I want to come back to the triangle I talked about earlier. There are three stakeholders in this scenario: the claimant, who applies for refugee status under immigration legislation; that person's advisor, whether it be a consultant or a lawyer; and the government, whether it be the Quebec government or the federal government. So there are three relationships between these parties.
Right now—and this was the case even before CSIC was created—a claimant can always file their application with the federal government directly. As soon as CSIC was created, a level of oversight was introduced into the relationship between the advisor and the federal government. The point of creating that body was to allow the relationship to exist, to make it legal, by requiring the individual to belong to the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants.
Now the legislation has added a level of oversight to the relationship between the advisor and the claimant. And, in my opinion, that has a lot more to do with protecting the public interest by regulating the profession.
Do all the lawyers here today agree with me, in that the paradigm has shifted and we are now focusing more on protecting the public, not just the integrity of the immigration system, as was the case previously? Does anyone want to jump in?