Citizenship and Immigration Committee on March 6th, 2017

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

My question is to Mr. Orr from IRCC.

We've had previous studies in 1993, 2005, and 2008 on this same issue. It seemed to indicate that the severity of the issue is big. It seems that, despite previous studies and legislation change, we're still inadequate and unable to provide a framework for legislating immigration consultants and paralegals. Is that what you're finding?

It seems like the problem is still there despite regulating the industry, having enforcement, and having a 95% conviction rate of those who are charged.

[Robert Orr]

We've made huge progress. The changes in 2011 and 2015, and setting up the ICCRC, were a valuable and major step in the right direction. There are issues and there continue to be issues.

We're on the right track, and we have to strengthen some of the tools that are in place at present. I don't think it's fair to say we are where we were in the previous studies because there has been significant progress made. As we've indicated, there are opportunities for us to go a bit further in some of these areas.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Is there any way to protect the applicants or the poor victims?

The problem we see, as you've heard from my colleague in the opposition, Ms. Dzerowicz, is that applicants seeks to come to Canada and apply under a program. This could be some sort of worker program, temporary foreign worker, or otherwise. The applicants seek a Canadian agent who does things, as Mr. Saroya said, and wants money first, then money later, usually in cash.

They get themselves caught in a catch-22, where if they report the person, either the employer or the agent doing this, their own immigration is in jeopardy. The only option is to carry on with the system.

I'm finding that a complaint mechanism isn't working because as the whole panel has said, it usually only happens if they get rejected. If the applicants are rejected, they feel comfortable enough to report it. While they're in the system or when they're being abused, they're not reporting any of this.

Perhaps I can ask Ms. Lutfallah, are there any other mechanisms you see that might help enforcement and those who wish to complain?

[Jennifer Lutfallah]

That's a very good question.

Right now, as IRCC representatives have pointed out, we do undertake a number of campaigns to make them aware of the services of ICCRC consultants and the implications. Other than criminal investigations, that's the only mechanism we have for enforcement.

[Robert Orr]

Can I just add, to be absolutely clear, someone making a complaint is not going to lose out on their immigration status as a result of that fact. They should be able to feel at ease in that respect in terms of making the complaint. I understand it's very complex, but their immigration status is not going to be affected by making a complaint.

[Randeep Sarai, Liberal, Surrey Centre, BC]

Many times, Mr. Orr, it does. What happens is that the person becomes complicit to the deal. They've paid to get the job letter, for example, if it's for employment, or they've agreed to say they're paying higher and then getting reimbursed or something along those lines. They fear if they tell the truth, they're in breach of their agreement; therefore, they're in breach of the immigration rules.

This may be a bit of a stretch, but has IRCC thought of doing sting operations or random tests on some of these consultants to see, when an average person goes in, if they elicit illegal activities, to weed them out? I'm not talking about inducing them into doing it, but in order to find those who are complicit. I'm not worried too much about higher fees for those who are successful. There are other mechanisms for that. They can go to small claims if they want to complain. There are judicial means—

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Very quickly, because we're running out of time.

[Michael MacDonald]

When it comes to workers, you used the example of workers, specifically. There are other mechanisms that workers can successfully use, and we have used them in co-operation with the provinces and the territories around worker legislation.

Seasonal agricultural workers is a great example where we have uncovered fraud, abuse of individuals, and have successfully removed those individuals and kept them employed at another farm, for example. We try and leverage as many systems, municipal, provincial, as well as federal, that we can to try to bring, let's call it, consumer protection to those individuals.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, David Tilson]

Thank you very much to all of you. You've been very helpful in starting us off with this study.

Mr. Cashaback and Mr. Brandt, we didn't spend too much time with you, but next time maybe.

Thank you very much.

[Proceedings continue in camera]