To the extent that it extends the jurisdiction of the regulatory body to earlier steps in the process, it allows for some level of protection. Having said that, the reality is that my experience with ghost consultants is that to a very large extent they operate outside the law.
On almost a daily basis in my office, I see people who have been helped by and have paid money to people, but when I look to see if their consultant is regulated, he or she is not. At that point, the only recourse is to call the police or the RCMP, or CSIC. As far as I'm aware, CSIC has not been able to effectively do anything about the problem of ghost consultants. That's why I firmly believe that the answer is to clearly delineate when a person must be a consultant. The bill extends that, so that's one improvement I acknowledge.
Once you've done that, the only way of protecting the consumer and the integrity of the system from ghost consultants is by injecting a large amount of money into the enforcement stream.