Rick Dykstra

[Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, September 23rd, 2010]

Madam Speaker, we went from the explorations of the explorers back in the 1700s to whether the government would stick around long enough to get this bill through. I find it quite fascinating that the member would like to use history as a guiding lesson.

In the close to five years that the government has been here, just with respect to this ministry, much has been accomplished.

If he is worried about what may or may not happen in the future, it certainly will not be because of this party. For the next two, three or four years, we will do whatever it takes to get out of the economic difficulties that the world now faces. Our country is sitting on the leading edge and there is no need for elections to move those things forward. If the opposition wants to talk about elections, that is fine. On this side of the House, we are focused on governing and moving forward.

With respect to the bill, it is very clear. I think I heard at the very end of the member's statement that he does support this bill and will vote to move it forward to committee. I appreciate the fact that there is some constructive nature to his discussions. I heard from the member for Etobicoke Centre, too.

When it comes to citizenship and immigration, there is no need to take a view that will not be positive, that will not see the bill move to committee, then back here for third reading and then implemented.

I have several quotes from the industry, and I would like to get the member's comments on what the industry has said what the bill will do for those who suffer under crooked consultants.

The first quote is from Peter Bernier, national president of Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, who said, “It is the dawn of a new era for Immigration Consultants as announced yesterday by Immigration Minister Jason Kenney”.

Phil Mooney, past president of Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, said:

We're delighted [about Bill C-35] because proper immigration consultants are victims of the crooked ones too. They steal our clients with lies and false promises and they give the whole industry a bad name... We've been very unhappy with the way we've been regulated. Our members complain bitterly...

The industry likes what we are doing. The industry knows it will be a good bill. I want to hear the member say that he will support the bill.

[Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, September 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the dialogue by the member and certainly the ending of his speech where he indicated that the opposition party, the Liberal Party, will be supporting the bill at second reading to move it to committee.

I have heard now from two members of the Liberal Party today on the bill with respect to the issue of the regulatory body that will exist. There is a bit of a misunderstanding here. This would be a self-regulating body. While we have spoken this afternoon about the difficulties we face with fraudulent consultants, rip-off artists and all of the other names that we use to describe these individuals who take advantage of other human beings, we also have a number of people in this industry who are legitimate. They would like the opportunity to self-govern and to ensure there is no place for those who are not in this business to help people but only to hurt people and for their own financial advantage. This will not be a regulatory body with the same sort of statutes as some of the provinces use with their agencies or regulatory bodies, depending on the profession, but it will be one that is set in place and it will be a self-regulatory one.

Part of the problem of getting into creating statutes is that we end up creating bodies that are costly. There are many bureaucracies that exist for years upon years and end up costing the taxpayer tens of millions of dollars. We do not want that. We want a very simple straightforward piece of legislation in this process that will do what its title says, which is to ensure that crooked consultants no longer have a place in this country to do business.

[Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, September 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with a great deal of interest to the member's comments. He is always very good at keeping my attention, presenting an interesting dialogue, and offering up some good points for debate.

The member did not speak as much as I would have hoped about the purpose and intent of the bill and the fact that his party has indicated that it is in fact going to be supporting this bill to get it through second reading and to committee.

I want to comment on a couple of things and ask for clarification. He alluded to the temporary foreign worker program as somehow being a problem with respect to this piece of legislation. I am not sure how. I have been across this country, from province to province to province. There are large companies, but mostly small businesses. In fact, he need not to look further than two seats behind him, to the member for Welland, whose riding encompasses a great deal of agriculture. These small companies need to have temporary workers to assist them to actually stay in business.

The member needs to understand how these companies work. I do not know whether the member has misunderstood or is unaware of how the temporary foreign worker program assists Canadian after Canadian company to stay in business and provide goods for this country.

[Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, September 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for his input into this process and also his confirmation that in fact his party will be in support of getting the bill to committee to obviously look into some of the issues that he has identified today, but I am a little unsure about his concern, at least at this point, with respect to his point about statutory.

The way it exists now is not nearly how it is going to exist after Bill C-35 is passed in terms of the regulatory board, so I am a little unsure as to what his concern is with respect to statutory, because this will be a board that obviously reports directly to the ministry and to the minister and will be given authority to do so. It will be given authority to actually regulate the industry and its position will become permanent based on that organization applying to the ministry, and a number of organizations obviously will. The organization chosen to be the overseer will in fact become the regulatory body.

So I am not quite sure what his concern is, but I would suggest that it certainly is something the committee will be studying once we get the bill through second reading and get it to committee.

[Global Centre for Pluralism, September 22nd, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 32(2), I have the honour to table, in both official languages, the Global Centre for Pluralism 2009-10 annual report and a summary of the Global Centre for Pluralism corporate plan for 2010.

[Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, September 21st, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with interest to the comments of my colleague from the Bloc.

One of the substantial things this bill does is provide for significant investigative measures and outcomes that will enable the regulatory body to pursue crooked consultants.

I point out that the bill authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations providing for the disclosure of information relating to the ethical or professional conduct of a representative. The governing body could then investigate the conduct and, where appropriate, pursue disciplinary action.

The bill also proposes to extend the time of the investigation from about six months to about five years. The bill allows for the pursuit and, in some cases, the conviction of those who have not been acting in accordance with the law.

I would simply ask the member to comment on both of these points. Will his party be supporting these important additional measures?

[Balanced Refugee Reform Act, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, the most important part of the statement by the member opposite was his conclusion, and that is one that I certainly echo. We come here, we do a lot of work, but when we look back on what we have done in the future, there will be points, certainly, that are highlighted in one's own career. I think the member has done a very elegant job of explaining that this will be a signature to which he can be very proud.

He did indeed spend a little bit of time speaking about the issue that faced all of us at committee, which was that the original bill had the safe country of origin. Based on a recommendation that he brought forward, the word “safe” was removed, but the designated country remained. He did briefly touch on why that was a preference for him, but I would like to give the member the opportunity to speak to the importance of this designation within the bill itself and why it needs to be supported by the House.

[Balanced Refugee Reform Act, June 15th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, I know the minister also wanted to thank the members on this side of the House, the members for Oakville, Oak Ridges—Markham, Richmond and Fleetwood—Port Kells, who sat on the committee and did tremendous work on behalf of the government. I also compliment the chair, the member for Dufferin—Caledon, who oversaw a lot of the process as we worked through 42 clauses. It was not always easy, but he did a good job. In fact, he kept the parliamentary secretary in line on a regular basis.

The minister should be complimented, too, for the work he did. He spent tireless hours with both staff and the ministry to ensure we put forward a bill that would be passed in the House. I extend compliments for his hard work and determination both on behalf of the government and also as an individual who truly believed that the reforms were necessary. It looks like it is ready for third reading.

Could the minister comment on the draft regulatory issues that were brought forward and presented by him at committee with respect to designated countries? He spoke about the details. Could the minister spend a little time answering why those were so important in this process?

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, if the member lets me, I will explain. It was passed in a budget when she was not elected. I would never refer to her as not being in the House. In fact, I know she is in the House a great deal of the time and does work hard. It was not a reference to her attention or membership here. It was in reference to a previous budget when she was not elected.

[Jobs and Economic Growth Act, June 8th, 2010]

Mr. Speaker, there are two things.

First, in the last two months General Motors announced in St. Catharines $480 million worth of investment at General Motors on Glendale Avenue, which will help preserve and create 800 jobs. That says something about how much manufacturing means in the riding of St. Catharines and where things are going.

When she speaks about EI, and I realize she was not here when this budget passed, let us not forget that we passed the budget that moved the whole board of EI away from the way it was being run. It is run independently and has a minimum of $2 billion to ensure that what the Liberals did with EI reform would never happen again.