Evidence of meeting #157 for Citizenship and Immigration in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was consultants.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michelle Rempel
We are getting down to business, colleagues. I’m calling the 157th meeting of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration to order.
We will begin with Monsieur Gagnon, for seven minutes.
9 a.m.
Louis-René Gagnon As an Individual
Good morning, Madam Chair, members of Parliament.
My name is Louis-René Gagnon.
First of all, thank you for the opportunity to appear before this committee as an individual.
Let me briefly tell you about my own experience that is directly related to the bill before you today.
I held positions related to policy development, with operational responsibilities at Quebec's immigration department for more than 20 years, including as secretary of the Conseil des relations interculturelles and as director of the Quebec immigration office for the Middle East in Damascus, Syria, from 2007 to 2009. That was during a more pleasant period. I also carried out many missions to select immigrants abroad.
From September 2011 to May 2016, after my retirement from the provincial public service, I taught immigration law at the CEGEP de Saint-Laurent to those wanting to become immigration consultants. Since May 2013, I have held the position that is perhaps most relevant in this case. I am actually a member of the Discipline Committee of the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council as a representative of the public. Let me clarify that I am not a consultant. As part of the committee, I have served on more than 250 complaints committees as well as on numerous disciplinary and appeal committees, either as a member or as chair.
I should tell you that I fully support the principle of the bill regarding the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants because I believe that the disciplinary system to which consultants must adhere must be based on a solid legal foundation under an act of the Parliament of Canada specifically designed for them.
In addition, I am pleased that subsection 6(2) of the Act respecting the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants proposed in Bill C-97 gives the college extraterritorial capacity. In my experience, the most serious abuses are in fact predominantly committed abroad. I also welcome section 78, which will allow the college to apply for an injunction to counter the blight of illegally practising the immigration consulting profession.
However, I would like to insist that the various disciplinary panels that will be created under the regulations—which will be approved by the minister—always be composed of two licence holders and a member of the public. A member of the public who is not a consultant is an important guarantee of impartiality. This prevents the image of a professional group whose members would only protect each other or absolve each other of their faults.
I am also pleased that section 9 stipulates that the Official Languages Act applies to the college, since the ICCRC has not always been exactly exemplary in that regard. However, the college will need to be provided with the financial resources required to comply with the legislation.
I consider the governance structure proposed by the bill, which combines both elected and minister-appointed members on the board, to be satisfactory.
I would like to add that, in my opinion, the role of the member of the public is broader than simply defending the consultants' clients. I recently recalled a case where the sentence to be imposed on a consultant who had been convicted of criminal acts was being considered on appeal. To mitigate his sentence, his lawyer said that, in this case, his clients had pushed him to commit those acts, that they too had committed criminal acts and that the public was not involved. However, I remember writing in that decision that the public was actually involved. The public is not limited the clients. A representative of the public must keep in mind the integrity of the Canadian immigration system and look at it in the broadest sense.
Thank you.
I am ready to answer any questions you may have, in French or English.
9:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michelle Rempel
Thank you, Mr. Gagnon.
We move to the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants for seven minutes, and I believe you're splitting the time.
9:05 a.m.
Dory Jade Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Members of the committee, good morning. I have accompanying me today, Mr. Gerd Damitz, who is the past president and co-founder of CAPIC.
On behalf of the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, I want to thank the committee for their unanimous bipartisan proposal of federal statute regulation through the Parliament, and acceptance of this proposal. I also want to personally thank you for inviting me and giving me the opportunity to present on such an important matter that belongs to the industry of immigration consultancy.
The proposed college of immigration and citizenship consultants act is a much-needed antidote for a problem that has long plagued the reputation of a respected profession, both at home and abroad. Specifically, its provision of extraterritorial powers against unauthorized practitioners will significantly bolster consumer protection and restore faith in the immigration consulting profession for prospective consumers. For these reasons and many more, CAPIC strongly supports the proposed act.
Before exploring all the points that I want to bring before you, let me reintroduce you to CAPIC. For those members of this committee who were not present before, CAPIC is the sole voice of immigration consultants. Its mission is to act and defend, protect and develop the profession in the best interests of its members.
Over the last five years, we have worked diligently with the Government of Canada to strengthen professional regulation and have advocated for greater disciplinary powers for the regulator. Although satisfied with much of the proposed act, we still have a few points that we would like to bring to your attention. We would ask you kindly to have some amendments on those.
I also want to point out that last Wednesday, the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council, from which you had representatives yesterday, has named Queen's University and l'Université de Sherbrooke in Quebec for their graduate diploma program in immigration and citizenship law. This is a milestone in what this committee has recommended in order to increase the education level of entry into the profession.
Let me go to the point pertaining to the solicitor-client privilege, which is consultant-client privilege. The consultant-client privilege is assumed by the Supreme Court for notaries, lawyers and paralegals. In the last seven years, it has become a constitutional right protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Crucially, such a privilege is not exclusive to lawyers, as both patent agents and paralegals are entitled to it. With consumer protection in mind, the distinction that the privilege applies to the client and not the solicitor renders its omission from the act all the more confounding.
There are three preconditions to establishing solicitor-client privilege: one, communication between the solicitor and the client; two, the seeking or giving of legal advice; and three, the intention of confidentiality. All those have been also brought forward through a legal letter by Professor Peter Hogg, which we would be happy to circulate if need be.
The memo brought by Professor Hogg concludes that the privilege should apply especially and equally to immigration and citizenship consultants and anchor any professional legislation. Indeed, consumers seeking advice should be equally protected when they seek advice from authorized representatives, who most of you would know are of different categories and different regulators.
Proposed section 80 deals with bylaws and regulations, but details are sorely lacking. The issue is the college can and will start doing bylaws. However, under proposed section 80 it only mentions in the act that the college needs to do bylaws or to prepare bylaws. We understand that they will be brought before the Minister of Justice at the end for final ratification or seal. However, there is no guideline. If the guideline is in the regulation, then this point is moot. There is also a concern that the regulator could draft bylaws without respecting the regulation.
In the interests of consumer protection, the reform that has touched on RISIAs, which is the tier regulation or the tier licensing that is in the act, has given RISIAs more powers, which is representation with express entry. RISIAs are only meant to be for representatives on study permits. We would like to recommend under—
9:10 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michelle Rempel
I will give you about 10 seconds to wrap your comments up.
9:10 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants
Will do. Under proposed subsection 85(7), it mentions that it can represent an EOI, which is an expression of interest.
Thank you for the time and it's a pleasure to answer your questions.
9:15 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michelle Rempel
Thank you.
The first round of questions go to Monsieur Ayoub.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Gentlemen, thank you for joining us this morning.
I will get straight to the issue. The purpose of the proposed legislation is to regulate consultants and protect the public. It also seeks to reassure Canadian citizens about immigration and people applying for Canadian citizenship. The process must be straightforward, honest and principled for persons who are in need or who are applying for family reunification. We know all that.
There are already consultants who provide quality services to those clients. That's the right term, since those people end up being clients. We are talking about creating an ombudsman position or a complaint mechanism on service quality, as in other colleges. However, people in vulnerable situations and in need are afraid to apply and assert their rights.
Can you give me some examples of cases where consultants have helped these people and given them access to all the services to which they were entitled? Some consultants even tell their clients that, if they are not satisfied with the services they receive, they can file a complaint. It's part of the profession.
Mr. Jade or Mr. Gagnon, you can take turns answering.
9:15 a.m.
As an Individual
Right now, each consultant is required to have their client sign a service agreement or a professional contract. The failure to do so is already, in itself, professional misconduct that can be the subject of a complaint. This still happens a lot. It is happening less and less, but I saw many of those cases at the outset.
In the contract, the consultants have the obligation to inform their clients that they are members of the regulatory body and that, in the event of a complaint, the client may contact that regulator. Clearly, the client must read the contract and be able to understand it. The contract must be in English or French, and also in a language that the client understands. It's already a foot in the door. A lot of awareness needs to be raised, but it is at least a key to doing so—
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
You are saying that it already exists.
How will the current regulations improve access to a certain level of security?
Having the process is one thing, but making the process work is another. We don't really want complaints, but we want the process to handle them to be easier.
9:15 a.m.
As an Individual
It's like any other regulated field. Regulations are absolutely necessary to provide the framework, but if there is no way to enforce them, to ensure they are upheld, to implement them, they have no effect. It takes both. It takes a highway code and police officers to monitor it.
9:15 a.m.
Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants
Actually, to add to what Mr. Gagnon just said, the complaints are confidential. In other words, clients are protected until they arrive in court, if necessary. Clients therefore have a guarantee of professional protection reinforced by the fact that there will be new federal legislation.
Previously, clients were protected “only” by the bylaws or what is also called the internal rules; bylaws is easier.
From now on, this will be enshrined in the legislation. We will certainly look at the regulations and make suggestions.
Complaints must be completely confidential, which will encourage people to file a complaint.
9:15 a.m.
Liberal
Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Okay. Thank you for your answer.
Mr. Gagnon, in your presentation, you mentioned that the problems are particularly common outside Canada. Future migrants who want to obtain Canadian status have problems outside Canada.
In your experience, how will this bill, or this college of immigration and citizenship consultants, improve the situation on your side for people who are not yet in Canada?
9:20 a.m.
As an Individual
The problem is mainly with those who are not members.
Until now, one of the main limitations of the regulator has been that it could only regulate its members. Some people falsely advertise themselves as consultants in the language of the country, which people do not understand; others imitate websites of recognized consultants—there is often identity theft.
It was beyond the organization's ability to prosecute those people because they were not members. The fact that the organization will be able to take legal action against anyone who illegally practises as an immigration consultant is already a step forward. In addition, the bill contains the concept of extraterritoriality that will allow them to act within the limits they might have abroad, giving them at least a foot in the door to start fighting fake consultants and try to make their lives much more difficult. Yesterday, you received some interesting suggestions from Mr. Kurland on that.
Clearly, in some countries, we will never be able to prevent—
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
Liberal
Ramez Ayoub Liberal Thérèse-De Blainville, QC
Are you suggesting that there be improved agreements with the various countries that have specific entries into Canada?
9:20 a.m.
As an Individual
Yes, to the extent that it will be possible to co-operate with the authorities who also want to protect their citizens, to a certain extent.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
May 7th, 2019 / 9:20 a.m.
Conservative
David Tilson Conservative Dufferin—Caledon, ON
Before my time starts, Madam Chair, I'd like to speak on a point of order. It's a question for the clerk.
This committee does not have a chair—although you're doing an admirable job as the interim chair, you are a vice-chair. I believe it's the clerk's responsibility to hold an election for a chair. There doesn't seem to be any sign of a new chair coming. My question is—if it's an appropriate question, through you, Madam Chair— can the clerk advise us on when she will be holding an election for a new chair?
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michelle Rempel
Yes, this is certainly an odd situation. We are chairless.
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
9:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Vice-Chair Conservative Michelle Rempel
I have confidence that my colleagues from the Liberal Party will advise members soon on when this will happen. I can't believe I'm putting this on the record, but I'm extending my trust to members of the governing party that they will address this situation in a very timely manner, Mr. Tilson.
Technically, as per the advice of the clerk, we actually do have a chair.