance In Malaysia
会计论文怎么写 The Development Of Corporate Governance In Malaysia
The trend of developing corporate governance guidelines and codes of the best practices began in early 1990’s in the United Kingdom and in the United Sates in response to problems in the corporate performance of leading companies. Over the past 12 years the UK has initiated a series of investigations into ways to improve the corporate performance of UK listed companies. These investigations have been high profile, lead by an experienced individual who has given his name to the final report. Thus we have seen a number of reviews and reports and some legislation along the development of Corporate Government, such as Cadbury Report (1992), Greenbury Report (1995), and Hampel Report (1998). (Jones I., 2003)
Cadbury Report (1992) published the findings of the Committee on Financial Aspects of Corporate Governance. (Robert W. McGee, 2008) It looked into the performance and rewards of boards and resulted in greater transparency and accountability in boardroom proceedingsThe report attached a code of best practice with guidelines for behaviour and disclosure Greenbury Report (1995) discusses directors’ remuneration. It amended the section within the Cadbury report concerning executive pay Hampel Committee Report (1998) reviewed the success of the Cadbury and Greenbury Reports. It consolidated the recommendations of the two previous reports and recommended the creation of a ‘Combined Code’ which was annexed to the Listing Rules Combined Code on Corporate Governance (2003) were issued by the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) to produce a set of principles and code which embraced Cadbury, Greenbury and the committee’s own work. The revised Combined Code builds upon the existing code and incorporates the recommendations of the Higgs and Smith Reports. The Code aims to achieve more open and rigorous procedures for the appointment of directors and improved induction and development of NEDs Updated Combined Code (2006) supersedes and replaces the Combined Code (2003) (CIPD, 2010)
It also recommended that the board should have three non-executive directors and the role of chairman and chief executive should be held by different people.
The main recommendations are the appointment of non-executive directors and an audit committee to oversee greater control of financial reporting and the separation of the role of the chair and chief executive.
The main recommendations were the appointing of a remuneration committee to determine directors’ remuneration, and a nominations committee to oversee new appointments to the board. It recommended the creation of a ‘Combined Code’ which was annexed to the Listing Rules.
It also made recommendations on improving communication with shareholders and redressing the balance between implementing controls and allowing companies to find their own ways of applying corporate governance principles.
It recommends that half of the board members of the FT350 companies should be independent NEDs, that only NEDs should sit on the audit and remuneration committees and that if NEDs serve more than nine years they are no longer considered to be independent (unlisted companies should have two NEDs on the board).
Following a consultation in 2005, a number of changes were incorporated into the updated Code. During 2007 the Financial Reporting Council (FRC) reviewed the impact and implementation of the Combined Code. In 2007, it announced the outcome of this review, including its intention to consult on limited amendments to the Code.
However, the corporate governance concept has gained in Malaysia and has been given more prominence after the Asian financial crisis. Development of corporate governance in Malaysia was first issued in March 2000 by Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance which was, marked a significant milestone in corporate governance reform in Malaysia. It codified the principles and best practices of good governance and described optimal corporate governance structures and internal processes. Since the release of the Code, Malaysian corporate scene has made significant strides in corporate governance standards. The mandatory reporting of compliance with the Code has enabled shareholders and the public to assess and determine the standards of corporate governance by listed companies. While significant improvement has been achieved, it is now timely to review the Code to further strengthen corporate governance practices in line with developments in the domestic and international capital markets. (Securities Commission, 2007)
The Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance as revised in 2007 represents the continued collaborative efforts between Government and the industry. The Securities Commission (SC) would like to thank some of the bodies for their invaluable feedback and comments Key amendments of Revised Code 2007 are aimed at strengthening the board of directors and audit committees, and ensuring that the board of directors and audit committees discharge their roles and responsibilities effectively. (Securities Commission, 2007)
Besides that, the introduction of Listing Requirement by Bursa Malaysia in January 2001 has drawn attention to the importance of corporate governance and disclosure requirements to public listed companies to comply with ever since. Under Bursa Malaysia’s listing requirements, the annual reports must include narrative statements on how the companies have applied the broad principles set out in the Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance. The statements should also address the extent to which the companies have complied with by a listed issuer and its directors with regard to the best corporate governance practices articulated in the Code, and explain areas of non-compliance. (bursamalaysia, 2009)
会计论文怎么写 The Development Of Corporate Governance In Malaysia