[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]
Thursday, November 9, 1995
.0915 
[English]
The Chair: Order.
The order of the day, pursuant to Standing Order 108(2), is a study of immigration consultants.
Today we welcome, from the Department of Citizenship and Immigration, Mr. Charles A. Godfrey, director, reconfiguration and operational support, international service sector.
Welcome, Mr. Godfrey. Please begin.
Mr. Charles A. Godfrey (Director, Reconfiguration and Operational Support, International Service Sector, Department of Citizenship and Immigration): Thank you.
I'm here today to talk about the operational reality of immigration consultants abroad. I understand that people from the department were here in May and talked about the policy aspects of this. I'm here to discuss operational reality, which in my opinion is the presence of immigration consultants in the day-to-day processing of applications at missions abroad.
For today, the term ``consultants'' is being given its broadest interpretation; that is, lawyers, consultants, and anyone who for a fee acts on behalf of an applicant.
My ability to provide some information on this topic is based on two factors. As part of my title, ``operational support'', suggests, I am in daily contact with the geographic bureau in the international service, who deal with the posts abroad. Probably of more interest, I've had recent postings in Hong Kong and New Delhi. My recent stint in Hong Kong from 1990 to 1994 was as the manager of the business immigration program, and I had occasion to meet with many lawyers and consultants. In New Delhi, from 1988 to 1990, I was the operations manager.
Ms Clancy (Halifax): And survived.
Mr. Godfrey: And survived. Hello, Ms Clancy.
In the topic of relations with consultants there are really two, formal and informal. In Canada the department has established ongoing consultations with various organizations; OPIC, for example, the Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants, in Toronto for the Ontario chapter and in Vancouver for the British Columbia chapter. OPIC in Ontario, which includes lawyers, has 120 members; OPIC in British Columbia has 30 members.
Relationships have also been cultivated with AQAADI, Association québécoise des avocats et avocates en droit de l'immigration, provincial law societies, and the Canadian Bar Association both nationally and provincially. There are 11 subsections of the Canadian Bar Association devoted to immigration lawyers.
These overtures to these organizations have resulted in formulations of service standards, and I'll deal with this later.
Abroad there are various organizations. In the United States, for example, there's AILA, the American Immigration Lawyers Association, but the one I've chosen to single out is one in Taiwan called TICA, the Taiwan Immigration Consultants Association. It has 150 members, of whom 80 are active, and 50 of those 80 fully specialize in Canadian immigration. This association was formed at the insistence of the Taiwan Ministry of the Interior, which wanted a self-regulating professional body in the country. Membership in this organization is compulsory for Taiwan residents with registered consulting businesses.
There are of course many informal associations; that is, associations with lawyers and consultants who have no association of their own, those who are on their own dealing individually, as well as with people who represent applicants on an ad hoc basis.
When considering the relationship with lawyers and consultants abroad, local sensitivities in the host country often come into play. In some areas of the world naturally there are sensitivities to persons engaged in the business of assisting citizens of that country to emigrate.
.0920
Negative host country attitudes may be reflected as follows. For example, in the United Arab Emirates there are laws regulating consultants advertising for immigration purposes.
Employment laws for foreigners may be at stake. For example, in Hong Kong there's a requirement that foreign lawyers have an office in Hong Kong and be registered there in order to represent clients.
Sensitivities are also expressed by host government departments. In particular, when dealing with the department of foreign affairs of the host country, its attitude toward the emigration of its citizens is very important.
Of major significance in dealing abroad with lawyers and consultants is the Privacy Act. Under this act, of course, only Canadian citizens or permanent residents of Canada are entitled to information when acting on behalf of an applicant.
Consultants abroad, of course, can be Canadian citizens. They may be Canadian permanent residents, or residents or citizens of the host country or area served by the local visa office. The impact is such that precise processing or decision details may not be revealed by the visa officer to a non-citizen, non-resident consultant. Of course, if the information is relayed via the applicant to his or her lawyer or consultant, that doesn't contravene the Privacy Act.
Consultants may be involved in many different aspects of the procedures. It's to be noted that offices abroad do not suggest that it is necessary to engage a consultant, nor do they endorse or recommend consultants. The decision whether or not to hire a consultant is that of the applicant alone.
Self-assessment guides for classes of immigrants contain various amounts of information for those intending to immigrate to Canada. For example, here is a self-assessment guide for independent applicants. It contains complete details of the point system and all aspects of information necessary for immigration. This guide and others contain a warning, if you will, that says ``Individuals or agencies who help you complete your application are not given any special treatment in processing''. The wording may be slightly different in various guides, but the message is the same.
Consultants who are authorized by applicants in writing may be involved in some of the following areas. First of all, of course, there is their role in pre-determining admissibility as they see their clients for the first time during the initial consultation. For example, what makes the consultant decide to take that particular case?
The consultants may be involved in filing applications and paying fees on behalf of the applicants; receiving notices from the immigration office that relate to acknowledgement of the receipt of the applications; processing timeframes; review of the files and an indication that the interview has been waived; the date and time of the scheduled interview; what outstanding documentation there may be; and deadlines for submissions of reports.
The consultant may also receive the medical instructions on behalf of the applicant, and in the final course even the visa, if so directed by the applicant.
They are, of course, involved in making representations on behalf of their clients relating to perhaps definitions in the Immigration Act, the need for and type of certain documentation, and of course refusals when they occur.
As well, there are general consultations with the visa office on processing policy and procedures.
Since January 1994 the international service has committed an extensive effort in its outreach liaison with these processing partners. It's intended that they work in tandem with the consultant community to gain support and in some ways, hopefully, reduce litigation. But the main purpose is to improve the quality of service to the applicant and be responsive while maintaining fairness, equity and transparency to all who apply, whether or not there is a consultant involved in the process.
Consultations with this representative community made up of lawyers and consultants have resulted in two virtually identical documents on service standards and communication: one for the lawyers and one for the consultants. These service standards relate primarily to how representations are handled and apply to all applications submitted after November 1, 1995. They are meant to reduce non-essential questions often posed to the visa office about whether an application was received or when an interview will be, by giving complete information and therefore allowing officers to spend time on productive processing activities.
.0925
It should be noted that these service standards are not a contract or an agreement; nothing has been signed. It's a declarative document outlining the standards to the public at large that we wish to be accountable for. The service standards apply to all applicants, whether represented by counsel or not.
Some of the highlights of the service standards are as follows. There's an acknowledgement of the receipt of the application sent by the CIC office within four weeks of application. This gives the file number, processing information and, in particular, timeframes for normal processing.
It's hoped that with as much information as can be given, consultants and lawyers will refrain from making routine case status inquiries. As a matter of fact, it's stated that routine case status inquiries, where the information has already been supplied, will not be answered. Other non-routine inquiries that are undertaken will be answered within thirty days.
There is a complaint mechanism whereby the lawyer or consultant can take a complaint - for example, if announced processing times are not being adhered to or when non-routine case inquiries are not answered - to the program manager of the mission abroad and, if satisfaction is not gained, further to the geographic area director in Ottawa or the director general of the international service.
It's also provided that there be continuing education of OPIC and the immigration bar in an effort to improve service standards. As stated before, these standards are meant to allow a transparency in the processing of all immigration applications.
The Chair: Thank you very much Mr. Godfrey. We'll begin with ten-minute rounds.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez (Bourassa): Thank you, Mr. Godfrey, for your presentation. The information that I receive as the Official Opposition Immigration Critic does not necessarily correspond to what you have just told us.
For example, many people abroad complain that they are unable to meet with a Canadian officer and that they are forced to meet with local people who at times are not up on the situation and cannot provide all the necessary information. They then feel compelled to hire or pay someone who knows the Canadian officer or someone higher up at the embassy.
Let me tell you about one case. A Dominican citizen wanted to come to Canada on a visitor's visa. Someone here phoned the embassy in Port-au-Prince and was advised that it was not necessary for the person to make an appointment and that he need only show up at 7:00 a.m. Last week, the individual went to the embassy. The first time he showed up, it was a holiday; the second time, there was no electricity; and the third time, he was told to come back the following week. He had travelled to Haiti from the Dominican Republic and had to pay for his hotel. It was incredible. Would you care to comment on this case? Do you know of any other similar incidents? Personally, I know of several.
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry, but I'm not familiar with the local details with respect to processing in Port-au-Prince. Obviously some of the items you mentioned are beyond the control of the immigration office - if the electricity goes out or something like that. There are also certain days that are set aside to deal with visitors. Perhaps the person didn't appear on one of those days.
I'm sorry, but I don't have any information about that particular case.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: However, there is a more important issue here. Why was the applicant abroad unable to meet with a Canadian officer at the embassy? Why did he have to meet with local staff? Are there specific guidelines governing such matters?
[English]
Ms Clancy: A point of order. What does this have to do with hiring consultants?
.0930
The Chair: If you will permit, Ms Clancy, I was going to say to Mr. Nunez that
[Translation]
if we focus on specific cases... Mr. Godfrey is here today to discuss immigration consultants in general, not a specific case in Haiti.
Mr. Nunez: Once again, you always react when Ms Clancy objects. You should be more objective. You are the chair, not Ms Clancy.
The Chair: Are you questioning my ruling? That's your right. However, I was not reacting to Ms Clancy's comment. Even before she raised her hand, I indicated that you were out of order.
Mr. Nunez: The point I was trying to make is that when problems such as this arise at Canadian embassies, people feel compelled to hire a consultant.
[English]
The Chair: Mr. Godfrey, are you prepared to add any light to the fact that certain individuals cannot hire immigrant consultants in certain countries?
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry; the question is whether or not they can hire -
The Chair: Due to other problems, some individuals are forced to hire immigrant consultants because of the functioning of the embassy.
Mr. Godfrey: In a case such as has been described, I don't believe a lawyer consultant would do any good, because the individual would still not be able to get to the officer. The question in that case is making an application. We do not see lawyers and consultants on individual cases. They are not permitted to make an appointment or to discuss individual cases.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: How many consultants are there in Canada and how many are there abroad? Can you give us a general idea of the number? You only mentioned organizations in Ontario, British Columbia and Quebec. However, there must be associations across Canada.
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry; those are the only statistics in Canada that I have.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: How many consultants are there overall in Canada?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry; I do not have information on how many in all of Canada. I have that information because those are the largest ones. OPIC, the Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants, is, as far as I am aware, the only agency representing consultants in that manner. I wouldn't have statistics on the consultants who are not members of OPIC.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: How many of these consultants are former Immigration Department officials? For example, has the number of consultants increased as a result of the massive layoffs in the public service?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I'm afraid I can't speculate on that. I'm sorry, but I do not have information as to how many registered consultants would be former members of the department.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: Do you have any figures on the number of non-lawyers arguing cases before the IRB?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: Overall, abroad? I don't have actual statistics. In my experience, it would appear as if there are more non-lawyers than lawyers involved as consultants.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: Is it fifty-fifty? Are there more lawyers involved? Do you have any idea of the actual number?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry; in my experience I never really thought of it in that definite term, as to whether they were lawyers or consultants, because in ``lawyers'' you may be talking about lawyers who are lawyers according to the host country regulations and lawyers who are Canadian lawyers.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: Have you received any complaints about consultants from persons applying for refugee or immigrant status?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: Personally, I have heard of some complaints. When I was in Hong Kong, I had some complaints, but not from those in the refugee category, with whom I did not deal.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: In which category did these complaints fall?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: In the business category.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: What happened? What were they complaining about?
.0935
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: Most of them were complaining about costs, the fees their lawyer or consultant was charging them.
The Chair: Ms Meredith, please.
Ms Meredith (Surrey - White Rock - South Langley): Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to start by apologizing for having missed most of your presentation. Maybe you've answered some of my questions.
I think I'm going to start by saying that we have a fundamental principle we have to deal with as to whether or not government should even be controlling who a person hires, who should do work for them. Whether it's hiring a real estate agent or going to a certain doctor, it's really the choice of the individual.
You mentioned OPIC, which is the Organization of Professional Immigration Consultants. Is this an international organization or...?
Mr. Godfrey: No, it's a Canadian organization, with two main chapters, one in Ontario and one in British Columbia.
The Chair: If I may interject, they did present a brief on this subject before this committee, to which Ms Meredith can have access.
Ms Meredith: Thank you.
The bar associations of upper Canada and of British Columbia didn't seem to be aware, or at least they didn't acknowledge -
Ms Clancy: They testified about it yesterday.
Ms Meredith: I don't believe they acknowledged that there was an organization already in place at a Canadian or provincial level that could regulate and discipline.
Do the immigration officers overseas monitor consultants' work? Are they ever in a position of identifying that this particular consultant is not doing the job in an ethical or proper way? If they do identify that, what can they do about it?
Mr. Godfrey: I think on a case-by-case basis, if you are looking at what is presented and you know that it's not correct, you would certainly have an opinion on what that lawyer or consultant is presenting.
Ms Meredith: But if it was consistently the same person or people who were presenting improper documentation or not doing the job in an ethical way, is there anything immigration officers can do about it at the other end?
Mr. Godfrey: If it were found that a consultant or a lawyer was consistently submitting fraudulent documentation, I think it would be incumbent upon the program manager of that office to talk to the lawyer or consultant and indicate that if this were to keep up he may not be allowed to continue to do business.
Ms Meredith: So you could actually disallow him or you could refuse to do business with that individual? That is within your purview, to make that kind of...?
Mr. Godfrey: How to handle it I think would be up to the discretion of the individual program manager. There's nothing in the law, of course, that says it can be done, but I think it would be reasonable to assume that if somebody kept giving you fraudulent documentation, you wouldn't want to be dealing with that individual.
Ms Meredith: One of the witnesses the other day was talking about a list; that embassies overseas would have lists of consultants they found acceptable; that they would do business using those consultants. Do you feel that's something that should or could be considered?
Mr. Godfrey: I'm not aware of any such list. In Hong Kong we had a list of about 470 persons who at one time or another had been engaged by an applicant as a lawyer or consultant. But that was all of them. We did not make any distinction.
Ms Meredith: The suggestion was that perhaps we should be making a distinction. Perhaps we should be basically crediting certain consultants to do this kind of work for Canadian applicants to Canada. Do you feel that is a realistic approach to dealing with consultants overseas?
Mr. Godfrey: I believe this matter is being considered by the policy people. I'm not privy to all the matters that are being discussed at that level.
Ms Meredith: From your own experience, would that be a workable situation to try to minimize the complaints, if you will, of improper representation by consultants overseas?
Mr. Godfrey: As you mentioned earlier, it really is at the discretion of the applicant who he or she chooses. To this point, this is the way we've been dealing with it.
.0940
I'm not sure whether you were here or not when I indicated that there is a warning in kits, self-assessment guides, that go out to applicants. There is a highlighted section that says individuals or agencies who help you to complete your application are not given any special treatment in processing. That's as close as we come to dealing with the issue of an applicant choosing a lawyer or consultant. We don't recommend it and we don't endorse it; we leave it up to the applicant.
Ms Meredith: Are these in the languages of the countries of origin or just in the two official languages of Canada?
Mr. Godfrey: At some points in the past they have been in other languages, but at this point we have gone strictly to English or French as the language of use.
Ms Meredith: So the fact that in many cases those languages are probably not a language this person uses indicates that they may need a consultant just to interpret the material. It certainly would be to somebody's advantage not to point out that disclaimer clause.
Would it be appropriate - and I think this was again a suggestion from one of the witnesses - to have a warning written in the language of the country of origin in order to warn applicants in that manner, but also to warn them that some people may take advantage of them; that this is an approximate pay scale for these fees from lawyers, from consultants; that these are the requirements necessary so that a person doesn't need to hire a consultant to understand what they're being asked for?
Mr. Godfrey: We certainly don't get into the pay scale. We don't mention it at all because it is strictly between the applicant and the consultant of choice.
Ms Meredith: You don't now, but is this something that might solve the problems we're hearing of, such as that people are being charged - and you raised it yourself - and the fees they're being asked to pay are in some cases out of line; that there might be a problem in that the person doing the interpretation is not being accurate or is misrepresenting the need for their own services?
If it's in a person's own language, if he or she understands what the acceptable fees and rates are, then he or she would be in a better position to shop around. That person would be in a better position to protect himself or herself from people who are using that lack of knowledge to further themselves.
Mr. Godfrey: I'd have to check. There are many posts at which, in addition to this, there are some instructions that go out as to how to complete an application form. There might be something on those instructions that also relates to lawyers and consultants, but I'd have to check.
Ms Meredith: Do you feel that would assist an applicant from a foreign country?
Mr. Godfrey: I think it's quite important that, as we are at this stage, it's up to the individual to choose the lawyer or consultant. The fees and the choice of doing it for language purposes is entirely up to the applicant.
Ms Meredith: I guess what I'm getting at is that if we're to try to solve the problems we have been presented with, and if we are starting to see more of a technical response in that we're taking away from the individual having human contact and are dealing with phone and mail inquiries and mail and phone processing, I feel it is extremely important to get the information out there initially. It's very important that the information gets out there in a language the person can understand.
To eliminate a lot of the other problems the system has to deal with, do you feel that may be something the department could do to minimize the problems down the road and to deal with solving the problem in general?
Mr. Godfrey: As a departmental official, I don't think my opinion is of importance here. I think the policy people are looking at this. You did mention getting the information out to people, and we try to do that.
I understand the question of the language. As we move towards greater emphasis on language in our selection criteria, and as we encourage more and more people to be fluent in either English or French, I think that may be why these instructions are going out in English or French only. That is a manner of self-selecting from the beginning. If the person is not able to deal in an official language, then maybe that person shouldn't be considering emigration to Canada.
.0945
Ms Meredith: But how many people come in under family class where that will not be an issue?
Mr. Godfrey: You're perfectly correct, the language is not an issue in the family class.
Ms Meredith: Thank you.
The Chair: Ms Clancy.
Ms Clancy: To begin with, I have two brief comments that will clarify my earlier intervention, Madam Chair.
Perhaps because Ms Meredith wasn't here for part of today's presentation, and I'm not sure if she heard all of yesterday's...OPIC is not the same as a professional association backed up by statute under the provinces, such as the Law Society of Upper Canada or any number of medical societies, etc. They have their own enabling statutes, which give them broad powers of discipline, of self-regulation, etc.
Ms Meredith: But it could be.
Ms Clancy: It could be, but the point is it isn't, and therefore at the moment OPIC has no control over its members; they're voluntarily members. They can't discipline. I suppose they can expel, but it does not have the force. They can't fine. They can't do any of those things that professional societies can do under provincial legislation.
So, in a sense, it's rather like there can be any number of professional associations that aren't backed up by statute in the provinces that really have no teeth, and thereby hangs the crux, if you will, of the problem we're dealing with here.
Anyway, that was my first comment.
Mr. Godfrey, thank you very much for your presentation. I wanted to ask you about TICA in Taiwan. The difficulties we're dealing with here in terms of the extraterritorial consultants are obvious. I think that as we get into the report we'll be looking at some precedent for the regulation of extraterritorial activities, but it's pretty difficult.
Does TICA look at the activities of Taiwan residents outside of Taiwan - do you know - or do they merely regulate within Taiwan?
Mr. Godfrey: No, as far as I know, it's only within Taiwan.
Ms Clancy: I was thinking - and you dealt with this briefly with Ms Meredith - when I was in China two months ago, meeting with our immigration people there, they said that part of the difficulty is that many of the people applying are being told.... In China there's a word-of-mouth communication that is a lot more effective than any kind of mass communication we might try. The word of mouth is that you can't even get the self-evaluation kits without dealing with a consultant first. It's a very difficult job to combat that kind of rumour. The problem isn't quite as serious in India, but it's a problem there as well.
In your experience in India, do you think mass communication, in the sense of television or radio or newspaper ads, would make any difference in the long run, given the vast populations?
Mr. Godfrey: That's a very interesting question. You could certainly reach a lot of people, but would you be reaching people who could qualify for immigration to Canada?
Ms Clancy: Yes.
Mr. Godfrey: I think that is the key. As you know, we are swamped in some of the offices as it is. We don't want to get involved in unproductive work; we want to concentrate on those who can meet the qualifications and try to process them as best we can.
Ms Clancy: Consequently, the question of language becomes even more relevant.
Mr. Godfrey: Very important.
Ms Clancy: We had a situation in Bombay when I was there where they had a recruitment session for engineers. In the past, before the self-evaluation kits, they'd get 600 applicants who would come to the seminar, of whom possibly 50 to 100 would actually qualify. This time, after the use of the self-evaluation kits, we had about 100 applicants at the seminar, of whom, according to our visa officers, it looked like 60 to 75 would probably qualify. So it was a better return.
Finally, with regard to the departments dealing with consultants, frequently - I am presuming this; I observed this, but I don't think I ever asked anybody this - the consultants themselves, particularly the consultants who are not giving the proper service, are probably not terribly likely to approach visa officers abroad. Isn't it likely that they would send the clients rather than go themselves, or is that not the experience?
.0950
Mr. Godfrey: Of course, if they do send the client and the client doesn't indicate that he or she has a consultant, we're not likely to know about it.
Ms Clancy: Exactly.
Mr. Godfrey: There is a place on the application form that specifically indicates who is authorized to receive information on behalf of the applicant. We follow those instructions. If the applicant doesn't put down anything, then we deal directly with the applicant.
Ms Clancy: Indeed, you have no way of knowing then if there is a consultant who may be advising incorrectly.
Mr. Godfrey: No, and we don't ask beyond that.
Ms Clancy: Thank you very much.
Mr. Dromisky (Thunder Bay - Atikokan): We all realize how complex the problem is regarding consultants and that there's practically no possible effective, viable way that we can control the kind of services they provide for people all over the world.
But I do have a concern, because most of the problems I'm dealing with in immigration are directly related to the kinds of misguidance that exist and the kinds of con games that are being played by these so-called consultants in many parts of the world.
I'll just give you one example. Just recently an individual paid $5,000 American to be processed by a consultant and was rejected by our office, and then the consultant passes the word on that this year they're not taking in Greek Orthodox, they're only taking Catholics and Protestant - that kind of thing. All of a sudden the blame is put in the hands of the Canadian government. In other words, we are the bad guys. In those kinds of games, all kinds of excuses are given for a person failing in the process.
My concern is that something should be done. We can talk about the freedom of choice and so forth, but I think that for the sake of the people who are being processed and for our image internationally, we should see to it that the people who want to consult should have the information. Many of them do not pick up, you might say, the most recent changes that are taking place in the Immigration Act or anything of that nature, and they're misguiding their clients. Possibly we can advertise.
The little notice you have in that booklet is there, but it's not strong enough. I feel that we should be far more dogmatic. In other words, maybe only those who are briefed on an annual basis, are kept up-to-date and are knowledgeable about the Immigration Act in Canada should be recognized as official consultants. Whether or not we give them a certificate, ask them to take courses, ask them to come to seminars, whether we do it ourselves or someone else does it for us, whether a university or college does it, or some other private agency, that's not important.
The important point is that somebody has to assume the responsibility of passing on the correct information and of recognizing the people who are knowledgeable to provide that kind of service.
Mr. Godfrey: I understand your concern, and that's why recently...not just pointing to the warning we've mentioned, but this book is rather extensive in what information it gives to an applicant. Obviously, we cannot control what the applicant does with it. For example, if he or she gives it to a consultant and then relies totally on that consultant for the information, maybe then the scenario you've described would develop.
This does provide all the legislative and other information necessary for an applicant to self-assess himself or herself. So most of the information I can think of that one would need to know whether one can qualify for immigration to Canada is included in this.
In addition, we do tell people exactly what our decision is. In your example of why the person was refused, the refusal letter is, as far as I know, very complete and will indicate the exact reason for refusal according to, for example, for an independent immigrant, the points he or she did not get.
Mr. Dromisky: I've had cases where that's not true; no reason is given and they can't get a reason.
.0955
The Chair: I think we're getting again into the same particular cases that Mr. Nunez.... I ruled him out of order, so I'm going to have to ask you, Stan, to rephrase or go on to another question.
Mr. Dromisky: I've finished.
Mrs. Ur (Lambton - Middlesex): We're hearing about all the negatives on consultants, but I try to pull the positive out of it. Can you tell me where they are of benefit? I've stated this again and I feel as if I'm using up good time by saying the same thing day after day: I think it's just a lack of education and communication.
People who are applying to become immigrants to Canada have to be told that these people are there, but cautioned as to what might or might not happen. We have to do a better job in selling consultants as to what criteria they should be looking at - not just dollar fees, but character references. I don't know, I guess you can't get into that.
Mr. Godfrey: One of the purposes of the outreach program to the lawyers and consultants is exactly what you're talking about: better informing them. There's no doubt that a properly informed and competent consultant or lawyer can do service to his or her client and certainly assist. There's also no doubt that a decision is based on the qualifications of the applicants per se.
There have been other outreaches, too. When I was in Hong Kong, in my experience, particularly after legislative changes came out, we would have a briefing of the community of the lawyers and consultants to advise them and bring them up to date on recent changes in the legislation, to inform them better, to make sure they had the right information with which to advise their clients.
Mrs. Ur: Where do you see the area we could best improve with the immigrant consultants? Where is the major concern? What would really turn this about?
Mr. Godfrey: I'm not sure of from what direction you're coming.
Mrs. Ur: Well, there are problems. Obviously you know there is a problem with immigration consultants. So what is the most difficult situation with consultants that would address this difficulty?
Mr. Godfrey: Again, I can speak only from my experience. I think the major way of dealing with this is to inform, to have consultations, and to be able to deal with these people in a climate of fairness and transparency so they know what's going on so we can tell them about changes. I think that's the best way.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: If the procedures are clear, if all the necessary information is provided to applicants and if officers treat everyone the same way, how do you explain the fact that there are so many consultants? Their numbers continue to grow. How do you explain this?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: Again, Mr. Nunez, this is a decision the applicant makes as to whether or not he or she wishes to engage a consultant. In my experience in dealing with business persons in Hong Kong, these were very busy people. They didn't have time to do a lot of things themselves. They rely on consultants for immigration as they rely on accountants and lawyers and other professionals.
In Hong Kong, for example, in dealing with business people, probably 80% of the applicants had engaged a lawyer or consultant, and in the investor category it was probably even higher, 95%.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: Isn't a consultant hired to deal with problems? If there were no problems, there would be no consultants. Why pay for one if everything is clear and if the information is there? When you received complaints in Hong Kong about excessive fees, what did you do?
.1000
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: This is a matter between the applicant and the consultant. It's caveat emptor. The person chooses a consultant based on many things. It's not up to me to say to somebody that they are paying too much money.
The marketplace in Hong Kong is very competitive. The fee set in Hong Kong may be very different from fees set elsewhere. But that's a matter that the local market decides.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: Did you say that you were unable to do anything or that you dismissed the complaint? You didn't answer the question. What did you do?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I think it's fair to say that it's not our business. The applicant chooses the consultant. It's the arrangement of fees between those two people.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: Are consultants who are paid a fee in the same position as volunteers who help applicants fill out their forms? In your opinion, is the situation the same or is it different, and if so, how?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: Do you mean do we still deal with those people? Yes, we do.
Do we involve ourselves in that relationship between the applicant and the representative, whether or not an official fee-paying situation exists? No, we decide who to deal with based on the written direction of the applicant.
Our first contact is with the applicant. If there is no direction, no written direction, to deal with anybody else, we obviously continue to deal with the applicant. If the applicant so directs in writing that we deal with somebody he or she has chosen, then we abide by the applicant's direction.
[Translation]
Mr. Nunez: You have not spoken about the situation in Europe. My understanding is that in Europe, consultants are not often hired. You spoke only of the situation in Haiti and in Arab countries. Are you familiar with the situation in Europe?
[English]
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry, but my experience is in Asia, and that's why I've talked about it. I think probably the use of lawyers and consultants may be higher in Asia than it is in Europe. That's quite possible.
The Chair: Ms Meredith, please.
Ms Meredith: I think Mr. Nunez hit the nail on the head when he said that it's an industry. I think that really is the problem, that immigration consultants are now quite a large industry.
I agree with you; I don't think it's the government's place to tell somebody who they should or should not be hiring.
Would it be fair to say that most people using consultants are doing so because they feel they do not have the skills to do the job themselves, or, on the other side, are they using immigration consultants to circumvent the regulations and the procedures that we have established?
Mr. Godfrey: I don't know whether I could comment on each of those in the way you've phrased them, strictly because it's much easier to define something when you have a case in hand.
As I said, in my experience in dealing with business people in Hong Kong, they're very busy people. They're sophisticated; they have a lot of interests. It's quite natural to turn to somebody, to pay somebody to do something for you because you don't have the time to do it yourself. That's very natural.
Another interesting item in the use of lawyers and consultants is, of course, a person can apply anywhere in the world. One doesn't have to apply in one's home country. In some cases, you find that the use of lawyers and consultants is higher where you're not in your own country, where people have applied in third countries.
Ms Meredith: Do you know why that would be? Can you give us an explanation of why that might be necessary?
Mr. Godfrey: I don't know whether it's because it's necessary. I think it's the choice of the applicant and the consultants as to where to apply. Again, for -
Ms Meredith: Would that suggest that they are trying to circumvent, or is it just situational?
Mr. Godfrey: Not necessarily. It could be situational.
Again, going back to my experience in Hong Kong, when I arrived there was a very large backlog as a result of what had happened after June 1989. People were applying in other places because they wanted faster service.
.1005
As we went on and worked through backlogs, a point came at which we were extremely current. We found out that people were still applying elsewhere because they wanted it to be longer in the processing because they weren't prepared to leave just yet.
You can take both sides of the coin. There are various reasons why people apply where they do. In the business category, with which I'm most familiar, these are very mobile people to begin with. It might be just as easy for a business person from Hong Kong to apply anywhere else as in Hong Kong.
Ms Meredith: If we're talking about non-business persons - and let's move the location to someplace that doesn't have the same energy level or the same tendency to hire people to do work for you because of your schedule - do you feel that there may be a use of consultants based on the fact that people read your brochure, realize that they really don't qualify, and then go to these consultants to see if they can help them stretch whatever to get qualifications?
Mr. Godfrey: I'm sorry; I can't speculate on why an individual might choose to go to a consultant in that type of case.
Ms Meredith: I'm just trying to find out if there's a legitimacy to using these consultants or if maybe there is another reason why people would be reaching out to use consultants who might not be concerned about their ethical and professional standards.
Mr. Godfrey: I understand. I just can't speak for an individual's choice. As I say, we try to give as much information as we can in order to ensure that the individual can make a self-assessment.
Ms Meredith: You feel that giving that information out, providing that they can read it and understand it, gives them a very good idea of whether or not they would be successful and whether to go through the process or not.
Mr. Godfrey: Yes.
The Chair: I thank you, Mr. Godfrey, for coming before us and enlightening us on your experiences.
Mr. Godfrey: Thank you.
The Chair: We appreciate it.
Mr. Dromisky: I move that we go into an in camera session.
Motion agreed to
[Proceedings continue in camera]