Scott Driscoll was appointed as EDC’s first Vice-President and Chief Compliance and Ethics Officer in July 2015. He is a seasoned senior banking executive with more than 20 years of regulatory compliance experience in both the public and private financial sectors. After more than 10 years with the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI), the primary federal financial institution regulator in Canada, Mr. Driscoll moved to the private sector, where his experience included senior management positions and C-level board appointments accountable for ensuring the ongoing development, assessment and monitoring of programs for compliance with regulatory expectations and requirements.
He has held roles including Chief Compliance Officer, Chief Anti-Money Laundering Officer, Chief Privacy Officer and Ombudsman. Scott holds a MBA, a Bachelor of Social Sciences and a Bachelor of Arts.
EDC’s Vice-President and Chief Compliance and Ethics Officer role serves to enhance the Corporation’s transparency and accountability. The Officer receives and reviews complaints from stakeholders which may include fielding internal inquiries with respect to EDC’s Code of Conduct and Code of Business Ethics, the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector, the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act, and EDC’s Wrongdoings Policy, as well as external inquiries regarding our Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies and initiatives.
EDC employees are required to abide by the public-sector-wide Values and Ethics Code introduced on April 2, 2012. The Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector sets out high level values and principles which are consistent with EDC’s own Code of Conduct and Code of Business Ethics. EDC’s Chief Compliance and Ethics Officer is the contact person for members of the public who may have reason to believe an EDC employee is not complying with the Public Sector Code.
Any individual, group, community, entity or other party affected or likely to be affected by EDC’s corporate social responsibility policies and initiatives can submit a complaint. If a complaint is being made on behalf of another party, that group should be identified and evidence of authority to represent that group provided. Anonymous complaints are not accepted, however, material can be submitted confidentially to support a complaint. This information will not be released without the consent of the party who provided the information.
The complaint must be in writing, or submitted electronically via our Request for Review Form. While it does not need to follow a specific format, it does help to speed up the process if we receive the following details:
You will receive acknowledgement usually within five business days.
The Compliance Officer will determine if a complaint falls within the mandate. Complaints that are accepted are registered in a database and given an identifying number to help ensure they are dealt with in a timely fashion. You will be notified immediately when a complaint has been accepted and given an estimate of how long it will take to review. If it is decided to reject the complaint, you will receive a letter outlining the reasons.
A preliminary assessment is done to evaluate the complaint and determine how it should be handled. This concludes with a decision of whether to proceed and, if so, an outline of the course of action proposed.
Depending on the nature of the complaint and the Compliance Officer’s assessment, one of three options will be recommended to resolve the complaint as follows:
The Compliance Officer can conclude or close a complaint at any time if a satisfactory resolution has been reached or when it is felt further investigation or problem-solving techniques will not be useful or productive. You will be advised in writing if this decision is made. When this happens, the Compliance Officer has two courses of action available:
As part of the resolution, the Compliance Officer will include a process for follow up monitoring and review. The Compliance Officer can ask EDC to help ensure monitoring and follow up is done.
The ombudsman-like role works in such a way that the confidentiality of information needed to run an effective process is given priority over the actual product or outcome. The idea is that an open and flexible attitude toward problem-solving is more likely if resolution processes are conducted with a reasonable level of confidentiality. Therefore, communication with parties during the course of dispute resolution process will be regarded as privileged. Similar constraints will apply when confidential business information is received during investigations.
English and French complaints can be emailed to
You can also fill in an electronic
Request for Review Form.