Citizenship and Immigration Committee on Oct. 6th, 2010

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Go ahead, Mr. Trudeau.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

I'd be open to moving this to the beginning of our next committee meeting upon our return.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

You're asking that this matter be tabled.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

It would be on the understanding that we return to it in the first ten minutes of our meeting on the Monday we return. My objective wasn't to disrupt. My objective was simply to ask the government to produce some documents. That's all. It wasn't about engaging in a large debate on this at all, and I did not want to disrupt the functioning of the committee.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Okay.

Mr. Dykstra.

[Rick Dykstra, Conservative, St. Catharines, ON]

I appreciate Mr. Trudeau's comments about not wanting to interrupt the momentum of the committee. Perhaps I can suggest that you attend our next steering committee meeting. I think it would be extremely helpful.

This was on the agenda. It was discussed. I won't get into the details, because it's an in camera meeting, but part of your responsibility is to ensure that the issues of the day that you wish to have on the agenda are presented. Those issues, in fact, were presented, and decisions were made, and the outcome wasn't one that you necessarily wanted today. But the fact is, it was completed, and there was agreement around the table here.

This is a reasonably decent committee in terms of working together. I hope you understand that it's important to me. It's important to the folks in this room. We come from different parties and different perspectives, but trying to work this committee in a smooth and efficient way isn't always the easiest, and to jump in abruptly and throw this on the table today isn't necessarily a good start. I just ask you to keep that in mind. It would be much appreciated.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

We have a technical problem, Mr. Trudeau. The technical problem is that the motion is now on the floor. To get it off the floor, we require unanimous consent.

Is there more discussion on this before I say something else that might upset people?

Mr. Trudeau has asked that this matter be tabled until the next meeting, which is the first Monday after the break. He has limited discussion to the first ten minutes of the meeting, and that will require unanimous consent. Is there unanimous consent for Mr. Trudeau's request?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

I don't hear any nays, so it's done.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

I apologize, Chair, for making it complicated. We're simply learning the ropes here.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

No, no, it keeps me alert.

I'd like to call this part of the meeting to order. This is the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration, meeting number 25, Wednesday, October 6, 2010. Our orders of the day, pursuant to the order of reference of Thursday, September 23, 2010, are Bill C-35, an act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

I probably should have done that earlier, but here we are.

We have three witnesses before us who are all from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration. I hope I pronounce all your names correctly. I'll take them in order. We have Catrina Tapley, associate assistant deputy minister, strategic and program policy; Sandra Harder, acting director general, immigration branch; and Brenna MacNeil, director, social policy and programs, immigration branch.

I would like to welcome all three of you today. You have done this before, so perhaps you could make some introductory comments from your perspective as to Bill C-35. Then, as you know, the different caucuses will probably have questions for you.

You may proceed, Ms. Tapley.

[Catrina Tapley, Associate Assistant Deputy Minister, Strategic and Program Policy, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We are pleased to have the opportunity to address Bill C-35, the Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, which would protect potential immigrants by strengthening the rules governing those who charge a fee for immigration advice.

The bill would amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act--IRPA--so that only lawyers, notaries in Quebec, and consultants who are members in good standing of a governing body designated by the minister could provide advice or representation for a fee at any stage of a proceeding or application. This includes the period before any application is submitted or a proceeding begins, thereby closing a loophole in the current framework that regulates consultants.

Under current legislation, the involvement of consultants in the pre-application or pre-submission period is not regulated. By casting a wider net, unauthorized individuals who provide paid advice or representation at any stage would be subject to a fine of not more than $50,000, or to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years, or both. This would include undeclared ghost consultants, those who conceal their involvement in an application or proceeding.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Canada Border Services Agency, and other enforcement authorities take immigration fraud seriously. By closing the current legislative loophole, we add another legislative tool for taking action against ghost consultants. The tools provided by the introduction of this legislation will support ongoing compliance, enforcement, and prosecution activities crucial to immigration program integrity.

In addition, Bill C-35 would give the Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism the authority by regulation to designate a body to govern immigration consultants and to establish measures to enhance the government's oversight of the designated body. This body would also be required to provide information that would assist the minister in evaluating whether it is governing its members in the public interest. The information would also help ensure that members are providing representation and advice in a professional and ethical manner.

Currently, CIC is limited in its ability to disclose information about individuals who provide unethical or unprofessional representation or advice.

The bill would allow CIC to disclose such information to those responsible for governing or investigating that conduct. An investigation could be undertaken more readily and, where appropriate, disciplinary action pursued.

I would add, Mr. Chair, that unpaid third parties, such as family members and friends, would still be allowed to act on behalf of an applicant. Furthermore, under the new rules, there would be exceptions for certain groups, such as visa application centres and other service providers, when acting in accordance with an agreement or arrangement with the Government of Canada.

It is primarily the federal government's role to protect the integrity of the immigration program. The Government of Canada recognizes, however, that the provinces and territories play an important role in regulating the conduct of immigration consultants, as they have responsibility for consumer protection and the regulation of professions. ln this regard, Quebec's own recent amendments to its regulations recognize as an immigration consultant any member in good standing of the body designated under federal regulations. In addition, during the course of federal-provincial-territorial consultations, we also shared our proposed legislative amendments with senior provincial public servants, who raised no objections.

Canada's immigration system can be accessed at any number of missions in other countries or at CIC offices in Canada. Overseas or in-Canada applicants seek assistance from immigration consultants for a variety of reasons. Given the fact that Canada cannot directly investigate matters in other countries, the investigation and prosecution of third parties residing abroad is challenging. While much of the problem lies overseas and beyond our reach, it is anticipated that enforcement in Canada of proposed new offences could disrupt overseas networks by removing their Canada-based links. The Government of Canada will also continue to make use of bilateral and multilateral opportunities to address the fraudulent activities of unscrupulous immigration representatives abroad.

The international component was initiated during the minister's trip to India in January 2009, and further developed in his recent international meetings in Europe and Asia. During those meetings, the minister underscored the need for combined action to combat fraud, abuse, and wrongdoing in Canada's immigration system. Indeed, as the minister recently said, the Government of Canada will soon send a dossier on some of the worst fraudsters in the Punjab to that Indian state's government, which would follow up with appropriate enforcement action. Meanwhile, efforts to raise awareness of the risks of engaging crooked consultants will continue, including updating of websites in Canada and at visa offices abroad, to carry warning messages for potential immigrants.

Service improvements, including web-based tools and video tutorials, are also being developed by CIC and will make it easier for applicants to independently apply to immigrate to Canada.

One such web-based tool is the Visa Wizard, an interactive tool that, based on an individual's specific circumstances, provides specific instructions and forms that best fit their situation. It will be launched shortly.

CIC has also recently launched a process under existing authorities to identify a governing body for immigration consultants, as part of the broader strategy to better regulate immigration consultants.

A call for submissions from candidates interested in becoming a regulator of immigration consultants was published in the Canada Gazette on August 28, 2010, and interested parties are given until December 29, 2010, to deliver their submissions.

This selection process follows a notice of intent published on June 12, 2010, in the Canada Gazette announcing CIC's intention to launch a public process to identify a governing body to regulate immigration consultants.

Candidates must demonstrate that their organization has or will have the capacity to effectively regulate immigration consulting activities in the public interest. This enhances public confidence in the immigration process and preserves the integrity of the immigration system.

In regard to the investigative powers of the regulator of immigration consultants, governing bodies continue to be responsible for taking disciplinary action against their members, including the revocation of membership. Like other governing bodies, the governing body for immigration consultants can investigate the conduct of members where there is a concern that a member has breached a term of membership. This is similar to the process used by provincial law societies to look into complaints concerning their own members.

Most immigration consultants working in Canada are legitimate and ethical, but as the minister has said, it is clear that immigration fraud remains a widespread threat to the reputation and integrity of Canada's immigration system. Bill C-35 would strengthen the rules governing those who charge a fee for immigration advice, close loopholes in the immigration system currently exploited by crooked consultants, and improve the way by which immigration consultants are regulated.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are now ready to answer any questions the committee may have.

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you, Ms. Tapley.

Mr. Trudeau, you are first, and you have up to seven minutes to ask questions and get answers.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

Thank you very much, Chair.

First of all, I want to say how pleased we are to see this bill come forward. This has been a concern for many of my own constituents in particular, being affected by ghost consultants, but I am a little concerned about some of the aspects of this bill, in that the challenges that have been faced over the past years with CSIC have not entirely, to my mind, been avoided by this bill.

One of the concerns people have had around the CSIC is they have been unable to gather the resources from their members, in terms of membership fees, to be able to adequately police their members and overview their members, and that has led to issues around overly expensive learning materials and just higher fees than the members feel are warranted. How is that going to be dealt with by the new regulator, given the fact that there is a small pool of immigration consultants who are not lawyers out there? There are around 1,800 now, maybe up to 6,000 if all the ghosts become members. How is this new regulatory body going to be able to function with the limited financial intake that they will necessarily have from such a small pool?

[Catrina Tapley]

Thank you for the question.

I think I would like to start by coming back to the factors that we have published for selection of a body, and then I'll ask my colleagues, Ms. Harder or Ms. MacNeil, to provide some more specific information around this.

I think I'd just like to note that what we've looked at is competence. So among other factors candidates must demonstrate that the employer will employ individuals with demonstrated knowledge and experience, and that would include practice and ethical conduct, official language status. But I think also when we get into accountability and integrity, which are two of the other competencies that we talked about in our factors, those become as important as well in addressing some of the concerns the member has raised.

Integrity: the development of a code of conduct, the code of ethics, the conflict of interest for immigration consultants has to be clear. Accountability: that they are accountable to their membership, including the democratic election of directors, annual public meetings, external audits, and regular reporting, which I think will help to get at some of the issues you have identified.

The other two factors we are looking at are good governance, which I think once again speaks to some of the issues you have raised, as well as viability. So these plans include ensuring a membership base that will provide for sustainability of the body, and to promote membership candidate entities must be incorporated or capable of incorporating, and what they need to provide to us is demonstrated expertise in financial management and reporting to ensure the same on an ongoing basis.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

I thank you for that. I recognize that those are very high criteria, and my concern is that what we've seen with CSIC is an inability to draw sufficient funds from its membership to be able to deliver the high quality of service we are now asking of them.

Is Bill C-35 allowing for any extra moneys to be offered to the regulator to help offset the low number of members they're going to have, as compared to a professional bar association or a provincial bar association or larger regulating bodies?

[Sandra Harder, Acting Director General, Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

In the notice of intent and the document that was published in the Canada Gazette in August, there is an indication of a possibility of money for start-up funds. No specific amount is indicated, but there is certainly that possibility for people...to give an idea of what may be required in order to become a viable organization.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

But that's the start-up funds only. There is no money for the ongoing operation of a body, which is of concern to me. Many of the problems the CSIC has run into in the past few years have been traceable to the fact that it simply does not have a large enough pool of registered immigration consultants to be able to draw the fees from that would allow it to be a healthy regulator. I think that's a problem we probably haven't been able to get to yet.

I wonder if you could respond to that.

[Brenna MacNeil, Director, Social Policy and Programs, Immigration Branch, Department of Citizenship and Immigration]

In addition to the financial assistance that may be made available--

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

For start-up.

[Brenna MacNeil]

--for the start-up, the way the approach has been structured is that the organization, whether that's CSIC or any other body, should be demonstrating to us how they plan to move forward and how they plan to remain a viable organization.

You have also pointed out that the membership should increase by virtue of this bill, because we're getting at these ghost consultants, because we're requiring anyone providing any advice or representation.... So that will assist the governing body moving forward.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

But as a comparison, moving from 2,000 to 4,000 members isn't the tens of thousands that many provincial law bodies have, and that comparison keeps coming back in terms of what we're intending. I'm really worried we're going to fall into the same trap that the CSIC has struggled with of not having the resources to be able to police their own consultants. I'm concerned that we're not actually going to make much improvement on that, and I'm worried because a lot of people are touched by that.

The other side of things is the ghost consultants, who will not be part of the responsibility of whatever regulating body. How much in the way of extra funds is going to be allocated to the policing of those ghost consultants? How much is the Canada Border Services Agency, for example, going to receive to be able to take on this new mandate of going after people who are giving advice before--

[The Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Your time is up, Mr. Trudeau; you'd better have a quick answer.

Go ahead.

[Justin Trudeau, Liberal, Papineau, QC]

It's a how-much question, so--

[Catrina Tapley]

There are no additional funds provided for CBSA. We can speak more fully about enforcement and why we think this is a very valuable legislative tool, but there are no additional funds provided to CBSA.