Citizenship and Immigration Committee on May 6th, 2019

[Lori MacDonald]

We've already started to establish information sessions, kits and written information in terms of providing guidance on those issues.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

Thank you.

Mr. Ayoub, you will be pleased to note that I gave you an extra 20 seconds that time around.

We are on to Mr. Tilson.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Thank you.

Just to continue on with some of the issues that have already been raised, a number of years ago, there was a big dust-up between the lawyers and the paralegals. The lawyers said, “Get rid of the paralegals; they're not any good.” Of course the response came back that the problem was that, for certain types of matters, you didn't need a lawyer; a paralegal could act in a certain way and charge the appropriate fees. That issue seems to have been resolved.

We had a study in 2017 in which the lawyers again came and said, “Get rid of the consultants; they're not any good.” We had the same argument. We had consultants who would do certain complicated things, and other consultants who were just simply filling out forms.

All of this gets down to the question as to how you're going to deal with that. There's always a grey area where, for the people who are filling out forms, maybe that's all they should be doing, but they're doing something else. I'm talking about consultants. I'm sure we're going to have some lawyers come again and say the same thing, maybe as early as today. This area was canvassed by my colleagues on the other side, but I'm interested as to how you're going to resolve that issue other than by saying that you are working on it.

[Natasha Kim]

In terms of paralegals, in Ontario at least, that issue was resolved in part by bringing them in as members of the law society and governing them through that mechanism. Consultants are another option, but it would have to have been addressed by every province in order for that to be effective as a national solution.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

Yes.

[Natasha Kim]

What's being proposed here is a regulatory body that would govern immigration and citizenship consultants.

In terms of whether they should or shouldn't be filling out forms, I guess I would say that anyone who was acting as an immigration consultant would have to meet the qualifications and the education standards that are set out.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

So you're going to say to consultants, “There are certain things you cannot do.” Are you going to go that far and say that there are certain things they cannot do, that this requires the expertise of someone who has had legal training?

[Natasha Kim]

Under the status quo, under the existing framework, for example, immigration consultants can't necessarily appear before a court. They can appear before the IRB, an immigration tribunal, but what is new within the proposed legislation would be they would be required to have extra training to be qualified to appear before a tribunal.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

What is that? Are you going to set that out?

[Natasha Kim]

That would be set by bylaws by the college.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

So it hasn't happened yet?

[Natasha Kim]

No, although I understand the ICCRC has been working with the IRB around what it could look like.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

That's an issue. Who should appear before the IRB? Just someone off the street? The answer is no; it's someone who's qualified. I trust that you're going to get to that point.

The other question I have is with respect to the board of directors. We have some members of the board who are elected and some members of the board who are appointed by the minister. That's still going to continue. That didn't work out very well.

[Natasha Kim]

Under the current framework, under the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, no members of the board of the ICCRC are appointed by the minister. There are public interest directors under their own constitution, but most are elected by the board itself or by the membership. This would be new, where the minister would be appointing those public interest directors to act in the public interest, and they would not be practising consultants.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

So the minister would in fact be making the appointment, all appointments.

[Natasha Kim]

It would be just the public interest directors; there would be elected members as well who would be elected from amongst the membership.

[David Tilson, Conservative, Dufferin—Caledon, ON]

So it's the same thing. From the testimony we heard, I think it was 2017, that didn't work out.

[Lori MacDonald]

No, there are no ministerially appointed positions on the board at this time. They are elected members. The new legislation will allow for the board to be made up of ministerial appointments that could be from any walk of life. There are appointments specific to manage the board; elected members from the consultants; and a public servant ministerial “observer”, as it's called, to be not a voice on the board but an observer on the board, to be kind of like a watch for the minister to flag any concerning issues and so on.

It will be a completely different entity from what exists now.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Michelle Rempel]

Thank you.

Mr. Sarai.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

In 2017, I think there was an issue about negative experiences by vulnerable foreign workers. In some instances, even though they didn't trust them entirely, they still ended up working with them, because they didn't know where anyone else could help. Do you think the new tools, given such a stronger complaint process and new public awareness activities, will help with the issues that were brought up in 2017?

[Natasha Kim]

Certainly, in relation to consultants and increased robustness around the regulation of the consultant industry, there would be, as the minister laid out, a number of additional recourses and consequences for either unscrupulous or unauthorized practice. As it relates to temporary foreign workers in particular, I would note that there are also other mechanisms in place. For example, there have been a number of investments in employer compliance regimes so that, for example, Service Canada or Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada can actually inspect employer workplaces that have migrant workers and ensure that those employers are living up to their obligations. We use a range of mechanisms to try to ensure the protection of vulnerable people.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Have you spoken to the current regime to see whether they expect that this would solve a lot of their issues? The last time we studied them, the complaint process was very long. Very few consultants ultimately had their licence either revoked or suspended. Do they expect the process to be different? Are they optimistic or are they hesitant? What's the feedback you've received from them?

[Natasha Kim]

I believe the committee will be hearing from them later today, but we have certainly been in regular contact with them. We have talked to them about the proposed changes. The reaction we have received has been fairly positive.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Will they fund this whole regime themselves? Will there be federal funding offsetting any costs in this, or are they expected to fund this all entirely on their own?

[Natasha Kim]

The college would be self-funded by fees paid by consultants.