Thank you.
Your question, if I understand it, is about the difference between an unlicensed person and a licensed consultant. I think I've answered part of that. The unlicensed person takes advantage of vulnerable people who need to run away or want to immigrate to Canada. These unlicensed persons are not knowledgeable because they didn't study like we did. We paid money to take courses and to pass exams. We are at a certain level of knowledge and skill that these unlicensed persons cannot possibly have.
As for moneys and where our client's money goes, the bank accounts are regulated. These other people could take the money and run away and they've done that. It has been in the newspapers, in the media. We are licensed and therefore are held to a strict standard. None of us would have been licensed, Mr. Uppal, had we not proven to CSIC that we know the refugee law and the immigration law.
There are always complaints.... A disciplinary department is hanging over our heads, which is important for any professional body.
Our knowledge allows us to render a proper professional service, which I'm very proud of, because I am where I am today thanks to CSIC.
As I said, lawyers do not take immigration law in law school; I never did when I was there. I learned everything through seminars and conferences, as Ms. Adam has stated.
Therefore, an unlicensed person is now covered in this new legislation, Bill C-35 in that it's an offence for them to get involved with persons in the area of immigration and refugee law.
The only comment I want to add now is that I'd like to have some serious teeth put into this bill. Unlicensed persons who are caught practising immigration and refugee law ought to be strictly fined, with maybe even a jail term to deter them, because they're taking advantage of vulnerable people around the world who want to come to Canada.