Evidence of meeting #28 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 40th Parliament, 3rd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was csic.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
--and then there are immigration consultants, and then there are people who are violating basic human rights and the understanding of what they should be doing. That would be a concern of mine. Is that a shared concern?
As an Individual
That is right. A lot of people give advice and that's actually very dangerous, because you give simple advice because you have experience with one case, but that person might have another case. The problem is that even if they don't charge anything, the client takes it as real advice, so--
As an Individual
Yes. We have to be very careful--even I do--that the advice.... That's why I always say when it comes to immigration, the work permit, and the papers, you have to go to the immigration consultant. I have a bunch of them who have different prices giving the same service. Everybody's registered with CSIC, but they have different prices. I make the client choose which consultant they are comfortable with.
October 25th, 2010 / 3:55 p.m.
Conservative
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
Thank you.
Let me continue the discussion with you, Ms. Javier.
During your presentation, you described a very worrisome situation. From what I understood, you said you were not able to provide a solution. That's somewhat unfortunate because that is exactly what the committee is looking for.
You have emphasized—and I believe Mr. Waldman talked about it too—that we should not punish the victims. Although I too share this noble point of view, I was wondering what you meant by that. Are we to understand that victims of fraud should be allowed into Canada, even if their application is invalid, just because they were victims of fraud?
As an Individual
Yes, that is what I am asking. I know it's very difficult and painful, but from the victims' point of view, in their minds they did not know. They were innocent . They thought the papers were correct. They thought this person was just helping them.
Now, let me differentiate between the victims. There might be a victim who is not really a victim, who actually knew the documents were fake. Those we should not bring into Canada; those we should send home.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
How can we tell the difference? Unless we are mind-readers, how can we be sure whether someone who submitted fake documents is aware of it or is simply a victim of fraud?
As an Individual
From my experience, you can tell, because once you are talking to the person, somewhere in the conversation it's going to come out. The people who interview them have to be trained to watch out for the signs. You can tell if the person is lying or not.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
If we did that, wouldn't there be a risk of relieving people of their responsibility to ensure that their consultants are doing honest work?
As an Individual
Yes, we run the risk of doing that, and the way to eliminate the risk, or to at least bring it down, is to train our own immigration officers, or CBSA, or whoever it is who will be interviewing them.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
That's fine.
Mr. Waldman, I would like to go back to my colleague Mr. Oliphant's question.
When I asked the departmental officials about the constitutional grounds of their bill, they said the reason for that was first and foremost to protect the integrity of the system. They obviously could not say that the main purpose was to protect consumers because that falls under the jurisdiction of Quebec and the other provinces. There is an issue of jurisdiction, and in my opinion, it is important.
In French, we often talk about the “compétences des provinces”. The French word “compétence” has a double meaning. It is used first to refer to “compétence constitutionnelle”, meaning constitutional jurisdiction, but also to the ability—acquired through one's experiences, knowledge and expertise—to perform a task. So the French word refers to someone's competence to do the job.
Sometimes, I get the impression that the failure of the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants is because the federal government does not have the required competence. I am not only talking about constitutional jurisdiction to regulate a profession, but there is no legal framework like the one in the provinces to regulate any profession at all.
Would you agree that there is nothing at the moment under federal legislation and in our federal institutions that allows the federal government to create a regulatory body for any profession?
Immigration Lawyer, As an Individual
You're asking me a legal question on the jurisdiction of the federal government, and I think the Supreme Court of Canada decided that in a case called Mangat. The B.C. law society argued that the federal government had no jurisdiction to regulate consultants, and the Supreme Court of Canada concluded that it did. So the question of which body--federal or provincial--has the jurisdiction has been decided by the court.
There is a second related question, and that's in terms of competence. I would agree that one possible solution would be for the regulation to fall to the provincial law societies. In Ontario, for example, the provincial law society now regulates paralegals. Since the law society has expertise over the regulation and all the experience in regulating in consumer protection, it would make sense to have them be the regulatory body. Albeit many people think the law society doesn't do it that well, it does have more experience than anybody else in the area, and it does its best. So now that the law society is into the area of regulating paralegals in Ontario, it would make sense for them to be the regulatory body.
Now, that would work if every law society in every province were prepared to undertake the responsibility of regulating the paralegals in the province. But it would be the preferred solution, for sure.
Bloc
Thierry St-Cyr Bloc Jeanne-Le Ber, QC
I really like the term you have used. The expertise needed to regulate professions is found in the professional systems at provincial level and not at federal level.
Immigration Lawyer, As an Individual
The only expertise that exists is the expertise that CSIC has acquired over the course of the years that it's been the regulatory body. And I think many people would suggest that CSIC has not done an effective job.
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Madam Javier, if the Government of Canada allowed immigrants who purchased documents for $10,000 from unscrupulous people to stay in Canada, would that not empower those criminals and perpetuate that system where the immigrants are taken advantage of?
As an Individual
Yes, it would, but even if you did not, they would still be there.
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
But there are a lot of phone calls going back and forth, back and forth, between foreign countries and Canadians, and a lot of potential immigrants have family members here. They can find out. Some of them know that paying $10,000 for documents is a shady way of coming to Canada.
Wouldn't that just perpetuate the system if you said, “Well, we're sorry, you've been taken advantage of, so therefore you can stay”?
As an Individual
Let me try to explain how the desperate person's mind works. A desperate person--
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
I understand the thinking. In some ways, you say...you almost don't blame people because the opportunity is so great in Canada. I'm just concerned that it would perpetuate this criminal activity and make it keep going on.
It might?
Conservative
Terence Young Conservative Oakville, ON
Okay. Thank you.
Mr. Waldman, do you believe this legislation will offer potential immigrants more protection from people who are acting as consultants?
