RECO needs industry know-how to regulate well
By Relta Real Estate
1 min read
This opinion piece argues the Ontario real estate regulator has overcorrected after the iPro Realty scandal by excluding all industry members from its board. The author makes a fair point: independence and expertise are not opposites, and other Canadian regulators preserve both by using majority independent boards with some practising professionals included.
Raises a substantive governance question that affects how RECO operates going forward.
The Minister banned elected board members from being registrants, brokerage employees, or industry association representatives following the iPro scandal.
The swing from industry-dominated governance to zero registrants is overreach. A board needs someone who understands what agents actually do.
Other Canadian professional regulators include a limited number of practising professionals alongside public appointees.
This precedent shows there is a middle path. Complete exclusion is not the only way to achieve independence.
The author notes that appointing non-registrants is not a guarantee of independence, citing builders and lawyers with policy disagreements against the real estate industry.
Valid point. Political bias exists outside the industry too. Screening for competence and conflict matters more than blanket exclusion.
Good governance requires the registrar to keep the board informed so directors can oversee performance and identify risks.
A board without recent registrant experience will struggle to ask informed questions about complex regulatory decisions.
“Many Canadian professional regulators continue to include a limited number of practising professionals.”
What this means in BC
BC regulators should watch this debate. If RECO's board loses industry insight, it loses the ability to spot what's actually happening in the market and why agents do what they do. That blindness eventually hurts consumers more than strict independence protects them.
- news
- commentary
- real-estate-magazine
