John Cannis

[Supply, May 30th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I begin by saying that I stand to make these comments today as a proud Canadian and as a proud Greek Canadian, my two heritages.

The hon. member for Bourassa stated that we did not keep the promises which appear on page 82. He mentioned racial intolerance, hate propaganda and racial discrimination. I do not know where he was when we voted on Bill C-41 which covered this entire area. Maybe he did not support it.

I know the hon. member for Bourassa has been abroad on various committees. He has heard, as have I, people in different countries saying: "We cannot understand what you people are doing in Canada. You are working toward splitting the best country in the world which has been recognized not once but twice by the United Nations".

I do not understand it when he talks about tolerance. There is not a country on the universe which has exercised more tolerance than Canada. I am proud to say so. The member said that they pay taxes. Just paying taxes does not give anybody the right to split the country. We all pay taxes.

I was not born in this country, but I cannot accept anybody who works toward splitting it. The member stated that he came from a country which had political difficulties. When he arrived in the country it was not Quebec that welcomed him, it was Canada that welcomed him. It was Canada that gave him citizenship. It was Canada that gave him the opportunity to sit in this honourable House, as I have that opportunity.

He talked about honouring flags. As long as this country is one united country, the Bloc Quebecois and the province of Quebec should respect the flag and put it in their offices and in every institution in Quebec. It is a shame they do not. It is a shame they have falsified Canadian history and continue to do so.

I stand behind what the Minister of Human Resources Development said. We have an obligation to defend this country. He took an oath. I took an oath. We all took an oath. Part of that oath was to ensure we would keep the country strong and united. When it comes to rights and freedoms, we do not have the right to split the country. I will work along with the Minister of Human Resources Development and every other colleague in the House to ensure the country remains united and a beacon of hope to the world.

[Supply, May 30th, 1996]

Madam Speaker, I will add my voice to the proceedings to touch upon the issue of honesty within government.

The Reform Party is also known as the son of Brian. When Reformers need ideas they go south of border and huddle with Newt Gingrich and Pat Buchanan. Then they come back thinking this is the United States of America. I will go beyond that to talk about decisions and standing by what one says and there are several examples.

After the budget presentation the first person who stood up to applaud the budget was none other than the Reform finance critic from Capilano-Howe Sound. Five minutes later he was out of the House. Later the Reform defence critic said that the Minister of Finance cut too much. Still later the member for Saanich-Gulf Islands said that we went too far. We do not know if we are cutting enough, if we are going too far, if we are not going too far. Reformers cannot make up their minds which way to go.

When Reform members talk about pensions it is really insulting. There are members in the Reform Party who are so-called double dipping. One of the first things we did as a government in our commitments was eliminate double dipping as well as the cuts which were mentioned earlier by my colleague.

In Reformers' own ridings, 55 per cent of their constituents have stated that the Reform Party is too extreme. This is from their own constituents whom they say they represent. Their constituents sent them here to represent them. They vote against their own constituents. Consider the gun issue. They were sent here to vote against it and they voted for it. They cannot have their cake and eat it too.

It is no coincidence that the Reform Party membership is down by 65 to 70 per cent. I ask myself why. It is simple: Nobody wants to be associated with the extreme views of the Reform Party. Nobody wants to be associated with the Newt Gingriches of this world who look at the esoteric picture as opposed to the global relationship we have.

There are certain expenditures but they do not talk about the the leader of the Reform Party who has gone from the $44 a night Travelodge Hotel to one that is $165 per night.

I could go on and on, but I think I have made my point. Reformers should be honest with the people of Canada.

[Trade, May 10th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister for International Trade. Export growth has been the key to much of job creation success since the government took office.

Can the Minister for International Trade tell the House what the future holds for Canadian companies in new and emerging world markets with respect to trade?

[Immigration Consultants, May 9th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, first let me say that I agree with the amendment. It was part of my motion. I would like to take this opportunity to thank you and my colleagues on both sides of the House who spoke on the amendment. It is an issue that is very important. It has to be addressed now for the various reasons that were covered by all the speakers. It is an issue where family members wishing to join family members sometimes get abused.

I have met immigration consultants who are very ethical people, who do an excellent job and provide the right kind of service. However, I have heard of many cases where people have been abused and tremendous amounts of money have been spent.

This is an issue that has to be addressed today. Hopefully with the co-operation of the provinces we will be able to develop a transparent system, a fair system, a system that serves our country the way it should.

[Immigration Consultants, May 9th, 1996]

moved:

That, in the opinion of this House, the government should work and consult with the provinces to develop legislation which would set guidelines and licensing regulations to govern the business of immigration consultants.

Mr. Speaker, I begin by thanking members on both sides of the House who have indicated they would support my motion. I greatly appreciate their support. I urge all members of the House to consider supporting this well founded initiative.

Motion No. 29 is the first step in rectifying a problem which has existed for well over 20 years not only in Canada but outside the country. The problem is the complete lack of regulations governing immigration consultancy.

I will provide some background to those who may be unfamiliar with the immigration consultancy industry. Consultants provide assistance to immigrants, sponsor refugees and so on, on a variety of immigration matters. The services provided can range from simple advice such as how to fill out forms to arranging business ventures to meet business immigration requirements, to representing individuals before immigration tribunals.

Many consultants are former employees of the Department of Citizenship and Immigration or translators who worked on the Immigration and Refugee Board. There are even some former members of Parliament in the industry. A number of these consultants hold law degrees from their home country but are not licensed to practise in Canada.

Not all individuals operating in this industry are without ethics or morals. However, there are a number of immigration consultants who agree, as do I, that it is time to set up guidelines and licensing procedures in this industry.

The Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants, based in Toronto, represents a number of immigration consultants striving to promote an industry which demonstrates a high standard of integrity and competence. To this end they have appeared before the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration to present their case. They stated their members do not represent the problem. The problem is with the people acting unscrupulously and illegally. These people are the ones who have been injurious to their clients and to the reputation of the government and the immigration profession at large.

I have heard various complaints from constituents and friends about immigration consultants. These complaints involve the incompetent delivery of services or incomplete non-performance. Other complaints involve exuberant fees charged to individuals. The worst complaints involve the absolute unrealistic promises made by certain consultants. These complaints amount to unethical behaviour and constitute outright fraud under the Criminal Code and the Immigration Act.

All one has to do to see evidence of unethical behaviour on the part of certain immigration consultants is read local newspapers. A Mississauga woman, posing as a lawyer specializing in immigration, defrauded her clients of upwards of $8,600. It was later reported she may have victimized up to 65 people who responded to her newspaper advertisements. She reportedly took down payments to represent individuals but never did any of the work as promised.

In other cases, a man working as an immigration consultant provided numerous clients with falsified letters of employment. People seeking to come to Canada receive additional consideration if they can prove they have a full time job waiting for them in Canada. This immigration consultant falsified documents and aided people in making false statements at immigration hearings outside the country.

This case highlights the increasing problem of unscrupulous immigration consultants operating abroad. One of the major problems we have today in the immigration industry is these people operating abroad and unfortunately causing problems in Canada.

When immigration or refugee claimants are counselled to lie and to cheat to achieve their goals, the integrity of the whole immigration system is being undermined.

At a time when public support for immigration process is at an all time low, this type of behaviour cannot and should not be tolerated. It is time to put in place strict guidelines to govern this industry.

The ninth report of the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration supports the licensing and regulating of this industry, as do the law societies of Upper Canada and British Columbia.

The Law Society of British Columbia has stated that it is gravely concerned about the harm being done to immigration applicants by unscrupulous or incompetent consultants. British Columbia's attorney general has supported the committee's recommendation: "I think it is an idea that is long overdue".

The committee heard testimony that many immigration consultants have no test for competency for the practice, no code of conduct, no negligence insurance, no disciplinary procedures and no compensation funds for defrauded victims.

More important, there are no academic or experience requirements. Basically anyone can hang out a shingle in this industry. The immigration committee heard testimony that an immigration lawyer disbarred from the practice one day could conceivably set up shop as an immigration consultant the very next day. Unbelievable.

The number of immigration consultants acting without ethics or morals and taking advantage of vulnerable individuals is increasing at an alarming rate. I find the action of these consultants especially contemptuous. These consultants prey on unsuspecting vulnerable individuals who are in genuine need of help. The consultants may seem very knowledgeable to the individuals, a so-called Fred if you will, who will help them through the door. The promise they make sounds too good to be true, and often it is not true.

Because of the nature of immigration matters, the stakes can be very high. An individual or family could see this as their only hope. They are willing to pay large sums of money, sometimes their entire life savings, to achieve this goal. The unscrupulous consultants are very willing to take their money. Unfortunately the

majority of these consultants make promises knowing full well they cannot deliver.

Take the cases reported in Russia. Several consultants were charging $5,000 U.S. to assist individuals with their immigration matters. They made promises that their applications would be successful, knowing very well these individuals had no chance of ever being approved.

Not only were these consultants misleading honest individuals who only wanted to find a better life, they were knowingly assisting criminals who saw an opportunity in our country to increase their illegal empires. They would arrange their applications with all the right answers as well as set them up with business ventures in Canada, increasing their likelihood of getting a foot in the door.

All this action by unethical consultants impacts the ability of the Canadian immigration system to operate successfully and properly.

The immigration committee put forth many recommendations for the industry of immigration consultants. First and foremost were the immigration consultants to be licensed and regulated. The only thing left to decide is who should be overseeing the licensing of this industry.

Seeing that the committee concluded it would not be responsible or feasible to recommend the federal government set up a body to govern these consultants, where does that leave us? Either we approach the provinces to act on this or we allow the industry to be self-regulated. Unfortunately the provinces have been slow to act in this regard to immigration consultants.

Ontario has examined this issue in the past but unfortunately has declined to act on it. At present the provinces are investigating the option of licensing immigration consultants even though many believe now is the time to act.

I feel with the appropriate pressure and recommendations from the federal government and from the industry, the province may feel and be inclined to act on this issue immediately.

This is what I hope to achieve with this motion, to send a strong signal that we must take action today because it is necessary. The provinces have achieved jurisdiction over regulating various professions and trades to date but have been lax in this specific area, unfortunately

Failing action by the province, the only option left in this case is to have the industry regulate itself. A number of organizations now exist in Canada. The Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants is one. It has over 150 volunteer members in Ontario and British Columbia. It has also been asking for years for guidelines and licensing procedures to be put in place. It sees the need, the committee has recognized the need and our constituents have recognized the need also.

The organization fears the irresponsible actions of these few individuals acting improperly have certainly put a damper on the industry and its reputation. It would more than welcome strengthening rules and regulations being brought to this specific industry.

The Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants in Canada has its own code of ethics and rules and regulations, and members must abide by these rules.

As stated earlier, this is only a voluntary organization. Members join because they want to, not because they are required to. It would be irresponsible to think consultants who behave unethically would be willing to join this organization.

We need to urge the provinces to work with the federal government and these organizations to develop guidelines. The individuals who are registered with the organization would be able to operate within legal boundaries, within specific guidelines.

Why not mould the system after provincial law societies or the College of Physicians and Surgeons? These are systems in place now which work. They have specific rules and guidelines which govern their members in accordance with provincial laws. Individuals cannot operate in either of these industries without being members of the appropriate organization.

I was a human resource consultant prior to entering public life. I operated a business in Ontario and was required to be licensed by a governing body. I had to follow strict guidelines and regulations while in operation. In addition, I had to pay an annual fee to make sure I operated within the guidelines of the organization and the province. My clients had the right to register complaints with the appropriate body if they felt they had not been served to the best of my ability.

Why does this not apply to immigration consultants? I was constantly required to update my knowledge with appropriate courses available through various government or academic institutions. Again, this is not necessary for immigration consultants. I do not understand why.

Why are there no set fees so that when individuals approach these consultants they know up front what the costs will be? I am really saying let us make the system transparent.

I am only repeating questions which have been continuously asked of me by my constituents and friends. I have heard numerous tragic stories about individuals being taken advantage of by these consultants, stories of families being torn apart and of thousands of dollars lost. Unfortunately by the time these individuals come to

me it is too late for me to do anything. Sadly I have seen many instances in which the advice these individuals were seeking was so simple that all they had to do to obtain the information was pick up the phone and I am sure officials would have been able to answer their questions at no expense.

A few suggestions I would make are basically that individuals wishing to operate as immigration consultants be require to pay an annual fee and register under a governing body. The individual should be required to undertake training and/or complete appropriate examinations to prove he or she is competent and able to carry out the duties of an immigration consultant. Once becoming an immigration consultant an individual must answer for his or her actions to the governing body. These suggestions seem reasonable.

I also commend the Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration for its work on this specific issue. Its recommendations were long awaited. All we simply have to do now is act on them.

I am happy to report that just last week the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration released a response to the committee's report on immigration consultants. The minister very much supported many of the committee's recommendations, in particular the one recommending that the federal government work with the provinces on this issue.

The minister's response stated that the federal government will develop a comprehensive strategy to deal with this very serious issue. The response suggests that a consultative process be undertaken with the province and relevant organizations to explore the prospect of a self-regulating immigration consultancy industry.

Surely after all of these recommendations the provinces will see fit to act and act immediately. If not, we as a federal government and as representatives of our constituencies have a responsibility to work to bring about some type of regulatory process for this industry. Canada's good name and reputation depends on it. The integrity of the immigration process also depends on it. We can no longer allow this ongoing abuse of our immigration system to continue.

Yes, our country was built on immigration but with rules and policies set for and by this country based on this country's needs and commitments, not abused by what some money hungry immigration consultants say and do. One of the biggest problems we have found is people working abroad as immigration consultants who prepare these individuals who want to come to Canada. They mislead our officials here and when individuals submit their applications it is very difficult for our immigration officials not to accept them. We have to address that issue as well.

Today I am saying, and I speak on behalf of my constituents in Scarborough Centre and most of the people I have spoken with agree, that we have to address this issue. Unless we act now the situation can and will get worse.

I urge all members of the House to support this motion. I believe it will help get our immigration system on track where it should be.

[Cyprus, May 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, on Tuesday, April 30 a ceremony was held in Toronto to recognize the contribution of Canada's armed forces to the United Nations peacekeeping force in Cyprus.

The Cypriot community of Toronto held the event to honour and pay tribute to the Canadian men and women who served admirably with honour and distinction for over 30 years in Cyprus. Canada's peacekeeping force maintained an unblemished record while serving and participating in the United Nations mission.

During the ceremony the high commissioner for Cyprus to Canada, Mr. Iacovides, presented a plaque to the Minister of National Defence honouring our Canadian peacekeepers. High praise was given to the Canadian government and the Canadian troops for their longstanding tradition of exemplary service in worldwide peacekeeping initiatives and more specifically in Cyprus.

I wish to add my thanks and praise to Canada's armed forces and as well to the Minister of National Defence. Congratulations on a job well done.

[Gasoline Prices, April 24th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my dismay at the recent increase in the price of gasoline.

I do not remember reading about a crisis in any of the countries belonging to OPEC. I have not heard about a shortage in oil or petroleum and we all know there was no gas excise tax increase in the last budget. Therefore I am at a loss as to how to explain to my Scarborough Centre constituents why the price of gasoline keeps going up and up. They are fed up as I am with the greed of the large oil companies.

Could it be that the only reason the prices are increasing is that these oil giants are in collusion with each other? We have been told to reduce the deficit, to reduce our spending, not to raise taxes, to stabilize our monetary policies and we have done so and have acted in good faith. We are now asking these large oil and gas companies also to act as good corporate citizens and stop their gouging.

Canadians should not have to put up with gas price hikes every time the weather gets warm or every time a long weekend comes around. The time has come to let these oil giants know that enough

is enough. Canadians want to know what justifies these gas price increases.

[Supply, April 23rd, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I wish to be recorded as supporting this amendment.

[Nisga'A Land Claims, March 27th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to extend my heartfelt congratulations to President Gosnell and the Nisga'a people on the signing of the agreement in principle this past Friday. Our colleague, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, is also to be congratulated for his important role in seeing this historic moment to fruition.

Those who know the history of this agreement know that it is long overdue. The Nisga'a have been turned away too many times by too many governments for too many years.

The signing marks the end of 20 years of negotiations, two decades at the negotiating table watching federal and provincial governments come and go. For the Nisga'a this has been going on a lot longer than 20 years. The Nisga'a people have been working at this for over 100 years, quietly, patiently, with dignity and persistence.

The time is long overdue. Our government has a chance to change history and we will do so.

[The Budget, March 7th, 1996]

Mr. Speaker, I want to start by thanking the member. He complimented our budget more than he criticized it.

In his criticism he said that we must address the debt problem and I agree. His party continues to refer to Alberta and Mr. Klein. I am very happy they have their finances in order. Mr. Klein has indicated that he has taken care of the deficit and will now take care of the debt. That is the direction we are headed in. As our borrowing needs decline steeply we will be in a position to attack the debt as well. Unless he has another alternative, at least this Doctor Doolittle is doing something. Maybe Doctor Do Nothing could improve on it.