It’s so amusing that Ted Rogers opines “occasional disagreements are essential elements of sound corporate governance.” Rogers – the company — has never been a model of sound corporate governance.  This internal family battle at Rogers right now is a classic symptom of poor governance in a situation where one family controls the whole show while ordinary investors, and frequently independent directors for that matter, are relegated to bit parts.

One recalls similar internecine battles involving Magna and Canadian Tire, none of which ever topped the list of corporate governance best practices. It’s a shame, too, that at a time when ethical practices in the boardroom are taking centre stage, there’s not a word about the larger role of ethics in this discussion.  Smart investors, and certainly informed stakeholders, expect better these days.

Frankly, I fault Canada’s institutional investors for giving their imprimatur to a corporate structure that is about as far away from good governance as you can get, and regulators and market gatekeepers for still permitting these antiquated controlling shareholder contrivances.