Vocal 'Public Protector's hidden agenda on Immigration Consultants vs Lawyers

It is commendable that a member of the Immigration Bar outwardly advocates for protecting public interest. I am hoping that they reflect on the deeper meaning of what that represents. They intentionally editorialize a topic that is hot in the court of public opinion, by packaging recent scandals and wrapping up overseas ‘ghosts’ recruiters and unauthorised agents, and tar all good RCIC Regulated Canadian Immigration Consultants with the same toxic brush. This is duplicitous. Many large law firms hire and cherish their senior RCIC immigration consultants, whom they discover usually know much more about the complex intricacies of immigration law and processes than all the recently graduated lawyers who have typically not been taught one hour studying immigration. Our CPD requirements are just as stringent, and we share best practices taught by leading lawyers and consultants equally. To suggest we need to work under their apron strings and be kept a watch on is the height of hubris. 

Immigration Consultants have been fighting a huge uphill battle after surviving the Mangat challenge and immediately finding ourselves prisoners of a morally bankrupt first group who highjacked the entire profession. That cannot be considered a first attempt at regulation.

ICCRC was formed with the utmost of professionalism and integrity. With the model flawed having no Federal Statute, that is being corrected now. The new regulator arose in the midst of a decades old tide of corrupt agents and unauthorized representatives overseas, all beyond its mandate or legal authority to halt.

Even lawyers - if newly regulated - would have suffered the same fate had they found themselves surrounded in a sea of pirates, the roles reversed. Demanding equal performance of a new fledgling regulator when they have the comfort of the Ontario Bar that is over a century old, is unfair. No one turns to the CBA and says: unauthorized practice overseas is your fault!

When they talk of counsel bungling files, we have sent in 2 files this year that were handled back to back by prominent immigration lawyers where we had to ask for consideration under ‘inadequate representation by former counsel’. With the privilege they enjoy in their inner circle, we extend the same collegial courtesy of not flinging mud at our friends on the other side of the bar. We survive in a climate where we have to wipe off our shingle daily from undeserved muck thrown at us.

This outspoken lawyer is predictable in his public pillorying on twitter throwing stones at RCIC Immigration Consultants. He has been consistent in his advocacy for his fellow lawyers, a faithful companion.

I know some will cuddle around his cauldron, and join in warming hands over what most already see as a tired self-serving thinly disguised turf war. May he find more worthy, uplifting preoccupations.