Thank you, Madam Chair.

Members of the committee, good morning. I have accompanying me today, Mr. Gerd Damitz, who is the past president and co-founder of CAPIC.

On behalf of the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, I want to thank the committee for their unanimous bipartisan proposal of federal statute regulation through the Parliament, and acceptance of this proposal. I also want to personally thank you for inviting me and giving me the opportunity to present on such an important matter that belongs to the industry of immigration consultancy.

The proposed college of immigration and citizenship consultants act is a much-needed antidote for a problem that has long plagued the reputation of a respected profession, both at home and abroad. Specifically, its provision of extraterritorial powers against unauthorized practitioners will significantly bolster consumer protection and restore faith in the immigration consulting profession for prospective consumers. For these reasons and many more, CAPIC strongly supports the proposed act.

Before exploring all the points that I want to bring before you, let me reintroduce you to CAPIC. For those members of this committee who were not present before, CAPIC is the sole voice of immigration consultants. Its mission is to act and defend, protect and develop the profession in the best interests of its members.

Over the last five years, we have worked diligently with the Government of Canada to strengthen professional regulation and have advocated for greater disciplinary powers for the regulator. Although satisfied with much of the proposed act, we still have a few points that we would like to bring to your attention. We would ask you kindly to have some amendments on those.

I also want to point out that last Wednesday, the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council, from which you had representatives yesterday, has named Queen's University and l'Université de Sherbrooke in Quebec for their graduate diploma program in immigration and citizenship law. This is a milestone in what this committee has recommended in order to increase the education level of entry into the profession.

Let me go to the point pertaining to the solicitor-client privilege, which is consultant-client privilege. The consultant-client privilege is assumed by the Supreme Court for notaries, lawyers and paralegals. In the last seven years, it has become a constitutional right protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Crucially, such a privilege is not exclusive to lawyers, as both patent agents and paralegals are entitled to it. With consumer protection in mind, the distinction that the privilege applies to the client and not the solicitor renders its omission from the act all the more confounding.

There are three preconditions to establishing solicitor-client privilege: one, communication between the solicitor and the client; two, the seeking or giving of legal advice; and three, the intention of confidentiality. All those have been also brought forward through a legal letter by Professor Peter Hogg, which we would be happy to circulate if need be.

The memo brought by Professor Hogg concludes that the privilege should apply especially and equally to immigration and citizenship consultants and anchor any professional legislation. Indeed, consumers seeking advice should be equally protected when they seek advice from authorized representatives, who most of you would know are of different categories and different regulators.

Proposed section 80 deals with bylaws and regulations, but details are sorely lacking. The issue is the college can and will start doing bylaws. However, under proposed section 80 it only mentions in the act that the college needs to do bylaws or to prepare bylaws. We understand that they will be brought before the Minister of Justice at the end for final ratification or seal. However, there is no guideline. If the guideline is in the regulation, then this point is moot. There is also a concern that the regulator could draft bylaws without respecting the regulation.

In the interests of consumer protection, the reform that has touched on RISIAs, which is the tier regulation or the tier licensing that is in the act, has given RISIAs more powers, which is representation with express entry. RISIAs are only meant to be for representatives on study permits. We would like to recommend under—