My goal or my thought is that if an example is set, there will be fewer people, or people will be hesitant to commit such an action. They will fear more than just being sanctioned by a society.
As to your other suggestion, that they get PRs on arrival, the concern I would have is this. If you have fraudulent or ghost consultants filling in applications and pairing people up, then really we don't know if the people who are coming are actually live-in caregivers. Are they coming for that purpose or are they paired up with a family here? Is the labour market opinion genuine or not genuine? If we automatically give permanent residence to people who might not be genuine, then we face that risk and have to deal with that.
The point is to correct the system. Automatically granting it might actually fuel a lot more fraud, because now they can charge a lot more. They can stay in the other country and say, “As soon as you arrive, you'll get permanent residence. You don't have to worry about your job or your employer. You can bring your children. You're safe.” Now you'll have a whole new industry work its way backwards on creating fraudulent documents to get you in the door until we find out it has no relevance. I think there are challenges with that.
What would you say should be changed for ICCRC so that they could sanction unregistered consultants in the same manner as, say, law societies deal with unlicensed individuals practising law, or the dental society deals with an unlicenced dentist, or doctors in the case of surgeons? Do you think they need that type of tool so that they can sanction them more heavily? For example, I think there was a recent arrest of a dentist who was practising. It might even have been in British Columbia, my home province, where they found him. The penalties are huge and there's a large hindrance.
Is that the answer, Ms. Emory?