Evidence of meeting #31 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 39th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was quebec.
3:30 p.m.
As an Individual
In 1993? In 1993, the immigration department was a new department, and I got my interview in six months' time, but within two years, I was in Canada.
3:30 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
How are you finding the experiences now for people in situations similar to yours?
3:30 p.m.
As an Individual
They're waiting six years plus, sir. The clients who applied in 2002--in India in particular, since I am of Indian origin--are receiving interview notices.
For example, there is a businessman who owns a very big house in the province of Gujarat, where I come from. Before I left, I received an interview notice for his file, which he filed on his own. He wants me to represent him or prepare him for an interview. He's a multi-millionaire businessman in India who would like to establish himself in Canada. He sent me that application in 2003.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
From your experience, what is the biggest hang-up for it taking so long now?
3:35 p.m.
As an Individual
We have to go back in history a little bit.
One hang-up I see is the ministers in the immigration department. We have seen more than a dozen ministers since 1993, starting with Mr. Gerry Weiner to the present minister. I have probably met each one of them.
The problem arises with the bureaucrats. They go for what is politically correct or PC. We don't have the power, so let's go and change the regulations and get the power. In the last regulations, they wanted to change or introduce the language exam. They held onto applications, sat on them for a number of years, and we had two years of wrangling in Parliament, and two class actions. The first one was initiated by my law firm, the Dragan case, just to introduce the English-language exam. So what I see is that the bureaucrats--not the members of Parliament--lack the field knowledge of what's to be done.
The simple solution at the time would have been to tell the applicants, “Look, we do not have the powers to ask you to take an exam”--which was the case under the old system--“but we want you to take this exam, whereby we can expedite your process or we can waive your interview.” If that simple thing was told to the people, we could have solved this problem in 1999 or 2000. Rather, they sat on the applications for 18 months, and then we got into the retroactivity, which was challenged in the first case by our law firm, the Dragan case. It was subsequently followed by a class action across the country and resulted in $3 million being paid to the lawyers for the class action.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
The Dragan case, number two, was subsequent, Mr. Chairman, to the change in the point system back in 2002. I just want to say for the record that some of the members on the committee might want to revisit what the committee had to say at the time, because we were very much against what was happening. One of the things that came out in the Dragan case was that the bureaucrats essentially lied to the committee. And it's in the records. I bring that up because I think it's important for us to know where the problems come from.
I have been on the committee for the last 10 years, and I have lived through seven different ministers in the last 10 years. If one wonders who runs the department, it very much is the bureaucracy, and they're not very open, accountable, and transparent.
3:35 p.m.
As an Individual
Clearly, on paper everybody wants to be transparent. But when it comes to reality, it doesn't happen.
If you look at the Dragan case, the judge mentions a very specific case about Mr. Majumdar. He was my client. I visited him in Indonesia, and we made so many requests in the Hong Kong office just to get an answer about when our clients could expect an interview. Six or seven faxes were unanswered, and in that specific case the federal judge said that this was unacceptable.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
The judgment also made reference to misleading Parliament on the part of--
3:35 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, subsequently, because what was presented by the lawyers in this particular case and what was coming in a deposition from the federal government and the bureaucrats were totally contradictory--the numbers given to the committee.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
I'm delighted that you're at this committee now, seeing the position you work at.
Now, you work as a consultant for the law firm.
3:35 p.m.
As an Individual
From the very beginning. That's the law firm that sponsored me to come to Canada. I was in England and I saw their advertisement in Wayback. I said I was a lawyer, and that's how we started working. It's the law firm of Brownstein Brownstein & Associates.
3:35 p.m.
Liberal
Andrew Telegdi Liberal Kitchener—Waterloo, ON
I had occasion last year to meet a person in the Punjab who was in exactly the same situation as you are in, and he is now practising as an immigration consultant in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia. He waited six years. What struck me was that we got you here at age 43, but it would have been better if we'd had you here at 37, because you would have had six more years to contribute, instead of being put on hold and waiting.
Since you work as a consultant and for a law firm—and I didn't see your submission—I wonder if you could make some recommendations to us as to how we could improve the regulation of consultants.
3:40 p.m.
As an Individual
Yes, I have it here.
Immigration consulting is my passion. Since I come from a legal background—I can't get a licence as a lawyer, which is another reality—this is the closest I can be to the legal profession.
On March 7, the immigration department in New Zealand introduced a licensing system for consultants. It's a federally regulated body; it's not given to the consultants. For example, if you are a farmer and you have 1,000 cows and you want to take care of them, you'll put them in one place and include them all, rather than exclude some.
The present system has been established with licensing systems for every profession in Canada. You're trying to exclude people because they don't have this or that; they don't have the language. You're not going to regulate people like that. You cannot, because if people are going all over the place and this is their livelihood, they're going to do it.
I'll put it in very loose terms, from my 15 years of experience in this field. The immigration profession from the outside, in other countries, is seen to be like the drug business. Because human smuggling in other countries is so rampant and so much money is involved in this, people wish to get into this business legally or illegally. Very few want to have legitimate businesses, but there are also people who want to have illegitimate businesses.
For example--and obviously I can't give you proof for this one--I started my practice way back in 1993 in India, in a small office, working with the law firm Brownstein and Brownstein. In the very first month after I put an advertisement in the newspaper, a gentleman came to me with a bag full of money. He said, “Mr. Ajmera, I work as a human smuggler. I saw your advertisement that you can send people to Canada. If you help me and my people, I will give you $15,000 per person.” I said, “Look, I'm a lawyer. My father was a lawyer, and my grandfather was a lawyer under British rule. That's the last thing I would like to do.”
As of today--this was overheard, and I don't have proof--the going rate to smuggle people from India to Canada or America is $80,000 Canadian.
3:40 p.m.
As an Individual
So it's like the drug business. The money involved in the drug business is there. Whatever we want to do, the financial motivations of people are in this so much.
I'll give you an example. We introduced this system of licensing consultants, and particularly giving points in the job offer. So even if I have minimum English and meet the 67-point requirement....
There was a leading law firm in Toronto. A lot of the consultants and lawyers started making HRDC-approved job offers to people abroad because it gave them 15 points. That law firm approached me in my law firm and said, “If you have a federal applicant who cannot make 67 points, pass them on to us. We can find them an HRDC-approved job and they will get 15 points.” When I asked how much he charged, he said it was $15,000. I said, “Look, I don't know your operation. I don't know how you do it, but with the fees you are trying to charge me, I don't think it's a legitimate operation.” That's exactly what happened. Six months later the RCMP found—
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Norman Doyle
I'm going to have to go to Mr. St-Cyr.
This is really interesting, Mr. Ajmera.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for being here today.
First of all, Ms. Gauthier, I encourage you to make your presentation in French because no one made any presentations to us in French during our stays in the rest of Canada. I wanted my Anglophone colleagues to be able to practise their French. You took away an opportunity for them to do so, and I had promised them that.
3:45 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Montreal, Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners
I didn't speak in French because, when I was asked to prepare a text, I started typing it in English. I presented the text to my supervisor, Nancy Salloum, who speaks more in English.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
I'd like to understand who you are. Are you from the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants?
3:45 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Montreal, Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners
No, we are practitioners.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
You are immigration practitioners. So this is an association of consultants, but you aren't from the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants, which regulates or should regulate the...
You represent the Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners. Your presentation was very personal, and you used it as an example to show the position of your association.
3:45 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Montreal, Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners
That's what I was asked to do.
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Since you are an immigration consultant in everyday life, are you also a member of the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants? Have you managed to become a member?
3:45 p.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Montreal, Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners
No. As I pointed out in my brief, I failed the test six times. Six times is the maximum number. You can't continue to practise. I'm doing work—
3:45 p.m.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
I'm going to interrupt you. I simply wanted to clarify that because I wasn't sure I understood. I have a few minutes left and I want to ask Mr. Ajmera the same questions.