Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 6th, 2019

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Okay.

Where would the compensation fund come from? Would that come from the federal government, or would it be an ongoing fee that they would pay in and put into a pool?

[Natasha Kim]

We envision that the compensation fund, which would be managed by the college, would be funded through the college's resources, perhaps through a levy on members. As well, if there are monetary penalties as a result of disciplinary decisions, for example, those penalties could go into the fund to provide recourse to victims.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

How do you envision the separation here? There was a recommendation that more training would be done for those who go to Federal Court, say, versus those who simply fill out forms. Would that be mandated in the beginning or would that come out of the regime on the different educational standards that would be expected from consultants?

[Natasha Kim]

It would come out of the bylaws as they're established, but the obligation for additional training, if you're appearing before a tribunal, is something that's set out in the statute itself.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

What would happen during the transition period to complaints that are already registered against those that are being investigated? How would they be taken into account?

[Natasha Kim]

Madame Chair, there are very detailed transitional provisions set out in the bill so as to try to make sure there is the least disruption possible for both clients and consultants themselves, and so there aren't disciplinary or enforcement issues that fall through the cracks. A lot of that would just transition over in phases, so that there would continue to be oversight over the profession.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Are there complaint mechanisms that will be there, not for the party directly involved but for other consumers? Here's an example: somebody sees unscrupulous activity that they don't feel is fair, or they feel a client is being victimized but the client doesn't have the courage or wherewithal to make the complaint. A third party may be able to make that complaint. Will that be investigated or will that be barred?

[Natasha Kim]

The legislation doesn't go into that level of detail, but it does require the complaints committee to consider every complaint brought to it. Of course, there are challenges sometimes with the actual investigation if someone's not willing to come forward, but that would be worked out on a case-by-case basis.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Are there any criminal tools? For example, somebody's very egregious, has had multiple fines and has been told to cease and desist. Still barring that, are there punitive measures that might include jail time? Would that be envisioned—something like the measures I've seen in the physicians and surgeons and the law societies?

[Natasha Kim]

Certainly, and that's part of what the budget investments are for, to provide more resources to CBSA to pursue criminal investigations, which can result in both imprisonment and fines. As the minister noted, those fines would be doubling.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

Thank you.

Ms. Kwan.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

What mechanisms are in place to enforce the educational and competency requirements set out by the college for consultants who work overseas, aside from having these outreach workers telling people? That is not an enforcement tool. What enforcement tool would there be?

[Dr. Harpreet Kochhar]

Madame Chair, we do have just an outreach tool. We do not have an enforcement tool. We continue to work with the government on a bilateral basis, just to establish....

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you.

I'll point out the problems with that right off the top, because with the outreach tool, you've got five staff for five countries. Let's just take China or India, for example, assuming you've got one person for each of those countries. Those are huge countries. I don't know how much one person can really get the word out. Really, at the end of the day, don't we need a mechanism for those ghost consultants elsewhere, who are taking advantage of these individuals who do not know our Canadians laws or the process and who are being taken advantage of and sucked in? Some of them have paid exorbitant amounts of money for these individuals to represent them, and they might even have gotten themselves here only to find out that, at the end of the process, the job they've been promised is actually not there. The pathway that they've been promised for permanent residency is also not there. At that point, what recourse is there? They can go and complain, but it doesn't actually help them. They might be able to get some sort of compensation, but at the end of the day they are screwed.

Part of the big problem we were dealing with at the committee centred on this issue too. What is there to prevent the government, for example, saying to overseas consultants that they have to meet these requirements and be registered to have met these requirements? Has that been considered by the government, and if not, why not?

[Lori MacDonald]

I have a couple of responses to that, Madame Chair.

From an enforcement perspective, obviously, we don't have jurisdiction overseas, so that is, and continues to be, one of the challenges. In terms of the consultants themselves—

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm sorry, I'm just going to interrupt here on that question. If people want to make an application meeting Canadian requirements, they have to have these competency and educational requirements met.

What about instituting a system to say that you actually have to demonstrate that you've met these educational and competency requirements, in order for you to represent somebody for an application to be considered here in Canada? Is that something that could be delegated to the college to say that this would be part of their task in order to prevent the kind of problems that we have?

[Lori MacDonald]

I'll take the start of this, Madam Chair, and then ask Ms. Kim to jump in.

One of the requirements of the board will be to establish the education requirements for the consultants. It will be a requirement to post the list of consultants so that people, regardless of where they are, overseas or in Canada, can search that list to say that this person is a qualified consultant. They know that they're using a qualified consultant.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Okay, so if you're going to use that as the basis, could you then say that applications can be accepted from only this list of people?

[Lori MacDonald]

Yes.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Anybody who uses somebody else who is not on this list would not be accepted as an application.

Is that process being put in place?

[Natasha Kim]

That process is already in place. The challenge that we have is where people are not declaring the consultants they're using who are unauthorized, who are operating without being declared.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

If people don't declare, then under this new regime, what are you going to do with that situation? Are you then telling them that their application is not being accepted?

[Lori MacDonald]

Madam Chair, that's where it comes into a number of different processes that we're putting in place.

I don't want the committee to think that putting a few resources in place overseas is the only strategy. That's one of many strategies. We have 157 VACs, as an example, around the world. Those groups will be part of the education process as well.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

I'm running out of time.

Can you submit to this committee all of the strategies you have in place to address this issue, so we can look at it in detail? I'm tight for time.

[Lori MacDonald]

I will undertake to do that.