The fact is, Kenney has decided to deregulate immigration consultants in a way that threatens the Canadian public interest. Why? Apparently Citizenship & Immigration Canada supports CAPIC, the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, a trade association advocating the interests of immigration consultants, over the regulator, CSIC, the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants acting in the public interest. Here is the result you can expect if the proposed regulator is changed from CSIC to CAPIC/ICCRC:
In the public interest, specific rules prohibit immigration consultants from controlling their clients' assets that are invested through the investor programs. Companies cannot be set up, with the assistance of an immigration consultant, as shell corporations to be wound down once the person attains Permanent Residency and immigrates to Canada. In the interests of immigration consultants, represented by CAPIC/ICCRC, immigration consultants such as CAPIC President Hemlin take control of their clients' assets and run the company without taking directions from their clients. The company is a shell, a vehicle to attain Permanent Residency that will then be wound down once the client successfully immigrates to Canada.
In the public interest, the immigration consultant must know their client, and cannot represent unknown individuals with potentially shady pasts. The immigration consultant is held responsible if they have assisted someone to immigrate to Canada who they knew or ought to have known is a danger to the Canadian public. In the interests of immigration consultants, tehre is a lot of money to be made by assisting individuals to come into Canada who have a shady history. In fact, the greatest profits come to an ICCRC member from dodgy individuals who need an expert to assist them to hide their shadiness from immigration officials. ICCRC will allow such an immigration consultant to argue willful blindness justifies working with shady individuals.
Finally, in the public interest immigration consultants are subject to public disciplinary hearings for serious professional misconduct. Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done and hence the hearings and decisions are public knowledge. In the interests of immigration consultants, serious misconduct is covered up, and hearings are to be avoided. The public must be misled to believe that only ghost consultants are crooked, not authorized immigration consultants.
Thanks to Jason Kenney, whose vision of the future of immigration consulting is shown by his support for deregulation through ICCRC: investor programs being vehicles for rich clients to attain Permanent Residency, whose companies are wound down upon their successful immigration to Canada; dodgy applicants are assisted, at an enormous profit to immigration consultants, to enter Canada illegally, endangering the Canadian public interest; and misconduct is covered up to promote the false belief that only ghost consultants are crooked, not authorized immigration consultants.
Tuesday 31 May 2011
Monday 30 May 2011
ICCRC/CAPIC Conduct Endorsed by Citizenship &Immigration Canada (CIC)
CAPIC President Jeffrey Hemlin was revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council for serious professional conduct involving signing and selling blank immigration forms to a ghost consultant, controlling his clients' assets and acting without the clients' directions, and submitting a false declaration. CIC chose to endorse ICCRC as regulator, despite knowing that CAPIC was the organization behind ICCRC, and despite knowing of Hemlin's disciplinary hearing. Thus, it would appear that senior CIC officials endorsed the conduct of Hemlin.
Phil Mooney President/CEO of ICCRC has promised to offer consultants (at a cost of $3.6 million in taxpayers money) lower membership fees, free Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and to chase ghost consultants rather than regulated immigration consultants. The regulator will have smaller revenues and thus a far weaker regulatory body than the Law Societies; free CPD means lesser competence as you cannot expect quality education to be free. Chasing ghosts means going after competitors rather than members, and will result in fewer resources being available for investigating and disciplining regulated immigration consultants. CIC endorses the prioritization offered by Mooney, thus supporting the financial interests of immigration consultants over those of their clients.
Standards of professionalism have been threatened as well by ICCRC. The lack of professionalism is self-evident from a review of public statements made by ICCRC supporters. Phil Mooney, for example, referred to critics of ICCRC as dogs. Also, a review of public discussion boards run by ICCRC indicate that ICCRC considers attacking one's opponents to be acceptable. Ultimately, the ICCRC board of directors was forced to apologize for public statements made on that discussion board, which attacked CSIP, CSIC, CMI and their leaders, all with the endorsement of ICCRC directors. CIC has endorsed these unprofessional public statements by choosing ICCRC.
Does Jason Kenney also endorse the conduct of Jeffrey Hemlin, Phil Mooney and ICCRC board?
Phil Mooney President/CEO of ICCRC has promised to offer consultants (at a cost of $3.6 million in taxpayers money) lower membership fees, free Continuing Professional Development (CPD) and to chase ghost consultants rather than regulated immigration consultants. The regulator will have smaller revenues and thus a far weaker regulatory body than the Law Societies; free CPD means lesser competence as you cannot expect quality education to be free. Chasing ghosts means going after competitors rather than members, and will result in fewer resources being available for investigating and disciplining regulated immigration consultants. CIC endorses the prioritization offered by Mooney, thus supporting the financial interests of immigration consultants over those of their clients.
Standards of professionalism have been threatened as well by ICCRC. The lack of professionalism is self-evident from a review of public statements made by ICCRC supporters. Phil Mooney, for example, referred to critics of ICCRC as dogs. Also, a review of public discussion boards run by ICCRC indicate that ICCRC considers attacking one's opponents to be acceptable. Ultimately, the ICCRC board of directors was forced to apologize for public statements made on that discussion board, which attacked CSIP, CSIC, CMI and their leaders, all with the endorsement of ICCRC directors. CIC has endorsed these unprofessional public statements by choosing ICCRC.
Does Jason Kenney also endorse the conduct of Jeffrey Hemlin, Phil Mooney and ICCRC board?
Friday 27 May 2011
ICCRC Lower Standards: Inferior to Immigration Lawyers
ICCRC promises the following benefits to immigration consultants:
Lower membership fees. CSIC Members pay similar fees to those of lawyers. ICCRC has made a low ball offer of lower membership fees, a promise made to win the support of immigration consultants. These fees will likely go up in the future. However, you get what you pay for. Lower membership fees means fewer staff, and less capacity to effectively regulate. Why hire an immigration consultant rather than a lawyer who has a more robust regulatory body?
Free Continuing Professional Develoment (CPD). Again, you get what you pay for. Free CPD, and no mandatory courses means lower quality consultants theough ICCRC than the requirements of lawyers. Why hire an immigration consultant with a regulator that seeks to remove the professional standards that are deemed a burden to it's members, when you can hire a lawyer with higher professional standards that ensures the competency of it's members?
Going after Ghost Consultants rather than ensuring consumer protection from the Regulated Members. ICCRC claims they will go after ghosts, that is competitors to their members, while having a smaller staff than CSIC. ICCRC will have no jurisdiction over these ghost consultants, of course, and no investigative powers whatsoever. Why hire an immigration consultant whose regulatory body is focused on going after unregulated ghosts rather than the person you hire, when a lawyer has a regulator that will investigate the alleged misconduct of that lawyer if the consumer is wronged?
Who will be the Regulator of Immigration Consultants 5 years from now? CSIC is now the regulator. CSIC may continue as regulator for years depending on the judge's decision on CSIC's judicial review and stay applications. ICCRC may become regulator, but a new Immigration Minister will be able to replace ICCRC just as easily as Minister Kenney has chosen to replace CSIC. Will immigration consultants continue to be self-regulated, or will the government or Law Society take over in the future? Why hire an immigration consultant, not knowing who or if there will be a regulator 5 years from now to protect you, when you can hire a lawyer with a Law Society as regulator for 100 or so years?
The ICCRC's focus on appealing to immigration consultants by offering lower membership fees, lower education standards, going after ghost consultants rather than regulated members, and replacing CSIC as regulator obscures the long term implications to immigration consultants. Ignoring consumer protection and promoting the financial interests of immigration consultants now means ultimately that consumers will likely prefer to hire an immigration lawyer rather than an ICCRC member.
What is the difference between a ghost consultant and an ICCRC Member? Apparently, one is subject to criminal sanctions (if they have not become an agent of an ICCRC Member of course) while the other is simply a member of the ICCRC cartel. Why would a consumer prefer to hire a member of the ICCRC cartel rather than an immigration lawyer?
Lower membership fees. CSIC Members pay similar fees to those of lawyers. ICCRC has made a low ball offer of lower membership fees, a promise made to win the support of immigration consultants. These fees will likely go up in the future. However, you get what you pay for. Lower membership fees means fewer staff, and less capacity to effectively regulate. Why hire an immigration consultant rather than a lawyer who has a more robust regulatory body?
Free Continuing Professional Develoment (CPD). Again, you get what you pay for. Free CPD, and no mandatory courses means lower quality consultants theough ICCRC than the requirements of lawyers. Why hire an immigration consultant with a regulator that seeks to remove the professional standards that are deemed a burden to it's members, when you can hire a lawyer with higher professional standards that ensures the competency of it's members?
Going after Ghost Consultants rather than ensuring consumer protection from the Regulated Members. ICCRC claims they will go after ghosts, that is competitors to their members, while having a smaller staff than CSIC. ICCRC will have no jurisdiction over these ghost consultants, of course, and no investigative powers whatsoever. Why hire an immigration consultant whose regulatory body is focused on going after unregulated ghosts rather than the person you hire, when a lawyer has a regulator that will investigate the alleged misconduct of that lawyer if the consumer is wronged?
Who will be the Regulator of Immigration Consultants 5 years from now? CSIC is now the regulator. CSIC may continue as regulator for years depending on the judge's decision on CSIC's judicial review and stay applications. ICCRC may become regulator, but a new Immigration Minister will be able to replace ICCRC just as easily as Minister Kenney has chosen to replace CSIC. Will immigration consultants continue to be self-regulated, or will the government or Law Society take over in the future? Why hire an immigration consultant, not knowing who or if there will be a regulator 5 years from now to protect you, when you can hire a lawyer with a Law Society as regulator for 100 or so years?
The ICCRC's focus on appealing to immigration consultants by offering lower membership fees, lower education standards, going after ghost consultants rather than regulated members, and replacing CSIC as regulator obscures the long term implications to immigration consultants. Ignoring consumer protection and promoting the financial interests of immigration consultants now means ultimately that consumers will likely prefer to hire an immigration lawyer rather than an ICCRC member.
What is the difference between a ghost consultant and an ICCRC Member? Apparently, one is subject to criminal sanctions (if they have not become an agent of an ICCRC Member of course) while the other is simply a member of the ICCRC cartel. Why would a consumer prefer to hire a member of the ICCRC cartel rather than an immigration lawyer?
ICCRC Proposed Regulator Shows Contempt for Political and Legal Processes
ICCRC was proposed as regulator of immigration consultants on March 19, 2011. A federal election was called shortly after the announcement, and CSIC filed for judicial review arguing the selection process was biased. Yet curiously, ICCRC have been engaging in several actions that in fact support CSIC's claim that the outcome of the selection process was predetermined and procedurally unfair.
There are very serious allegations raised against Phil Mooney, former President of the trade association CAPIC, now President of ICCRC. He is purported to have, or claims to have influence over the government's decision to appoint his body, ICCRC as regulator. Conviction for influence peddling is punishable by up to 5 years in jail. Mooney's and ICCRC's own actions support these allegations. He has been acting as if the outcome of the political and legal processes is predetermined and inevitably in his favour; that is ICCRC will definitely be the regulator at the end of all these processes.
The ICCRC states that any member of CSIC in good standing as of March 19, 2011 will be able to join ICCRC. Yet as of today, May 27, a member of ICCRC that is not a CSIC Member is not an authorized representative. Interestingly, CAPIC President Hemlin was ordered revoked after March 19, 2011, and hence will not have his revocation impact his ability to join ICCRC.
ICCRC have been meeting with immigration consultants across the country. Such a strategy makes sense once the body has been fully authorized as regulator. These town hall meetings are premature for a body with no authority under the regulations.
CAPIC argues for the immediate wind-down and handing over of assets to ICCRC by CSIC. They are outraged at having to continue to pay fees to CSIC. Yet ICCRC is not the regulator, CSIC is the regulator. There is a federal court action that renders it uncertain when and if ICCRC would be officially appointed, there is also a 120 day transition period, during which CSIC must continue to function, and several ongoing disciplinary hearings and investigations that must be paid for somehow.
Ultimately the decision of who will regulate immigration consultants lie with a Minister, government officials, and a judge who are supposed to decide in a fair and legally supported manner. ICCRC may believe that the Minister and government officials have decided long ago in their favour; however who knows why the judge will decide. Was the selection process reasonable or was it biased and unfair? That is for a judge to decide, not for Phil Mooney or ICCRC.
There are very serious allegations raised against Phil Mooney, former President of the trade association CAPIC, now President of ICCRC. He is purported to have, or claims to have influence over the government's decision to appoint his body, ICCRC as regulator. Conviction for influence peddling is punishable by up to 5 years in jail. Mooney's and ICCRC's own actions support these allegations. He has been acting as if the outcome of the political and legal processes is predetermined and inevitably in his favour; that is ICCRC will definitely be the regulator at the end of all these processes.
The ICCRC states that any member of CSIC in good standing as of March 19, 2011 will be able to join ICCRC. Yet as of today, May 27, a member of ICCRC that is not a CSIC Member is not an authorized representative. Interestingly, CAPIC President Hemlin was ordered revoked after March 19, 2011, and hence will not have his revocation impact his ability to join ICCRC.
ICCRC have been meeting with immigration consultants across the country. Such a strategy makes sense once the body has been fully authorized as regulator. These town hall meetings are premature for a body with no authority under the regulations.
CAPIC argues for the immediate wind-down and handing over of assets to ICCRC by CSIC. They are outraged at having to continue to pay fees to CSIC. Yet ICCRC is not the regulator, CSIC is the regulator. There is a federal court action that renders it uncertain when and if ICCRC would be officially appointed, there is also a 120 day transition period, during which CSIC must continue to function, and several ongoing disciplinary hearings and investigations that must be paid for somehow.
Ultimately the decision of who will regulate immigration consultants lie with a Minister, government officials, and a judge who are supposed to decide in a fair and legally supported manner. ICCRC may believe that the Minister and government officials have decided long ago in their favour; however who knows why the judge will decide. Was the selection process reasonable or was it biased and unfair? That is for a judge to decide, not for Phil Mooney or ICCRC.
Thursday 26 May 2011
ICCRC Chasing Ghosts Rather than Regulated Immigration Consultants
The ICCRC is claiming that they will go after ghost consultants, despite possessing no powers to subpoena evidence or witnesses, no regulatory experience, and very limited resources. In addition to going after ghosts, the ICCRC offers lower membership fees to it's members, fewer staff than CSIC (20 rather than 38), and free Continuing Professional Development (CPD).
CSIC and the government of Canada do not have sufficient resources to go after ghosts, how can ICCRC with fewer resources and no experience be capable of prosecuting ghosts? The answer is clearly that ICCRC members will not be regulated. A significant portion of ICCRC resources will have to target ghost consultants; ICCRC views ghosts as the problem not their members. ICCRC clearly is chasing ghosts.
ICCRC is going after their competitors, ghosts, rather than regulating their Members. ICCRC truly is reflective of the interests of immigration consultants: no public interest mandate, no consumer protection, no regulatory structures, and an immigration body that is in fact an arm of Citizenship & Immigration Canada (CIC) ICCRC is not an independent regulatory body ensuring consumer protection in the public interest. Such a body may suit the interests of CIC and immigration consultants; but immigrants will not be protected and the public interest will not be served.
CSIC and the government of Canada do not have sufficient resources to go after ghosts, how can ICCRC with fewer resources and no experience be capable of prosecuting ghosts? The answer is clearly that ICCRC members will not be regulated. A significant portion of ICCRC resources will have to target ghost consultants; ICCRC views ghosts as the problem not their members. ICCRC clearly is chasing ghosts.
ICCRC is going after their competitors, ghosts, rather than regulating their Members. ICCRC truly is reflective of the interests of immigration consultants: no public interest mandate, no consumer protection, no regulatory structures, and an immigration body that is in fact an arm of Citizenship & Immigration Canada (CIC) ICCRC is not an independent regulatory body ensuring consumer protection in the public interest. Such a body may suit the interests of CIC and immigration consultants; but immigrants will not be protected and the public interest will not be served.
Wednesday 25 May 2011
CAPIC's Consortium of Ghost Consultants: Funding ICCRC's Bid to be Regulator
CAPIC Members have launched a continuous stream of litigation against CSIC costing millions of dollars. Who pays the legal fees?
Start with CAPIC's seemingly limitless access to millions of dollars to pay for constant litigation against CSIC. ICCRC allows companies to be members. CSIC does not. Bill C35 will make it illegal for some very rich multinational immigration consulting companies to operate in Canada. These very powerful immigration consulting companies, essentially ghost consultants, will be out of business if CSIC continues as regulator and Bill C35 makes ghost consulting illegal. ICCRC as regulator ensures theses ghost consulting companies can continue to operate, ripping off immigrants and then paying a fine if someone makes a complaint. Are the millions of dollars in litigation fees for CAPIC's litigation provided by these ghost consultant companies who, despite Bill C35, are protected if ICCRC becomes the regulator?
There is also a decision on CSIC's website involving CAPIC's president, Jeffrey Hemlin who signed and sold blank use of representative forms to his Chinese ghost agent. Are fees paid to CAPIC members by Chinese ghost agents then used to fund litigation against CSIC?
Who pays for CSIC's legal bills? CSIC Members pay through membership fees. Hence CSIC's reportedly high membership fees are the direct result of millions of dollars in litigation launched by CAPIC. Then CAPIC campaigns that CSIC should be replaced by ICCRC which will have lower membership fees. Why are ICCRC membership fees lower? Because litigation against the regulator will stop when Phil Mooney and CAPIC are in charge.
Bill C35 is in fact more appropriately named the Protecting Crooked Consultants Act. The proposal to put ICCRC in charge of regulating immigration consultants amounts to the de-regulation of immigration consultants. ICCRC will favour the business interests of immigration consultants over the protection of the public; that means cashing in on the ghost consultants rather than putting them out of business.
Start with CAPIC's seemingly limitless access to millions of dollars to pay for constant litigation against CSIC. ICCRC allows companies to be members. CSIC does not. Bill C35 will make it illegal for some very rich multinational immigration consulting companies to operate in Canada. These very powerful immigration consulting companies, essentially ghost consultants, will be out of business if CSIC continues as regulator and Bill C35 makes ghost consulting illegal. ICCRC as regulator ensures theses ghost consulting companies can continue to operate, ripping off immigrants and then paying a fine if someone makes a complaint. Are the millions of dollars in litigation fees for CAPIC's litigation provided by these ghost consultant companies who, despite Bill C35, are protected if ICCRC becomes the regulator?
There is also a decision on CSIC's website involving CAPIC's president, Jeffrey Hemlin who signed and sold blank use of representative forms to his Chinese ghost agent. Are fees paid to CAPIC members by Chinese ghost agents then used to fund litigation against CSIC?
Who pays for CSIC's legal bills? CSIC Members pay through membership fees. Hence CSIC's reportedly high membership fees are the direct result of millions of dollars in litigation launched by CAPIC. Then CAPIC campaigns that CSIC should be replaced by ICCRC which will have lower membership fees. Why are ICCRC membership fees lower? Because litigation against the regulator will stop when Phil Mooney and CAPIC are in charge.
Bill C35 is in fact more appropriately named the Protecting Crooked Consultants Act. The proposal to put ICCRC in charge of regulating immigration consultants amounts to the de-regulation of immigration consultants. ICCRC will favour the business interests of immigration consultants over the protection of the public; that means cashing in on the ghost consultants rather than putting them out of business.
Chinese Crooked Consultants &CAPIC's Bid to Be Regulator
As we all know, the proposed new regulator of immigration consultants, ICCRC, is in fact CAPIC, an immigration consultants' trade association. The President/CEO of ICCRC is former CAPIC President Phil Mooney, and all ICCRC self-appointed board members are also from CAPIC. CAPIC has launched several millions of dollars in litigation against CSIC. CSIC Members pay for this litigation through membership fees to CSIC. Interestingly, CAPIC complains about high membership fees, yet it is CAPIC's constant litigation against CSIC that is to blame for these so-called high membership fees.
CAPIC has access to several millions of dollars to fund their litigation against CSIC. the source of these millions of dollars in funding in not known. However, Chinese crooked consultants and their investor clients, as mentioned in the recent Globe & Mail article at "How China's Crooked Consultants Help the Rich Enter Canada" would easily have access to the millions of dollars required to bankrupt CSIC through a neverending stream of litigation against CSIC by CAPIC. It is well-known that CAPIC's President Hemlin has been ordered revoked as a result of his work with a Chinese ghost agent and Chinese investor clients.
How many CAPIC board members are getting rich working with these Chinese crooked consultants and their investor clients? These CAPIC members would all want to shut down CSIC for hindering their very profitable work with Chinese crooked consultants and their Chinese investor clients.
Perhaps we should start by looking carefully at the list of names on the petition set up by CAPIC to support their bid to be the new regulator and to get rid of CSIC. The ICCRC will be a regulator that better protects the business interests of crooked immigration consultants, and no doubt crooked consultants will support ICCRC over CSIC.
The main question that arises is to what extent does Minister Kenney have knowledge of CAPIC's relationship with Chinese crooked consultants? Does he know who is funding CAPIC's scheme to bankrupt CSIC, or has he been duped by Mooney through Les Linklater?
CAPIC has access to several millions of dollars to fund their litigation against CSIC. the source of these millions of dollars in funding in not known. However, Chinese crooked consultants and their investor clients, as mentioned in the recent Globe & Mail article at "How China's Crooked Consultants Help the Rich Enter Canada" would easily have access to the millions of dollars required to bankrupt CSIC through a neverending stream of litigation against CSIC by CAPIC. It is well-known that CAPIC's President Hemlin has been ordered revoked as a result of his work with a Chinese ghost agent and Chinese investor clients.
How many CAPIC board members are getting rich working with these Chinese crooked consultants and their investor clients? These CAPIC members would all want to shut down CSIC for hindering their very profitable work with Chinese crooked consultants and their Chinese investor clients.
Perhaps we should start by looking carefully at the list of names on the petition set up by CAPIC to support their bid to be the new regulator and to get rid of CSIC. The ICCRC will be a regulator that better protects the business interests of crooked immigration consultants, and no doubt crooked consultants will support ICCRC over CSIC.
The main question that arises is to what extent does Minister Kenney have knowledge of CAPIC's relationship with Chinese crooked consultants? Does he know who is funding CAPIC's scheme to bankrupt CSIC, or has he been duped by Mooney through Les Linklater?
Tuesday 24 May 2011
Phil Mooney & ICCRC: His Agenda Exposed
Phil Mooney has spent the past few years engaged in a campaign of undermining CSIC in his own self-interest. Here are some of the exhibits demonstrating Mooney's campaign to get rid of John Ryan and influence peddle his way into becoming the President/CEO of the proposed new regulator ICCRC:
1. He complains about the relationship between CSIC, the regulator and CMI, the professional association. Why? CAPIC, Mooney's trade association, lost it's Continuing Professional Development status because they allowed ghost consultants as members of CAPIC. As revenge, he destroyed CSIC through a campaign of misinformation. Now ICCRC, his proposed new regulator, is in fact CAPIC, the trade association; they are the same body! There is no regulator, only the trade association acting as both CAPIC and ICCRC! He has successfully deregulated immigration consultants!
2. He complains that CSIC's Complaints and Discipline process is political. Why? Jeffrey Hemlin was prevented from running for a position on CSIC's board because he had a complaint. We now know the complaint was so serious that Hemlin got revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council. Now ICCRC will not honour any disciplinary action taken by CSIC, as Hemlin claims CSIC has no authority to discipline members. ICCRC has the same authority. Quite convenient, wouldn't you say?
3. He complains that CSIC has no right to publicize the diaciplinary decision against Hemlin. Why? Mooney protects immigration consultants. He does not accept that CSIC must protect the public interest; the ICCRC will protect immigration consultants, not the Canadian public from the misconduct of immigration consultants.
4. He complains that CSIC should drop it's judicial review application and wind down, handing over all their assets to him, the ICCRC. CSIC's application raises the allegation that Mooney has attained the position of President/CEO of the proposed new regulator through influence peddling. Also, the application accuses CAPIC of accepting ghost consultants and of endorsing the activities of Hemlin, who submitted a false declaration, engaged in a conflict of interest and signed and sold blank Use of Representative forms to a Chinese ghost consultant. Of course Mooney wants CSIC to shut down and hand over the money before these allegations go to Federal court!
5. He complains about Nigel Thompson, Chair of CSIC, who is the subject of accusations by lawyer Cecil Rotenberg. Conveniently, the allegations were raised right before CSIC submitted it's application to be selected as the regulator in December 2010. Yet when his buddy Hemlin gets revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council he jumps to Hemlin's defense. Why does he accept the accusations of Cecil Rotenberg, while rejecting the decision of an independent discipline tribunal that Hemlin must be revoked for serous professional misconduct?
Phil Mooney was President of CAPIC, the immigration consultants' trade association. He stepped down as he knew he was going to be chosen as the new regulator. he had prior knowledge because he influence peddled his way into that position through Les Linklater at CIC, and directly into Jason Kenney's decision to select ICCRC. Mooney was replaced by Jeffrey Hemlin. Mooney and Hemlin are the future of immigration consulting under ICCRC, thanks to Jason Kenney.
Kenney, your name is all over this fiasco. Remember, from March 18, 2011 Mooney and Hemlin have been acting with your endorsement. Do you support the crooked consultants at ICCRC, or the Canadian public interest?
1. He complains about the relationship between CSIC, the regulator and CMI, the professional association. Why? CAPIC, Mooney's trade association, lost it's Continuing Professional Development status because they allowed ghost consultants as members of CAPIC. As revenge, he destroyed CSIC through a campaign of misinformation. Now ICCRC, his proposed new regulator, is in fact CAPIC, the trade association; they are the same body! There is no regulator, only the trade association acting as both CAPIC and ICCRC! He has successfully deregulated immigration consultants!
2. He complains that CSIC's Complaints and Discipline process is political. Why? Jeffrey Hemlin was prevented from running for a position on CSIC's board because he had a complaint. We now know the complaint was so serious that Hemlin got revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council. Now ICCRC will not honour any disciplinary action taken by CSIC, as Hemlin claims CSIC has no authority to discipline members. ICCRC has the same authority. Quite convenient, wouldn't you say?
3. He complains that CSIC has no right to publicize the diaciplinary decision against Hemlin. Why? Mooney protects immigration consultants. He does not accept that CSIC must protect the public interest; the ICCRC will protect immigration consultants, not the Canadian public from the misconduct of immigration consultants.
4. He complains that CSIC should drop it's judicial review application and wind down, handing over all their assets to him, the ICCRC. CSIC's application raises the allegation that Mooney has attained the position of President/CEO of the proposed new regulator through influence peddling. Also, the application accuses CAPIC of accepting ghost consultants and of endorsing the activities of Hemlin, who submitted a false declaration, engaged in a conflict of interest and signed and sold blank Use of Representative forms to a Chinese ghost consultant. Of course Mooney wants CSIC to shut down and hand over the money before these allegations go to Federal court!
5. He complains about Nigel Thompson, Chair of CSIC, who is the subject of accusations by lawyer Cecil Rotenberg. Conveniently, the allegations were raised right before CSIC submitted it's application to be selected as the regulator in December 2010. Yet when his buddy Hemlin gets revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council he jumps to Hemlin's defense. Why does he accept the accusations of Cecil Rotenberg, while rejecting the decision of an independent discipline tribunal that Hemlin must be revoked for serous professional misconduct?
Phil Mooney was President of CAPIC, the immigration consultants' trade association. He stepped down as he knew he was going to be chosen as the new regulator. he had prior knowledge because he influence peddled his way into that position through Les Linklater at CIC, and directly into Jason Kenney's decision to select ICCRC. Mooney was replaced by Jeffrey Hemlin. Mooney and Hemlin are the future of immigration consulting under ICCRC, thanks to Jason Kenney.
Kenney, your name is all over this fiasco. Remember, from March 18, 2011 Mooney and Hemlin have been acting with your endorsement. Do you support the crooked consultants at ICCRC, or the Canadian public interest?
Friday 20 May 2011
Jason Kenney Chose Unprofessional ICCRC, De-Regulates Immigration Consultants
Minister of Immigration Jason Kenney's proposed new regulator, ICCRC, is not actually a regulator. It is an immigration body made up of registered immigration consultants, and run by immigration consultants, for immigration consultants, in the interests of immigration consultants without any attention to regulating and maintaining professional standards. The most obvious example of the de-regulation and lack of professionalism in ICCRC can be demonstrated by looking at any public forum being run by ICCRC. Here is a quote directly from petition24.com, which contains a discussion board run by ICCRC Board Members:
To ICCRC directors. You are responsible for the content of any messages that you post on this board. Observe the activity on an online discussion board before attempting to participate. ... Promote an active discussion, but do not allow or encourage attacks between members, nasty language, personal ads, ... Enjoy the discussion and allow others to participate.
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on this messageboard are those of the individual of ICCRC and in no way represent the views of Petitions24.com or or The Canadian Migration Institute (CMI). We do not review messages posted, but reserve the right to remove any message for any reason whatsoever in our sole discretion. Petitions24.com collects automatically users' IP addresses for assessment and evaluation only and will not be provided to a third party unless there is a court order. The user of this board are forbidden from the use of abreviations in comments like (CIC), (Jason Kenney), (CSIC), (CSIP), (CMI), (Nancy Salloum), ( John Ryan), (Nigel Thompson). Again you may not use this message board to incite people to commit a crime or in a way that will result in contempt of court or breaking of a court injunction between The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) and The Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners (CSIP).
Welcome to the new proposed regulator ICCRC! Prior to this message, President/CEO of ICCRC Phil Mooney referred to critics of ICCRC as dogs. Ultimately, ICCRC board had to post a letter of apology for the offensive comments made on their discussion board. petition24 had to step in to delete comments that were deemed offensive, because ICCRC board members did not.
Thank Jason Kenney for choosing ICCRC as the new unprofessional de-regulator of immigration consultants.
To ICCRC directors. You are responsible for the content of any messages that you post on this board. Observe the activity on an online discussion board before attempting to participate. ... Promote an active discussion, but do not allow or encourage attacks between members, nasty language, personal ads, ... Enjoy the discussion and allow others to participate.
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on this messageboard are those of the individual of ICCRC and in no way represent the views of Petitions24.com or or The Canadian Migration Institute (CMI). We do not review messages posted, but reserve the right to remove any message for any reason whatsoever in our sole discretion. Petitions24.com collects automatically users' IP addresses for assessment and evaluation only and will not be provided to a third party unless there is a court order. The user of this board are forbidden from the use of abreviations in comments like (CIC), (Jason Kenney), (CSIC), (CSIP), (CMI), (Nancy Salloum), ( John Ryan), (Nigel Thompson). Again you may not use this message board to incite people to commit a crime or in a way that will result in contempt of court or breaking of a court injunction between The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) and The Canadian Society of Immigration Practitioners (CSIP).
Welcome to the new proposed regulator ICCRC! Prior to this message, President/CEO of ICCRC Phil Mooney referred to critics of ICCRC as dogs. Ultimately, ICCRC board had to post a letter of apology for the offensive comments made on their discussion board. petition24 had to step in to delete comments that were deemed offensive, because ICCRC board members did not.
Thank Jason Kenney for choosing ICCRC as the new unprofessional de-regulator of immigration consultants.
Thursday 19 May 2011
Revoked Immigration Consultants Welcomed into ICCRC
The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) has revoked 974 Members for failing to meet CSIC requirements: https://www.csic-scci.ca/find/revoked.html The proposed new regulator ICCRC will allow revoked immigration consultants to join, as ICCRC expects that the more members they have, the lower membership fees will be for everyone else. Here are some of the revoked immigration consultants that will be able to join ICCRC, thus demonstrating the complete absence of any concern for protecting the public interest:
Sukjinder Sandhu was revoked by the discipline council for serious professional misconduct. The discipline council found that he lied to his clients, he lied to the Investogator and he lied to the discipline council. https://www.csic-scci.ca/images/Files/tribunal-decisions/Sandhu-penalties-En. He will be able to join ICCRC and continue his lies.
Jeffrey Hemlin, President of CAPIC, the trade association that has now become the proposed new regulator of immigration consultants ICCRC, has also been ordered revoked for serious professional misconduct. He was deemed ungovernable, as he considered there to be nothing wrong with signing and seeking blank forms to a ghost consultant, engaging in a conflict of interest when transferring money between clients' companies without the clients' consent, and submitting a false declaration. He will also join ICCRC and continue his work with ghost agents and unknown investor clients. The unacknowledged risk is that these investor clients could be engaged in money laundering through these shell companies which are set up only to qualify to immigrate to Canada, then wound down once the person gets Permanent Residency.
Katarina Onuschak went bankrupt and ended up getting revoked. She will also be able to join ICCRC. I would hate to be one of her clients, who if they knew she had been bankrupt may think twice about giving money to her.
Please thank Jason Kenney and Mark Davidson from Citizenship and Immigration Canada for supporting the ability of revoked CSIC members to join ICCRC with no questions asked.
Sukjinder Sandhu was revoked by the discipline council for serious professional misconduct. The discipline council found that he lied to his clients, he lied to the Investogator and he lied to the discipline council. https://www.csic-scci.ca/images/Files/tribunal-decisions/Sandhu-penalties-En. He will be able to join ICCRC and continue his lies.
Jeffrey Hemlin, President of CAPIC, the trade association that has now become the proposed new regulator of immigration consultants ICCRC, has also been ordered revoked for serious professional misconduct. He was deemed ungovernable, as he considered there to be nothing wrong with signing and seeking blank forms to a ghost consultant, engaging in a conflict of interest when transferring money between clients' companies without the clients' consent, and submitting a false declaration. He will also join ICCRC and continue his work with ghost agents and unknown investor clients. The unacknowledged risk is that these investor clients could be engaged in money laundering through these shell companies which are set up only to qualify to immigrate to Canada, then wound down once the person gets Permanent Residency.
Katarina Onuschak went bankrupt and ended up getting revoked. She will also be able to join ICCRC. I would hate to be one of her clients, who if they knew she had been bankrupt may think twice about giving money to her.
Please thank Jason Kenney and Mark Davidson from Citizenship and Immigration Canada for supporting the ability of revoked CSIC members to join ICCRC with no questions asked.
Wednesday 18 May 2011
Crooked Bill C35 Promotes Crooked Consultants
Bill C35 has been sold as the Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act. In fact, the most appropriate label would be the Protecting Crooked Consultants Act.
Bill C35 grants the Minister the authority to designate and revoke the regulator of immigration consultants. Kenney has already proposed to revoke the designation of the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) and designate the ICCRC as regulator. ICCRC is not a regulator, ICCRC is in fact CAPIC, the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, a trade association that protects the interests of immigration consultants. CAPIC President Hemlin has been revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council for serious professional misconduct, and ordered to pay costs of $50,000. His case in fact gives a clue as to the future of immigration consulting under ICCRC.
Bill C35 also criminalizes ghost consulting; that is it imposes criminal sanctions on those who provide immigration assistance for a fee if you are not a lawyer or member of the designated body, proposed to be ICCRC. In fact, the reality is that Canada has no jurisidiction over ghost consultants operating overseas. Also, ghost consultants in Canada can simply become Agents of ICCRC members and continue to operate, making a massive profit for the crooked ICCRC member that sells their membership to the ghost consultants.
That is exactly what one can see taking place in the Hemlin decision, available at He signed and sold blank Use of representative forms to a Chinese ghost agent related to an investor program scheme; this conduct was deemed acceptable by the CAPIC Members who re-elected Hemlin President despite the disciplinary decision. CAPIC is ICCRC; all ICCRC Board members (self-appointed, none have been elected) are from CAPIC.
Welcome to immigration consulting under ICCRC; ghost consultants simply work as Agents of ICCRC members ensuring that the profits of ghost consultants are shared with the ICCRC cartel. While honest, hard-working immigration consultants struggle to make ends meet, CAPIC Members through ICCRC can make huge profits as a direct result of Bill C35.
Bill C35 grants the Minister the authority to designate and revoke the regulator of immigration consultants. Kenney has already proposed to revoke the designation of the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) and designate the ICCRC as regulator. ICCRC is not a regulator, ICCRC is in fact CAPIC, the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants, a trade association that protects the interests of immigration consultants. CAPIC President Hemlin has been revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council for serious professional misconduct, and ordered to pay costs of $50,000. His case in fact gives a clue as to the future of immigration consulting under ICCRC.
Bill C35 also criminalizes ghost consulting; that is it imposes criminal sanctions on those who provide immigration assistance for a fee if you are not a lawyer or member of the designated body, proposed to be ICCRC. In fact, the reality is that Canada has no jurisidiction over ghost consultants operating overseas. Also, ghost consultants in Canada can simply become Agents of ICCRC members and continue to operate, making a massive profit for the crooked ICCRC member that sells their membership to the ghost consultants.
That is exactly what one can see taking place in the Hemlin decision, available at He signed and sold blank Use of representative forms to a Chinese ghost agent related to an investor program scheme; this conduct was deemed acceptable by the CAPIC Members who re-elected Hemlin President despite the disciplinary decision. CAPIC is ICCRC; all ICCRC Board members (self-appointed, none have been elected) are from CAPIC.
Welcome to immigration consulting under ICCRC; ghost consultants simply work as Agents of ICCRC members ensuring that the profits of ghost consultants are shared with the ICCRC cartel. While honest, hard-working immigration consultants struggle to make ends meet, CAPIC Members through ICCRC can make huge profits as a direct result of Bill C35.
ICCRC/CAPIC will Shut Down CSIC Disciplinary Hearings to Protect Hemlin
By selecting ICCRC as regulator of immigration consultants, Minister Kenney and CIC indicate support for the shut down of CSIC disciplinary hearings: https://www.csic-scci.ca/content/currenthearings. Gurpreet Khaira and Kamalpreet Khaira from CWC Immigration, Parvinder and Devinder Sandhu from WWICS, Jun Cheng from Winner's Immigration and Anoo Lal are some immigration consultants affected by the shut down of CSIC's disciplinary hearings. CSIC has filed for judicial review to ensure the continuation of these disciplinary hearings.
ICCRC will shut down CSIC's disciplinary hearings to protect CAPIC President Hemlin from revocation, and the $50,000 costs ordered by CSIC's independent discipline council. CAPIC/ICCRC support Hemlin's conduct, as Hemlin was re-elected President despite the disciplinary findings against him. He signed and sold blank Use of Representative forms to His Chinese ghost agent, engaged in a conflict of interest by acting as Director to his Clients' companies, then transferring money between the companies without the clients' consent, and by submitting a false declaration on his membership application.
Welcome to the ethics of the new regulator of immigration consultants, ICCRC. Please thank Kenney and CIC senior officials for the shut down of CSIC discipline hearings and for the promotion of CAPIC ethics through the selection of ICCRC as regulator.
ICCRC will shut down CSIC's disciplinary hearings to protect CAPIC President Hemlin from revocation, and the $50,000 costs ordered by CSIC's independent discipline council. CAPIC/ICCRC support Hemlin's conduct, as Hemlin was re-elected President despite the disciplinary findings against him. He signed and sold blank Use of Representative forms to His Chinese ghost agent, engaged in a conflict of interest by acting as Director to his Clients' companies, then transferring money between the companies without the clients' consent, and by submitting a false declaration on his membership application.
Welcome to the ethics of the new regulator of immigration consultants, ICCRC. Please thank Kenney and CIC senior officials for the shut down of CSIC discipline hearings and for the promotion of CAPIC ethics through the selection of ICCRC as regulator.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)