CIMM Committee Report

Supplementary Opinion of the Conservative Members of the Committee

With respect to immigration consultants, the fact that there should be a self-regulatory body is not in dispute.  The mandate of such a body should be to protect consumers of immigration consulting services and to ensure competent and professional conduct. The issue is how best to accomplish that goal given that a federally incorporated not-for-profit body presently exists. This current body is of fairly recent origin and its operations are at various stages of maturation. It would appear that fundamental to its success is its ability to ensure that all those that provide services are registered and that there are meaningful sanctions if they are not. Equally important to the success of this body is the concern that once service providers are registered, they maintain an acceptable professional and ethical standard and are subject to meaningful discipline in the event of breaches.

Given that the regulated activity is with respect to a federal immigration proceeding or application, the regulatory body should be a federal one, with jurisdiction over all provinces and territories. It would be up to the provinces and territories to regulate as to any matters relating to provincial and territorial immigration matters.

There are a range of options available that should be considered by the government but what appears clear is that the status quo is not an option.

Range of Options:

1. Changing the existing field manual and policy to reflect points 1 to 4 relating to pre-submission work, authorized representatives, disclosure, and concealed representatives referred to in the majority report or a close variation to it.

2. Ensuring that existing rules or more robust rules are adequately enforced.

3. The inclusion of specific offence provisions in the IRPA. It is of note that the only recommendation of the Report of the Advisory Committee on Regulating Immigration Consultants that was not followed in the creation of the existing body was Recommendation 31, “The Committee recommends that penalty provisions be included in the IRPA to address unauthorized and improper practice.”   To this effect, an option would be for the government to introduce legislation to add an offence provision to the IRPA addressing unauthorized and improper practice. The provision should specify the punishment for anyone who comments the offence and it should be substantial.

4. That the existing or new body consider or be encouraged to establish a complaints procedure in respect of unauthorized or improper representation where immigrants with precarious status in Canada could lodge complaints.

5. That the current organization consider arranging an independent governance expert to assess its governance structure to ensure it meets objective and acceptable standards and that the finding should be made public. At the very least it should ensure that a specified and conventional number of members have a means to call an extraordinary or special meeting to deal with issues of concern to them.

6. That the government of Canada consider introducing stand-alone legislation to re-establish the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants along the lines recommended in the majority report.

Other considerations

All of the issues that stand-alone legislation would have to address could include those that also need to be addressed under the existing body namely: conduct, professional standards, competence, prohibition, offences, complaints resolution, compensation funds and bylaws. Much of what needs to be addressed by the existing body and which is being addressed with various levels of success would need to be addressed by the new body. In each case it would be important that the membership themselves establish the governing bylaws. In either case, it is likely that not all of the members will be pleased with the membership fees, the professional standard requirements, the ethical standards established or the discipline meted out, but that is the nature of self-governing bodies. What is important is that the membership, through their elected members, have a say in the development of the policies affecting each area.

If options are chosen other then stand-alone legislation, it is suggested that a period of time be given to the existing body to come to maturation on the issues of concern or face re-establishment by stand-alone legislation.

In order for the regulatory body to succeed it is important that it be given the tools needed to succeed. Consideration therefore should be given to include the penalty provisions previously referred to and to ensure that the rules, regulations and legislation apply to presubmission work.

Finally, as referred to in the majority report, consideration should be given to streamlining and simplifying the application forms and processes relating to them.

There is a great need to make it easier for prospective immigrants to access and navigate the application process by simplifying and streamlining the forms and process.  The present process makes it difficult for people to apply to come to Canada on their own and without the assistance of immigration consultants.  Ideally, our immigration application processes should be easily accessible to those wishing to work and live in Canada.  Such measures toward this goal would help prospective immigrants rely more on themselves and less on potentially unscrupulous consultants, thereby helping prospective immigrants to protect themselves.

Respectfully submitted,s

Ed Komarnicki, M.P.

Souris-Moose Mountain

Parliamentary Secretary to the

Minister of Citizenship and Immigration