Good afternoon.
I will continue on with the creation of CSIC.
CSIC, thus created through regulation, not statutes, and cooperation between industry and various levels of government and local policing agencies, is at the heart of this model. Cooperation between CSIC and the Government of Canada is particularly crucial, since CSIC was created to oversee members, and the government retains the role of enforcement, including disciplining and sanctioning of ghost or non-authorized agents.
In addition, the provincial law societies have the power to take action against the unauthorized practice of law. The Federation of Law Societies of Canada and the Law Society of Upper Canada are in litigation with the federal government over the process used for the creation of CSIC. The Federal Court has already ruled in favour of the government and CSIC, but the law societies are appealing the decision, and we've enclosed the Federal Court decision at tab 7.
One of the main reasons for the creation of CSIC was that immigration consultants do not operate under any one single provincial jurisdiction. We deal with multiple provincial jurisdictions, the federal government, and foreign governments. Therefore the creation of CSIC means a set of standard regulations throughout Canada.
A positive development in this regard is the announcement about legislative changes in Manitoba in support of the CSIC regulations. This legislation will strengthen the ability to regulate foreign recruiters in relation to the immigration process. We have put a copy of the announcement at tab 8.
Moving forward, this is the context for CSIC and CMI. Both organizations are key parts of a model that took years to develop. That was the result of considerable thought and effort by all sectors and stakeholders. That was the direct outcome of extensive consultations by the ministerial advisory committee. That was implemented through regulatory amendments, and that requires that all parties fulfill their roles and work together. It is a model that is now in place and working on behalf of the consumers of immigration services. However, much remains to be done.
We continue to wait for the provincial law societies to take up their responsibilities. Clearly, we continue to call for the government to strengthen its enforcement by clarifying the roles of federal organizations through IP-9, by making changes to the way CIC interprets and administers the regulations—such as education agents, nanny agents, employment agents—and by implementing the last remaining recommendation from the ministerial advisory committee that recommended penalty provisions be included in the IRPA to address unauthorized and improper practices.
This is why the creation of CMI is so beneficial to CSIC, to the members and consumers. CSIC can now focus exclusively on its regulatory responsibilities and work with other key players to move forward. At the same time, there is a dedicated organization operating independently from CSIC that educates, accredits, and advocates. Together we can take this effective model to the next level and continue protecting consumers, developing the skills and expertise of the CSIC membership, and raising public confidence in the organization and the profession.
Thank you.