Citizenship and Immigration Committee on April 2nd, 2008

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

I can understand how the organization itself might respond to your accusations negatively or evasively. But you have received nothing from the minister's office suggesting that they are going to live up to their responsibilities and correct the situation. If I understand correctly, that is the situation.

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

Unfortunately, no, no direct response. And as I mentioned in my write-up, the only response we got is more in the public domain where they're saying, well, CSIC is self-regulating.

I don't think the government should leave CSIC alone at this point. It's great to make sure we have regulations, but the government still has a role to play, particularly the office of the Minister of Immigration.

I did not get a response other than, of course, that the generic e-mail acknowledgement came. If you send e-mails to that office, by default you get the “read receipt”, more like a generic e-mail. That's all I got.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

I can understand how discouraging it can be that the Minister of Immigration makes no commitment to correct the situation in an organization with responsibility for all the immigration cases that we have been looking at carefully since Monday morning. It must be discouraging when consultants like you who deal with these files see that the minister herself is not interested. Is that how you see it?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

Correct. That's a good way to express my feelings. The office of the minister has a role to play. So far it looks like CSIC has been left alone. No, we cannot do that.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

You are aware that, under the division of powers of the federal and provincial governments, professions are regulated by provincial governments. This body was created by the Department of Immigration. Would it be possible to get each of the provinces involved so that the profession becomes recognized, serious and regulated? In Quebec, the Office des professions du Québec ensures that all professions operate properly. Sometimes, some go off the rails and make mistakes. But the Office des professions is there to make rulings. Is this an approach that you would like to see?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

I'm going to say yes and no.

I'll use Saskatchewan as an example. There are very few immigration consultants in this province. If I count, we're probably just three, outside the lawyers. I think there are two lawyers primarily full costing in that area, Merchant Law Group and another one in Saskatoon. Going through the phone book—for instance, the Regina phone book—you probably only have two organizations listed, or three. So if you create a provincial covering for that small number of people, that could be a concern.

Should the consultant be regulated federally? I say yes, that's a good thing to do. At some point, there might be a need to go provincial.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Thierry St-Cyr]

Mr. Komarnicki,you have seven minutes.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I won't use them up. I just wanted to make a couple of comments. I've heard what Kay has said, so I won't repeat those, nor do I necessarily agree with all of the comments.

We have heard from a couple of witness along the lines that you're talking about, on some of the concerns you have with the process, things like annual meetings, governance things, having some say as the membership, and so on. We've noted those comments, I've noted your comments, and we do intend to have representatives from CSIC. I believe it's going to be in our Toronto hearings where we'll certainly put many of these questions to them, to hear directly from them, as well as have a review of your bylaws and some of the documents that govern how it works. Then we'll simply ask about the history, how they came into place, and so on.

My sense is, from what you've indicated.... Hopefully you will file your material with us so we do have your concerns documented.

Having said that, would you agree with me, just from a public policy and protection point of view, that those who are consultants would need to meet certain standards with respect to professionalism or competency, and that there would need to be some mechanism to enforce discipline and to deal with ethical issues, and that some form of association or group is necessary to sort of regulate the whole area of consultants and those who maybe would like to consult but are not prepared to be bound by a system?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

Yes, I think it is correct that consultants should be regulated. I agree with that. There is a need for discipline. I support that.

The concern I have is the fact that CSIC is not enforcing this thing. So far, there have probably been only one or two hearings since their creation.

In terms of standards, yes. We all went through that. We all had to write the professional exam. We all had to write the English exam. So I agree with the need for standards.

But in terms of enforcement, we are not seeing much in that area, and that's why it's easier for ghost consultants or phantom consultants to do their own thing.

Rather than putting money into discipline and full regulation, to me the board has just paid itself a huge amount of money that could be diverted to that area.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

It seems to me that whenever you have a new organization in its development stage, there is a period of time where it needs to mature and it needs to develop into a place of respectability and where membership finds it acceptable. And this organization hasn't been in existence very long.

First of all, would you agree with me that it's still very much in the infancy stage and there is room for improvement, but that you need to get the membership taking some ownership of whatever that vehicle is going to be, to deal with those areas that I think are the core areas of an association like CSIC?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

That's the reason, some of us, despite what is going on, are still part of the organization. I mean, even though I am not happy with what's going on, that's one of the reasons I said, “I'm going to run for that board. If I win, I do not want to be paid, but I will work for that organization.”

So, yes, there is room for improvement. There is no doubt about that. But the reality is that I don't think some of the current board members see it that way. They see it as a way to enrich themselves.

If you can get it, this committee can at least look at the financial statements and see how much is being paid to these individuals.

Education-wise, probably some only have high school diplomas and that's it. Two of the board members just took a course that was paid for, from our understanding, by the society.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

It almost seems you need a system within the system to regulate the ethics within the system. But the fact of the matter is that it's not always wrong for people to be paid for jobs they do. It needs to be transparent, it probably needs to be fair, it needs to be open, and it needs to be in such a fashion that the majority of reasoned members would find it acceptable. And if there are excesses, then you need to deal with those.

But my sense is that when you're in the growing stage of an organization, you're going to have problems. It really is up to the membership, and I suppose to those who are in the executive, to ensure that what they do in the end meets the approval generally of the membership.

Certainly the department of immigration has an impact on the organization of it, and I suppose they have a role to play there too. But overall, it should be the membership in the organization that governs itself.

I know in other professions it's the profession that sets the rules and sets the bylaws and that governs itself. I find generally when they're working and functioning properly, they're harder on themselves than a government agency that controls them. So keep that in mind as you're working through the system, that sometimes it's a timing thing as well.

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

Well, I think what's happening with CSIC is not about growing pains; it's about people who saw an opportunity and jumped on it.

Yes, we know there will be problems, just like with any other organization. It's just a normal process. Members cannot govern at this point. With a special meeting being removed completely, no AGM, you send an e-mail and you get a response back.... Speaking up is becoming professional misconduct. There is a problem.

So I think the problem is with the foundation. Yes, there will be growing pains—that's standard, that's true—but at this point there is a problem with the foundation. And once we deal with that foundation, bring all these things back.... I have some of those suggestions in my paper. Yes, we will have challenges, but we can govern ourselves in that process and then people outside will need to join.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

I can tell you, rest assured, we'll ask some very pointed questions to those who will be appearing before this committee, and we'll certainly cover many, if not all, of the areas you raised in your talk and in your paper.

Thank you very much for appearing.

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

Thank you.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Thierry St-Cyr]

Now we will go around the table for a second time.

Mr. Carrier, you have four minutes.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

Thank you.

Could the fact that you received no answer from the minister about the problems with the operation of the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants indicate the lack of importance that she attaches to it? In another presentation, yesterday or the day before, we heard that, to become a member of the organization, you just had to take a one-day course in Toronto. If you could not go, you could do the course by video. Anyone with an interest in those cases could become a member.

Do you really see a use for the organization? Do you think that being a member really gives you the qualifications expected of an immigration consultant?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

First, thank you.

I just want to say this. Do I think the regulation is important to the minister's office? My take on it is yes, it is important. Being a member of CSIC, do I have any benefit or do I think it's good? My answer is yes, especially abroad. I think it is good to have consultants regulated, and you can say you're a member of an organization. In all my contracts--I put it there--you can report to me if there are concerns, if we cannot resolve it.

Having said that, what you're referring to is the continuous development point. It's not to be a member. It's just that CSIC makes it mandatory that you have to go to Toronto for that seminar. I refuse to go because it is not economical. I'd pay $800 to fly there, pay for my hotel--no, it doesn't make sense. They now say, fine, stay at home, watch the video, and pay $800. No, that's not acceptable. the CBA is not doing that. The lawyers are not doing that, so why insist on going in this direction?

Again, I will go back to the point that the foundation is faulty. We cannot leave CSIC alone. My submission is that the office of the minister left CSIC alone too soon, and that's part of what I think is causing the trouble. There is no monitoring process at this point.

[Robert Carrier, Bloc, Alfred-Pellan, QC]

So you are saying that there are significant criteria and standards that people who want to become members of your organization must meet in order to be accepted. To your knowledge, are there people who have been rejected because they do not meet the criteria, or can anyone become a member with a reasonable effort?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

Thank you.

Are there criteria that are higher to meet? Yes. We had to write an initial exam. I had to write the English proficiency exam, and I had to write the full membership exam, which I passed. Now, the web people did not, and CSIC was not very creative with the law, and that's another reason why there seems to be an increase in some of these other consultants who are practising. But they are not members.

I will use an example. Some of the points required for the English exam to me were too high, even for people going for the master's programs. I was not required to have that when I did my post-graduate studies. So for a regulation body like CSIC just starting, asking for that level of English language proficiency--even higher than what CIC is asking for--is just too much.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Thierry St-Cyr]

Thank you.

If I understand your presentation correctly, basically, you are not questioning the relevance of a regulatory body for the profession, nor the need for an organization to mature and evolve over time. But you do question the democratic governance of your association and the members' ability to genuinely influence the association and become involved in the democratic process. Is that what you said in a nutshell?

[Olukayode (Kay) Adebogun]

That's part of what I've said so far. But beyond that, there are other suggestions that are laid down in my little piece here, which I think will help the organization to become a true profession. Another suggestion is to actually criminalize the operation of immigration consulting, without being a lawyer or a member of an association. The only way that can happen is for an amendment to come for the IRPA. Right now, it's not a crime for anybody to open shop and help clients. The only thing they cannot do is they cannot submit their name with the application, and people know that already, so they help them do all the work until the clients submit, and they monitor it without putting their name on it. There are lots of people who are doing that. So I don't need to be a member of CSIC just to get paid. It's just that I cannot go before CBSA; I cannot go before CIC.

[The Vice-Chair, Bloc, Thierry St-Cyr]

Fair enough.

The committee members who were here, as well as those who were not here, will receive a copy of your presentation and will be able to take a look at it. Your contribution is one that the members of this committee find interesting.

We are now going to end our meeting and resume our task tomorrow.

The meeting is adjourned.