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.