My understanding – in hearing Americans speak about the Fiduciary Standard – is that product cost is a primary determinant of what can and should be recommended to clients.  I personally agree strongly with that.  Many advisors in Canada, it seems, do not. 

My quesiton for debate, therefore, is "to what extent do you think product cost should be considered when making recommendations to clients IF you are a Fiduciary?"

Cost is not a primary concern in fact on its own its irrelevant. It’s like saying low calories are the prime consideration in the food we eat. Investment product cost should always be viewed as one component in the client experience equation. Value is the only prime factor. Is the client receiving enough benefit to make the cost worthwhile? If the tangible and intangible benefits received are greater than the cost then the client has received an appropriate level of value. A large and hard to quantify benefit is the potential benefits down the road – severance, estate windup, divorce advice, etc. Some of the ongoing cost the client bears should be considered a retainer or amortized expense for future advice. Much of which, like coaching the client to stay the course on their investments when their emotions tell them to make changes are literally priceless.