  | 
 
 | 
 
Public Statement by SEC Chairman: 
How to Prevent Future Enrons
by
Chairman Harvey L. Pitt
"Op-Ed" for the Wall Street Journal
December 11, 2001
| 
These remarks reflect solely the personal views of Mr. Pitt, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, the individual members of the Commission, or its Staff. |   
The Securities and Exchange Commission is  investigating Enron's meltdown and its tragic consequences. Until all the facts  are known, there is nothing that can or should be said about who may be  responsible for this terrible failure. The public can be confident, however,  that we will deal with any wrongdoing and wrongdoers swiftly and completely, to  ensure full protection of investor interests.  
Even before the Enron situation, we were  working to improve and modernize our disclosure system -- to make disclosures  more meaningful, and intelligible, to average investors. Our immediate concern  in the wake of this tragedy should be to understand how to prevent more events  like this. Of course, those with intent and creativity can override any system  of checks or restraints. Believing that we can create a foolproof system is both  illusory and dangerous. But investors are entitled to the best regulatory system  possible, and we can achieve more than we presently do if we focus attention on  finding solutions instead of scapegoats.
  
Our current reporting and financial  disclosure system has needed improvement and modernization for quite some time.  Disclosures to investors are now required only quarterly or annually, and even  then are issued long after the quarter or year has ended. This creates the  potential for a financial "perfect storm." Information investors receive can be  stale on arrival and mandated financial statements are often arcane and  impenetrable.  
To reassure investors and restore their  confidence, the public and private sectors must partner to produce a sensible  and workable approach that includes, in addition to our existing after-the-fact  enforcement actions:  
- A system of "current" disclosure.  Investors need current information, not just periodic disclosures, along with  clear requirements for public companies to make affirmative disclosures of, and  to provide updates to, unquestionably material information in real time. 
   
- Public company disclosure of significant  current "trend" and "evaluative" data. Providing current trend and evaluative  data, as well as historical information, would enable investors to assess a  company's financial posture as it evolves and changes. It would also preclude  "wooden" approaches to disclosure, and encourage evaluative disclosures that  begin where line-item and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles disclosures  end. This information, upon which corporate executives and bankers already base  critical decisions, can be presented without confusing or misleading investors,  prejudicing legitimate corporate interests, or exposing companies to unfair  assertions of liability.  
   
- Financial statements that are clear and  informative. Investors and employees concerned with preserving and increasing  their retirement funds deserve comprehensive financial reports they can easily  interpret and understand.  
   
- Conscientious identification and  assessment by public companies and their auditors of critical accounting  principles. Public companies and their advisers should identify the three, four  or five most critical accounting principles upon which a company's financial  status depends, and which involve the most complex, subjective or ambiguous  decisions or assessments. Investors should be told, concisely and clearly, how  these principles are applied, as well as information about the range of possible  effects in differing applications of these principles.  
   
- Private-sector standard setting that  responds expeditiously, concisely and clearly to current and immediate needs. A  lengthy agenda that achieves its goals too slowly, or not at all, like good  intentions, paves a road to the wrong locale.  
   
- An environment that encourages public  companies and auditors to seek our guidance in advance. The SEC must be, and  must appear to be, a constructive resource and hospitable sounding board for  difficult and complex accounting issues before mistakes are made. We will always  need, and utilize, after-the-fact enforcement, and we can, and will, improve our  review of financial reports. But by now it is painfully clear that preventing  problems is infinitely superior, and far less damaging, than acting after  investor funds, retirement accounts or life savings are dissipated. 
   
- An effective and transparent system of  self-regulation for the accounting profession, subject to our rigorous, but  non-duplicative, oversight. As the major accounting firm CEOs and the American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants recently proposed, the profession, in  concert with us, must provide assurances of comprehensive and effective  self-regulation, including monitoring adherence to professional and ethical  standards, and meaningfully disciplining firms or individuals falling short of  those standards. Such a system has costs, but those who benefit from the system  should help absorb them.  
   
- More meaningful investor protection by  audit committees. Audit committees must be proactive, not merely reactive, to  ensure the quality and integrity of corporate financial reports. Especially  critical is the need to improve interaction between audit committee members and  senior management and outside auditors. Audit committees must understand why  critical accounting principles were chosen, how they were applied, and have a  basis for believing the end result fairly presents their company's actual  status. 
   
- Analyst recommendations predicated on  financial data they have deciphered and interpreted. Analysts and their  employers should eschew expressing views without an adequate data foundation, or  when confused by company presentations. 
 
 
Our system can be improved and modernized.  In a crisis, some seek easy answers to difficult problems by pointing fingers.  But true reform requires rigorous analysis, respect for competing views, and  compromise and statesmanship by all concerned. We are up to the task, but only  if we are able to tap our best minds to produce our most creative solutions, and  only if we are able to discuss these issues openly and honestly. We are  committed to that end, and we seek participation from everyone with an interest  in our capital markets. Together, in partnership, we can make a difference. That  is our vision, and our mission.   
 
 
http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/spch530.htm 
 
 |