Canadian Advocacy Council



Current members of the CAC include:

Moad Fahmi, CFA, CAC Chair, Montréal Society
Robert Gouley, CFA, CAC Vice Chair, Toronto Society
Michael Thom, CAIA, CFA, CAC Past ​Chair, Toronto Society
Laura Bewick Howitt, CIPM, CFA, Calgary Society
Kevin Burkett, CFA, Victoria Society
Hannah Giesbrecht, CFA, Winnipeg Society
​Jean-François Levasseur, CFA, Montréal Society
Cristina Lopez, CFA, Calgary Society
Parham Nasseri, CFA, Toronto Society
Pierre-Francois Payette, CFA, Montré​al Society
Kareen Stangherlin, CFA, Calgary Society
Milos Vukovic, CFA, Toronto Society

 Oversight Committee

The CAC reports to the CAC Oversight Committee consisting of the four largest CFA societies in Canada and the Presidents of two "floater" societies. The CFA Institute President’s Council Representative for Canada acts as an observer. It is the primary governance mechanism of the CAC with the power to approve budgets, nominate members, and approve appointment of new members to the CAC. The Oversight Committee also provides an important feedback mechanism between the Canadian CFA Societies and the CAC. Members of the Oversight Committee are encouraged to observe all CAC meetings and conference calls. The current members of the Oversight Committee are:

James Chisholm, CFA, President, CFA Society Calgary
Frederick Chenel, CFA, President, CFA Montréal
Pamela Steer​, CFA, President, CFA Society Toronto
David Smith, CFA, President, CFA Society Vancouver
Rod Babineau, CFA, President, CFA Society Edmonton (Floater)
Wesley Blight, CFA, President, CFA Society Ottawa (Floater)

 Litmus Test

In order to determine the issues that it will engage its resources, the CAC utilizes a litmus test as follows:

Canadian Advocacy Council
Litmus Test
(September 1, 2006)

  1. Deciding what initiatives the Canadian Advocacy Council (“CAC”) should undertake requires an analysis of a variety of criteria, balancing the potential for contributing meaningful analysis and insight against the resources, intellectual and otherwise, available to the CAC. Moreover, given the myriad of issues facing the Canadian markets in general, and the investment management industry, more specifically, the CAC must assess whether it is the most appropriate body to address a particular issue.
  2. In order to provide guidance for evaluating which initiatives the CAC will undertake, reference is made to the following criteria. While no one criterion or combination should be seen as determinative, the following list will provide helpful benchmarks against which the relevant policy group within the CAC, in consultation with its Oversight Committee, can weigh its decision to expend its efforts.
  3. In deciding whether to undertake a particular initiative, the CAC will consider each of the following characteristics in order to undertake those initiatives that will produce the greatest benefits to Canada’s CFA Institute member societies, CFA Institute members, the capital markets, and the investment community in general. Accordingly, an initiative should be considered in light of the following characteristics:
    • Level of importance to our Canadian membership, including member societies;
    • Ability to promote high standards of ethical and professional conduct in the investment industry consistent with CFA Institute Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct, and other relevant CFA Institute standards;
    • Potential implications for the investment profession across major capital markets;
    • Opportunity to address issues of investor protection or transparency of disclosure;
    • Recognized as an important source for providing the views of investment professional practitioners;
    • Opportunity to advance policy of the CFA Centre for Market Integrity;
    • Relevance of issues to CFA Institute’s mission, vision and goals;
    • Opportunity to lead and engage in public debate on current and emerging policy issues and to significantly and positively influence the outcome;
    • Importance of issues in light of current and developing market conditions, legislation, regulations, or actions by standard-setting bodies; and
    • Ability to reflect favorably on the profile of CFA Institute, the CFA Examination Program, and CFA Institute members and charterholders.

 History of the CAC

The CAC was officially created in July 1995, when the Canadian Council of Financial Analysts (CCFA) was formally incorporated. For 23 years before incorporation, CCFA existed as an informal gathering of Canadian society presidents. The council comprised of two delegates from the Toronto and Montreal societies and one delegate from each of the remaining Canadian societies. The CCFA operated like the current Presidents Council where society executives could share ideas and problems.

On July 4, 1995, CCFA was incorporated as a nonprofit organization pursuant to the Canada Corporations Act. It shared office space with the Toronto Society of Financial Analysts (TSFA) and utilized the services of its employees.

The CCFA had the following purposes:

foster communication between the Association for Investment Management and Research (AIMR) and Canadian societies,
oversee, initiate and coordinate AIMR’s Canadian advocacy efforts,
enhance and build upon the principles and standards of AIMR.
Prior to July 1, 1995, the funding of CCFA was based on a percentage of Canadian member fees. Afterwards, funding was based on CCFA needs as budgeted over a three-year period.

Under the bylaws of the CCFA, the Canadian Advocacy Council (CAC) was created. It would consist of at least one representative from, and chosen by, each Canadian society. The Chair of CCFA and an AIMR senior officer would serve as ex officio, non-voting members of the CAC. The Chair of the CAC would be chosen from among the CAC members by the members thereof. Members of the CAC were mainly the advocacy chairs from various societies or the presidents.

In February 1997, CCFA moved out of the TSFA office and rented space on its own. An Executive Director was hired to screen regulatory issues as the CAC took on a more active role across Canada. This practice continued for approximately two years until after the departure of the Executive Director, a part-time consultant was hired to support the CAC for a few more years.

It was around this time (1997), that the CAC began to overshadow the relevance of the CCFA. Shortly thereafter, the CCFA disappeared altogether and the CAC became a standing committee of AIMR. It was also at that time when the composition of the CAC changed from nominations from Canadian societies (namely advocacy chairs) to Canadian members-at-large who were interested in advocacy matters. With staff support from AIMR, the CAC took on a more prominent role in advocating AIMR’s and Canadian members’ positions within Canada.