Citizenship and Immigration Committee on June 19th, 2023

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Madam Chair, it is difficult for me to speak when people are having conversations around me.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Can I request that members not have side conversations? It's very difficult to get the interpretation.

Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, please go ahead.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Let’s be serious. We’re nearly done, but not quite yet.

There are several solutions. We’ve been told that a framework should be put in place for schools when dealing with students abroad to ensure that no ghost agencies were involved in their study permit applications.

Do you think that’s possible? Should the Canadian government be responsible for this? In your opinion, should this solution be seriously adopted by the Government of Canada?

[James Casey]

Absolutely. The federal government should be able to increase the regulations with regard to ghost consultants. I believe, as I mentioned in my opening speech, this committee enacted a study on that same exact issue. To my knowledge, those recommendations have not been implemented properly.

Again, going back to some of the broader issues with these students, education is a shared responsibility. Provincial governments have a huge part to play in this, as well. We've seen a number of private colleges in the GTA that have not been audited at all or learned whether they are actual DLIs, yet they continue to market themselves as DLIs. There was an Auditor General of Ontario report, specifically—since we're on the topic of the GTA—where a significant number of these private colleges have not been audited. There hasn't been any mention of that, at all, and that is a provincial responsibility.

I think, if the federal government were serious about this issue, it would pressure provincial governments to audit those private colleges, so students know whether or not they are going to a college—where they pay high tuition fees—where they are actually going to get an education and graduate.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Something similar happened in Quebec. I don’t know if you saw it in the media. Foreign students had paid their tuition fees in advance. When they arrived here, the college had closed and didn’t reimburse the students because it placed itself under the Bankruptcy and Insolvency Act. When that happened, the Quebec government alerted the federal government.

What jurisdiction does this case this fall under?

First, the federal government obviously has a role to play in this, since it ultimately grants or denies the student a study permit.

Secondly, I quite agree with you that the provincial and federal governments should discuss this problem.

That said, other questions also come to mind. For example, are there enough bilateral discussions between countries? We can see that there’s a particular problem in India. I have no idea why. Given its enormous population, perhaps it’s easier to open agencies there, then close them and open others under new names.

In your opinion, does improving the situation necessarily involve bilateral discussions between the Canadian and Indian governments?

[James Casey]

It would be incumbent upon the federal government to have those conversations take place. Considering the education system, as we have it right now, is so heavily reliant on international students as revenue sources—specifically at many of these institutions—it doesn't make any sense why we would not want to ensure the highest ethical practices when we sign off on approving different recruiters.

A lot of immigration consultants have brought up the 2012 London statement that enacts certain regular, basic standards for ethical practices so that, when we are dealing with different consultants, those ethical practices are ensured and we don't have a situation, as we do now, where multiple consultants in different countries are saying to these students that it's very easy to get permanent residency—that they will get it within a year, and so on and so forth. They are making these large, ambitious promises that are far from the truth, and making it seem as if it's a lot easier a situation than it actually is.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

The time is up for Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

We will now go to Ms. Kwan for six minutes.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their presentations.

Mr. Casey, first off, thank you for your work as the representative for the Federation of Students and, of course, for advocating for international students as well.

You mentioned in your presentation the concern that international students pay five times the tuition than that of domestic students. In the case of these victims, not only are they subject to the high tuition fees, but they are subject to having to pay it sometimes twice, if you will, because of the fraudulent activities that took place with the unscrupulous actors. In addition to that, they are also faced with legal fees that they have already incurred. Some of them have had to file to the Federal Court and to deal with this entire situation.

On the issue around ensuring that this is properly addressed, students are calling for the government to stay their deportation, to waive the inadmissibility based on misrepresentation and then, finally, to provide them with an alternative pathway to permanent residency. You touched on that, as well, in your comments.

Can you advise the committee?

Do you think that in providing them with an alternative pathway to permanent residency, such as the H and C application process or the regularization process, we're giving them special treatment compared to other international students?

[James Casey]

Yes. That's actually a great point.

When we visited these students and spoke to them directly, they wanted me to communicate one thing to this committee and to all the different stakeholders trying to see that these students have a pathway to justice. They made it a point for me to mention to everyone that they're not looking for any special treatment. What they are looking for is fairness.

They are making a specific point that they want the integrity of our immigration system to be upheld. They want it to be strong. They want it to be fair. At the same time, they are in the situation right now where for many of them, as far as we have heard from those different announcements from the minister, inadmissibility is not really subject to those actions that are currently taking place.

Again, the words aren't really matching up with the actions, so to speak. These students are more concerned about ensuring that the system is fair to everyone who comes here. They've made a specific point that they want the integrity of our system to be upheld and that they are not looking for any special treatment.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

Yes, we've heard from the students that for them to be given an alternative pathway to permanent residency is not really deemed special treatment per se.

Do I understand that correctly from you?

[James Casey]

Yes, that's correct.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

In terms of dealing with the unscrupulous actors, this was something, as you mentioned, back in 2017. The committee studied this issue. These ghost consultants are still carrying on and preying on individuals. In this instance, it happens to be students. In other instances, it would be other immigration measures.

However, since 2017...these recommendations came forward and there's not much that seems to have corrected the situation. Here we are once again.

If actions were to be taken by the government, what would you say the government needs to do to address the issue of ghost consultants? How do we deal with these unscrupulous actors? How do we ensure that they don't prey on the students the way they are right now?

[James Casey]

I would say, because you mentioned that study or report from a few years ago, I believe it's recommendation 17, specifically, that talks about ghost consultants.

As well, we certainly need to have not just more regulation, but actual regulation around ghost consultants in this country. The fact of the matter is that these different ghost consultants...in this situation, this is just one education consultant who has so many different cases connected to him. We saw it as far back as 2013, when we knew he was forging documents and defrauding different students. The fact that it didn't raise any flags in the system or with the different departments is quite concerning.

We definitely need to tackle unethical practices and ensure that DLIs actually have the tools and resources to communicate among one another. We need to see them take a proactive approach to making sure that if they see a student coming to them and saying, “Hey, I just got told by my consultant there aren't any spaces here, but I was told I actually have a placement here. What's going on?”....

I would think, and I think most Canadians would think, that in an ideal situation, they would try to create some sort of communication within CBSA or IRCC whereby they are actually investigating this case, instead of letting it go on.

[Jenny Kwan, NDP, Vancouver East, BC]

For the students who have been subjected to fraud, of course, it is enormously distressing for them. But even without that situation, in your capacity at the Federation of Students you see lots of international students. What kinds of supports do you think need to be in place to support international students when they're away from their home and trying to build on their educational development, and also contribute to Canada as well? Is there anything that the universities or colleges can do to provide better support for their students?

[James Casey]

As a start, we shouldn't be raising giant, exorbitant amounts of tuition fees on these students. I have some of the figures in front of me for international undergraduate students. They pay $36,123 every single year, just on average. Here in Ontario it's significantly higher. I actually received an email yesterday from the University of Ottawa saying that they're raising international student tuition by 12%. That's already on top of a nearly $50,000 annual tuition fee on international students.

The facts are in front of us. It's very clearly a two-tiered system between domestic students and international students. As I mentioned before—

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry. You have to wind up.

[James Casey]

—we see many different crises, but the actual solution to put in place to ensure that these students have the resources and the supports that they need is to essentially treat them like domestic students.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you.

Time is up. With that this panel comes to an end.

I really want to thank all of the witnesses for appearing before the committee this evening. I appreciate your testimonies for this important study.

I will suspend the meeting for a few minutes, because we need a few minutes to get the sound checks done for the next three witnesses. All of them are appearing virtually.

With that, I suspend the meeting.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I call this meeting to order.

This is the last panel for this evening.

I would like to welcome Mr. Dory Jade and Ms. Monica O'Brien from the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants. We are also joined by Anna Boyden from the Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities; and Ms. Kamaljit Kaur Lehal, barrister and solicitor at Lehal Law.

We will begin with opening remarks from our witnesses. Thank you all for appearing before this committee.

We will begin with Mr. Jade or Ms. O'Brien, representing the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants.

You will have five minutes for your opening remarks. Please begin.

[Dory Jade, Chief Executive Officer, Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair and committee members, thank you for the invitation. I will just give you a friendly reminder: I have been before this committee on several occasions, and I am legally blind, so I would appreciate your mentioning things to me by voice. Thank you.

Thank you for the information and invitation regarding foreign students being exploited by the system.

This subject is of the utmost importance, and it’s one that everyone needs to address.

First, as the professional association of about 5,000 licensed immigration consultants, CAPIC recommends avoiding the terms “ghost consultants” and “ghost immigration consultants” and any variation of these. Through this committee, it went to Parliament, and section 77 of the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants Act has clearly identified “immigration consultant” and “citizenship consultant” as being terms that cannot be used outside of this parameter.

Those who are not licensed to practise are named by the law societies, by the college, by IRCC, and by CAPIC and other stakeholders as being unauthorized practitioners, UAPs. Using the terms “ghost immigration consultant” or “ghost consultants” or other terms within that consultant terminology inside the immigration system.... The people are known. We know where they are. We know their addresses. We know who they are, so they're not ghosts and they're not consultants at all. They can be called UAPs.

The immigration consultant profession is enshrined in the law under the college act, and those who are licensed deserve to be called immigration and citizenship consultants as per the law, unlike those who provide unauthorized advice. It is critical for consistency and accuracy that proper terms be used across the board by this committee, the media and other stakeholders.

As such, immigration consultants should be properly recognized, especially under paragraph 77(c) of the College of Immigration and Citizenship Consultants Act, to put a stop to misleading the public in this regard.

I'll hand it over now to Monica, who will be addressing the other points within the five minutes.

Thanks, Madam Chair.

[Monica O'Brien, Education Manager, Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants]

Thank you, Dory.

I'm CAPIC's education manager, but I'm also a licensed immigration and citizenship consultant with more than 25 years in the profession.

We also wish to acknowledge the plight of those impacted by fraud and the incredible stress and anxiety it causes.

I will add further to Dory's comments.

CAPIC acknowledges that the minister's announcement on June 14 is an appropriate approach to protect victims of fraud and meanwhile hold those who are complicit accountable. Misrepresentation is a serious matter according to paragraph 40(1)(a) of IRPA.

Coming to Canada to study is a tremendous undertaking and requires serious consideration and preparation. It is incumbent on future students, and indeed all applicants, to do their own due diligence in understanding the obligations, requirements and pathways. Not every single student will have a pathway for permanent residence. In fact, a permanent resident pathway is a privilege, not a right, and one that must be earned legally.

CAPIC's recommendations for addressing the issue of exploitation of international students are the following.

Currently, after the initial study permit is issued, post-secondary students in Canada can change their program or education institution easily by only inputting information in their immigration account. We recommend tightening up the requirements for transferring to new schools or designated learning institutions, DLIs, by requiring confirmation from the existing and new DLI of the student's change of information. If such actions are required, fraud can be detected much earlier.

While victims of fraud should not be penalized, the integrity of the Canadian immigration system should be maintained. We recommend modifying all immigration application forms to add the question: Have you been assisted by any third party with this application? This will reinforce the consequence of misrepresentation. This is an amendment beyond the Use of a Representative form. Such a question should be standard on all types of immigration applications.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

I'm sorry for interrupting, but your time is up. You will get an opportunity to talk further when we go to our round of questioning.

We will proceed to Ms. Anna Boyden from the Ontario Ministry of Colleges and Universities.

Ms. Boyden, you will have five minutes for your opening remarks. You can please begin.

[Anna Boyden, Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Hello, my name is Anna Boyden. I'm the assistant deputy minister responsible for the advanced education learner supports division at Ontario's Ministry of Colleges and Universities. I'm here today as a representative of the ministry.

I'd like to begin by thanking the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration for the invitation to appear today to address this important matter.

Students and academics from around the world are attracted to the high-quality education offered by Ontario's post-secondary institutions and by our reputation as a multicultural, welcoming and supportive destination for post-secondary education studies. That's why there were over 200,000 international students enrolled at publicly assisted colleges and universities in Ontario just last year.

International students studying in Ontario are here as a result of considerable coordination between all levels of government, individual post-secondary institutions and local communities, with each playing a part in the journey that brings students from around the globe to study in Ontario. From the student permit provided by the federal government to the health and wellness supports from a student's post-secondary institution, the success of any given international learner is thanks to many partners coming together to prepare and support a student.

Today I'd like to take this opportunity to speak on the part of the equation that the Ministry of Colleges and Universities plays among the many partners. International post-secondary education is a critical part of building up Ontario's skilled workforce. It plays an important role in fostering the skills and future prosperity of the province. It ensures that we have a pipeline of talent ready to fill the gaps in the job market of Ontario.

International students enrich the academic, social and cultural life of our post-secondary institutions and communities across the province. They are part of why Ontario is such a vibrant and globally competitive destination.

Preliminary 2022-23 enrolment figures tell us that we're continuing to see an increase in international students enrolling in Ontario's publicly assisted colleges and universities. This is a trend we've been noticing for the past decade. That's an increase in individual learners, each with a dream of receiving a world-class education, which Ontario is well known for. That's why we continue to work with all of our post-secondary education institutions, as well as our federal and municipal partners, to create the conditions that make it easier for everyone to access high-quality post-secondary education.

All levels of government, in collaboration with Ontario's post-secondary institutions, have a part to play in the future of our international students. For Ontario, we're responsible for overseeing and supporting post-secondary institutions, and setting regulations and standards to ensure our sector is delivering excellent post-secondary education to all students, including international students.

However, it's important to note that Ontario's post-secondary institutions are separate legal entities. That means that as long as they continue to meet the requirements set by the ministry under the applicable policies and legislation, they have the authority to determine their own policies and practices. This includes partnership with education agencies and the provision of supports to their international students.

However, the ministry has heard about the challenges that many international students have faced in Ontario recently. Improving their experience while in the province is an important priority for the ministry.

When international students come to Ontario to receive a world-class education, they deserve to be free from predatory treatment from bad actors. Last December, Ontario's Minister of Colleges and Universities wrote to Minister Fraser about the need for the federal government to protect the prospective international student and reduce visa backlog wait times. The backlog on visa wait times has led to talented students choosing other countries to pursue their education and leaves those wanting to get to Ontario vulnerable to predatory marketing and recruiters from their home countries.

Ontario is doing its part through the credible work and new standards set by Colleges Ontario. This new standard will ensure that the marketing of programs to international students are accurate and transparent. It will require international agents working for Ontario Colleges to complete a sector-endorsed agent training program. It will ensure that information on services, supports and facilities is provided to students before they arrive in Ontario and once they're in the province. Lastly, it will provide targeted assistance to help international students adjust to a new environment.

All levels of government, in collaboration with Ontario's post-secondary education institutions, have a part to play in the future of our international students. Together, we can work together to ensure that Ontario continues to be the best place to further an education.

The Government of Ontario is proud to play its part in meeting this collective goal. We strive to ensure that from the moment an international student sets foot on campus to the day they graduate, the quality of education they are here to receive is second to none and ultimately helps them to prepare for success in the workforce.

Thank you. I'm happy to take your questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Salma Zahid]

Thank you, Ms. Boyden. That was exactly on time.

We will now proceed to Ms. Kamaljit Kaur Lehal, a barrister and solicitor at Lehal Law.

Ms. Kaur Lehal, you have five minutes for your opening remarks.

[Kamaljit Kaur Lehal, Barrister and Solicitor, Lehal Law Corporation]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and honourable members for inviting me here today.

I'm pleased to see that this committee is working towards supporting students who are innocent victims in a fraudulent scheme, and having discussions about creating systems that will prevent such occurrences in the future.

I will be breaking my submissions into two parts: one regarding the affected students and the second regarding steps moving forward.

Dealing with the first part, I have heard first-hand from students caught in this fraudulent scheme how their lives have turned upside down. The halt on deportations is indeed a relief for the students. While I would have preferred an option that did not necessitate the inadmissibility and TRP route, it is reassuring that TRPs will be issued immediately after the finding of inadmissibility, to allow students to continue to complete their studies or work, depending on what stage of the process they are in.

I understand that a task force will then determine, on a case-by-case basis, who the victims of fraud are. My understanding is that the process to be undertaken will be on a priority basis and will be compassionate. I'm relieved to hear that.

However, in line with this goal to be expeditious and compassionate, I believe it is imperative that the task force permit these students to have legal representation, should they choose, given the significance of the possible outcome. Principles of procedural fairness must govern the proceedings of the task force.

Immigration is one of those unique areas of law where lawyers may be permitted into an interview with the CBSA or an immigration officer but not actively allowed to participate. Again, given the seriousness of the proceedings to be undertaken, I urge that students be provided with full disclosure, know the case to be met, and be permitted to have fulsome legal representation.

I appreciate and commend the decision to not invoke the five-year ban against these students. This is indeed a huge relief for students moving forward with their immigration processes in Canada.

However, as H and C submissions will likely have to be made to overcome a finding of inadmissibility, I would urge that the agency assessment also be conducted on an expedited basis. This can be done by way of flagging the file for expedited processing. Normally, applications with agency submissions can take well over a year or more to process.

I have been involved in other areas of immigration law where vulnerable persons, such as victims of family violence, are able to flag their H and C files for priority processing with the coding “FV” for family violence. I would recommend some kind of coding be issued for the student H and C files for priority processing. Doing so will ensure—as the minister himself said—that these students' journeys are not interrupted by the process.

Another matter that needs to be addressed is the impact of an inadmissibility finding outside of Canada for these students. Internally, we may be able to resolve the matter via the TRP and H and C processes, but what about beyond our borders? Should these students wish to travel to other countries, the finding of inadmissibility in Canada may make them ineligible, or complicate their admission to other countries. It would be important for these students to have something, perhaps a letter from the task force stating that they were innocent victims in a fraudulent scheme. This would hopefully make them whole, as best as possible, and remove potential barriers to admission to other countries.

I'll turn to the second part of my submissions regarding next steps.

Moving forward, we want to make sure that we have measures in place that will deter bad actors. Using technology strategically is going to be an important part of being able to accomplish that.

We already use technology to allow for the unique client identification of individuals through various parts of the immigration process. For example, medical examination requests and biometrics requests include bar codes that are unique to the named individual.

Perhaps something similar can be created for students, a unique bar code—or something akin to that—issued by the DLI when a student applies to that institute. That unique bar code would match the student to the DLI database and allow the student to independently verify their status.

My understanding is that DLIs already have portals that are used for reporting requirements. Perhaps these portals can be modified or adapted to incorporate this verification process. I would defer the precise process to experts in technology, but I'm confident that in this day and age we should be able to come up with something.

I would also encourage further discussions with whomever the counterparts are in India to address the exploitation by consultants of students wanting to study in Canada. Perhaps this will require consultation with criminal law experts, both in India and Canada, who can advise on ways to take enforcement steps against individuals engaged in such criminal conduct.

In closing, I thank this committee once again for inviting me here today.