CFA Societies Canada

The CAC reports to the CFA Societies Canada Board of Directors. The Board of CFA Societies Canada in turn designates the CFA Societies Canada Advocacy Sub-Committee. The CAC uses a Litmus Test in order to efficiently allocate its resources to 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. 

The CAC works closely with CFA Institute by providing input and participants into their two main advocacy committees (Capital Market Policy and Corporate Disclosure Policy). In addition, the CAC and CFA Institute co-ordinate general and specific Canadian advocacy efforts when appropriate

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 expand 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.

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