Kenney's Public Statements Contradict Choice of ICCRC

Minister Kenney stated on September 21, 2010 that his Act, formerly known as the Cracking Down on Crooked Consultants Act, had the support of legitimate consultants, such as the President of the Canadian Association of Professional Immigration Consultants (CAPIC).  The Acting President of CAPIC at that time was Jeffrey Hemlin, who was well-known to be the subject of a disciplinary hearing.  After this statement was made, Hemlin was revoked by CSIC's independent discipline council and ordered to pay costs of $50,000 for signing a false declaration, engaging in a conflict of interest by exercising control over his investor clients' assets, and signing and selling blank Use of Representative forms to his ghost agent.  Despite the disciplinary decision against Hemlin, Kenney selected CAPIC's bid, through the ICCRC, to be regulator of immigration consultants.  Is the conduct of Hemlin that of an immigration consultant that the Minister considers a legitimate consultant?

Minister Kenney also said, on the same date that: "What we are looking for is a regulator who can support Canada's immediate and long-term immigration objectives while working at building confidence in our immigration system." ICCRC has publicized their intent to promote program integrity and go after ghost consultants despite lacking jurisdiction or power over non-Members.  The ICCRC is thus an immigration agency protecting CIC's interests, and going after their competitors, the ghost consultants.  Of course, one wonders that if the CBSA doesn't have the resources to go after ghosts, how does ICCRC? ICCRC has no consumer protection provisions, and thus cannot be deemed a professional regulator.  They are a cartel supporting the interests of CIC and immigration consultants and not the public interest.

Minister Kenney also indicated in September 21, 2010 that: "The successful candidate must show that it can effectively investigate the conduct of it's members and sanction those who do not play by the rules." There is no publicly available information to show how ICCRC will effectively investigate and sanction Members; in fact thus far they have advised they will go after ghost constants not their own Members.  Considering there are no provisions in place to ensure the continuation of CSIC's disciplinary hearings, ICCRC has demonstrated the opposite of the intent of Minister Kenney as described in this quote.  Further, ICCRC competency to investigate and sanction members is questionable since their disciplinary process lacks procedural fairness; it is also a highly convoluted unworkable strategy designed to ensure ICCRC Board Members will control disciplinary decision making.  Since Hemlin continues as President of CAPIC, we can be sure that ICCRC will protect their friends, such as Hemlin, from discipline.

Again on the same date, Minister Kenney spoke of transitional provisions for the registration of CSIC Members with ICCRC.  What has never been addressed is what will happen to the investigation files and disciplinary hearings?  What about the disciplinary records of CSIC Members?  How about revoked CSIC Members, who are also able to join ICCRC?  EVERYONE can join ICCRC, without any consideration of their conduct while they were a CSIC Member, or after their membership with CSIC was revoked.  By considering the transition to be one of registration with the new body, rather than an assessment of their competency and disciplinary history, the interests of immigrants and the Canadian public are unprotected.