Regulatory Working
Group Roundtable
Discussion
(*Note: The September/October 2014 issue of CPABC in Focus detailed some of the changes slated to be implemented early in
2015—in time for the next CPD and member billing cycles. The issue also included profiles of the individuals who participated in this
roundtable.)
When did you begin this process?
Pamela Skinner: We started the initial planning after we signed the three-way merger agreement
in May 2013, and more formalized meetings have been taking place since August. We began by
carefully assessing what we were trying to achieve—we knew we had to start at the grassroots
level and work up to the bylaws. That’s what has taken us more than a year now.
Jamie Midgley: Recognizing that all these recommendations will be subject to enabling legislation,
the fact that the CPA legislation has not yet been introduced in BC has allowed us to focus on
developing the best practices for CPABC without getting distracted by creating the governing
documentation around those practices. We’ve maintained a focus on the future, and we’ve
been through a process that enabled us to achieve consensus.
Pamela: This consensus has allowed us to get to where we want to be with practices that will
continue to effectively protect the public.
Rick Lightheart: I agree. Our collaboration has been outstanding throughout. We’ve had some
healthy, constructive discussions that have really strengthened the process.
More on regulatory changes
Visit bccpa.ca for detailed information about CPABC
regulatory policies, including analyses of the changes
from legacy policies and FAQs.
24 CPABC in Focus • Nov/Dec 2014
What was the first step in the
process?
Roger Merkosky: We first examined everything by departments—membership, CPD,
ethics, practice review, registration—and then
we determined what each of the three bodies
was already doing. We spent quite a bit of time
learning about everyone’s legacy structure
and processes, and that was really instructive.
Our next step was to start thinking about
recommendations for the best practices for
CPABC.
And how did you make those
decisions?
Jamie: Consensus.
Pamela: Absolutely. We had some lively debates, but I think we always ended up in a
place where we had consensus.
Liz Chan: From a process standpoint, once
we had a thorough understanding of what each
of us did and determined what we wanted to
achieve, we had to do a “gap analysis.” It took
a year, but what’s great is that we now have
some solid material.
Edward (Ted) Tanaka: Also, we were guided
by international standards and/or national
recommendations, depending on the area in
question. In areas where there are standards
set by the International Federation of Accountants [IFAC], such as ethics and discipline,
we ensured that these standards were met.
Weren’t the legacy structures
guided by those same criteria?
Ted: Yes, but standards evolve, and we had
to make sure we were incorporating changes.
Roger: As Ted says, this was an opportunity to
double-check against any changes in national
and international standards.
DragonImages/iStock/Thinkstock
O
ne of the most critical and complex components of the unification process is the
merging of the three legacy regulatory structures into one new structure for CPABC.
Regulatory recommendations* have been approved by the Transitional Steering
Committee (TSC), and the TSC is proposing that they be adopted by the CPABC Board following the enactment of, and subject to, CPABC legislation.
To find out more about the year-long effort to establish a new regulatory framework, CPABC in
Focus recently hosted a roundtable discussion with key members of the Regulatory Working
Group (RWG): Liz Chan, CPA, CA; Rick Lightheart, CPA, FCMA; Jamie Midgley, CPA, FCA;
Roger Merkosky, CPA, CA; Pamela Skinner, CPA, FCGA; and Edward Tanaka, barrister & solicitor.