OTTAWA — Canada is “clearly” leading the G20 out of the recession, Labour Minister Diane Finley told QMI Agency.
Finley was in Washington, D.C., this week to meet with her counterparts in the other G20 countries to discuss the strength of their respective workforces and how to combat high levels of unemployment, which could hinder the global economic recovery.
Canada’s unemployment rate has remained steady at 8.2%, but the situation is far worse in other countries.
In 2009, the global economy shed 34 million jobs, hitting a record high 212 million unemployed.
The first-ever two-day meeting was a setup for the G20 leaders summit in Toronto this June when the economic recovery will be discussed.
Finley said the labour ministers all agreed education and skills training strategies are key to strengthening the labour force.
Canada, she said, was the marvel of them all.
“It was very evident in our discussions that as a result of the quick action undertaken by our government ... Canada is clearly leading the G20 out of the recession,” Finley said from Washington. “It really is clear that our plan is working and we’ve become a marvellous success for the G20 nations.”
Finley said the next step for Canada is to focus on better matching available skills to employers’ needs.
“We all need that. People who are looking for jobs need it, employers need it, and we need it as a country,” she said.
bryn.weese@sunmedia.ca
Saskatchewan immigration website a first for Canada
By Joe Couture, Leader-Post
Saskatchewan is now the only province enabling applications for immigration to be made online, part of a new website that immigrant Ercoph Bongomin said would have made his journey to the province easier -- if it had been available 10 years ago.
In 2001, Bongomin and his family came to the province from Egypt, where they had been living as refugees from their home country of Sudan. Today, Bongomin, his spouse and their four children call Regina home. Bongomin works as an accountant and the whole family cheers for the Saskatchewan Roughriders.
"I didn't know much about Regina," Bongomin said, referring to the time before his move to the city. "But my attitude was, anywhere people live, I can live. They (officials) told me, 'If you don't find it good for you, you can move to another province.' "
That was almost 10 years ago. The Bongomins have stayed.
"My experience here has been very good," he said. "As soon as I arrived here, I found also some people that came from my country before me and that makes it even better. I would tell (others) that Saskatchewan is a good place to live, especially Regina. It has all the feeling of a big city. At the same time ... the community is very supportive ... People are very friendly."
Bongomin upgraded his education at the University of Regina. He values the education system for his children, two of whom were born here. The story of their success is one of several featured on the new website.
The provincial government launched the website this month. It provides a central, comprehensive source of information about immigration, including how to apply through the Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program -- the only program that allows people to submit their applications online, as well as track the status of their applications on the website.
Such a website would have made a difference for Bongomin.
"It took me longer to get all the information I needed. If this website had been there, it would have been easier," he stated.
"I think this demonstrates the real benefits of co-operation with Ottawa," said Rob Norris, provincial minister responsible for immigration, noting the federal government provided funds for the new project over three years to the tune of $450,000.
The website will allow for more efficiency within the provincial office, Norris said, noting staff will be able to focus on processing applications. A continuing goal is to reduce the time it takes to process an application, though some of that responsibility rests with the federal government.
Norris said he hopes the website will encourage prospective immigrants to choose Saskatchewan. Last year, about 9,000 immigrants came to the province as a result of the SINP. This year, the goal is 10,000.
Immigration is one of several avenues of population growth being pursued. Growth is important for both economic and revitalization reasons, Norris said. With many open jobs on the horizon, more people will be needed; plus, growth of the economy is related to population. There also are intangibles.
"We want to foster and facilitate increasingly diverse, dynamic and cosmopolitan communities," said Norris, noting newcomers are moving to 160 different communities, which are becoming more inclusive as a result. He said the province also is working with partners to enhance services to help immigrants settle.
For more details, go online (www.saskimmigrationcanada.ca).
© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post
Saskatchewan is now the only province enabling applications for immigration to be made online, part of a new website that immigrant Ercoph Bongomin said would have made his journey to the province easier -- if it had been available 10 years ago.
In 2001, Bongomin and his family came to the province from Egypt, where they had been living as refugees from their home country of Sudan. Today, Bongomin, his spouse and their four children call Regina home. Bongomin works as an accountant and the whole family cheers for the Saskatchewan Roughriders.
"I didn't know much about Regina," Bongomin said, referring to the time before his move to the city. "But my attitude was, anywhere people live, I can live. They (officials) told me, 'If you don't find it good for you, you can move to another province.' "
That was almost 10 years ago. The Bongomins have stayed.
"My experience here has been very good," he said. "As soon as I arrived here, I found also some people that came from my country before me and that makes it even better. I would tell (others) that Saskatchewan is a good place to live, especially Regina. It has all the feeling of a big city. At the same time ... the community is very supportive ... People are very friendly."
Bongomin upgraded his education at the University of Regina. He values the education system for his children, two of whom were born here. The story of their success is one of several featured on the new website.
The provincial government launched the website this month. It provides a central, comprehensive source of information about immigration, including how to apply through the Saskatchewan Immigrant Nominee Program -- the only program that allows people to submit their applications online, as well as track the status of their applications on the website.
Such a website would have made a difference for Bongomin.
"It took me longer to get all the information I needed. If this website had been there, it would have been easier," he stated.
"I think this demonstrates the real benefits of co-operation with Ottawa," said Rob Norris, provincial minister responsible for immigration, noting the federal government provided funds for the new project over three years to the tune of $450,000.
The website will allow for more efficiency within the provincial office, Norris said, noting staff will be able to focus on processing applications. A continuing goal is to reduce the time it takes to process an application, though some of that responsibility rests with the federal government.
Norris said he hopes the website will encourage prospective immigrants to choose Saskatchewan. Last year, about 9,000 immigrants came to the province as a result of the SINP. This year, the goal is 10,000.
Immigration is one of several avenues of population growth being pursued. Growth is important for both economic and revitalization reasons, Norris said. With many open jobs on the horizon, more people will be needed; plus, growth of the economy is related to population. There also are intangibles.
"We want to foster and facilitate increasingly diverse, dynamic and cosmopolitan communities," said Norris, noting newcomers are moving to 160 different communities, which are becoming more inclusive as a result. He said the province also is working with partners to enhance services to help immigrants settle.
For more details, go online (www.saskimmigrationcanada.ca).
© Copyright (c) The Regina Leader-Post
Can’t Cut Spending? Look Around the Globe
By TYLER COWEN
Published: April 16, 2010
Source: The New York Times.
AMERICA’S long-run fiscal outlook is bleak, mostly because of an aging population and rising health care costs. To close the gap between expenditures and revenue, we’ll likely see a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts. And we’ll need to focus especially on reducing spending, largely because that taxes on the wealthy can be raised only so high.
Consider the tax burden on high earners once the Bush administration’s tax cuts expire next year. Add up the federal, state, city and sales taxes for a lawyer in New York City who earns $300,000 a year. Depending on the circumstances, this individual could be facing marginal tax rates in the range of 60 percent. Higher income tax rates would discourage hard work and encourage tax avoidance, thereby defeating the purpose of the tax increases.
The most potent way to add revenue is to impose a value-added tax. As its name indicates, a V.A.T. takes some percentage of the value added at each stage of production. V.A.T.’s raise money so readily and so invisibly that they often climb to a range of 15 to 20 percent; politicians like the revenue, and voters don’t always notice the burden.
A move toward a V.A.T., however, also brings price inflation, a big increase in the tax-collecting bureaucracy and the emergence of favored sectors with exemptions or lower rates. Though we may well end up with a V.A.T., it isn’t obviously the best option.
Burdening citizens with much higher taxes would fundamentally change what this country is about. Our founders envisioned a government that would provide public goods but not guarantee everyone’s well-being against every possible obstacle. Immigrants would be offered a franchise to come here and make good if they could — while bearing considerable risk themselves. To this day, this openness has elevated many millions in health, prosperity and liberty — and enabled many newcomers to innovate and offer new goods and services, or scientific ideas, to the world.
Higher levels of government spending and taxation would also soak up resources that might otherwise foster innovation and new businesses. And sentiment would most likely turn ever stronger against those immigrants who consume public services and make the deficit higher in the short run. Current residents might feel more secure in a larger welfare state, but over time the loss of commerce and innovation takes a toll.
The macroeconomic evidence also suggests the wisdom of emphasizing spending cuts. In a recent paper, Alberto Alesina and Silvia Ardagna, economics professors at Harvard, found that in developed countries, spending cuts were the key to successful fiscal adjustments — and were generally better for the economy than tax increases. Their conclusion was based on data since 1970 from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The received wisdom in the United States is that deep spending cuts are politically impossible. But a number of economically advanced countries, including Sweden, Finland, Canada and, most recently, Ireland, have cut their government budgets when needed.
Most relevant, perhaps, is Canada, which cut federal government spending by about 20 percent from 1992 to 1997. The Liberal Party, headed by Jean Chrétien as prime minister and Paul Martin as finance minister, led most of this shift. Prompted by the financial debacle in Mexico, Canadian leaders had the courage and the foresight to make those spending cuts before a fiscal crisis was upon them. In his book “In the Long Run We’re All Dead: The Canadian Turn to Fiscal Restraint,” Timothy Lewis describes Canada’s move from fiscal irresponsibility to a balanced budget — a history that helps explain why the country has managed the current global recession relatively well.
To be sure, the spending cuts meant fewer government services, most of all for health care, and big cuts in agricultural subsidies. But Canada remained a highly humane society, and American liberals continue to cite it as a beacon of progressive values.
Counterintuitively, the relatively strong Canadian trust in government may have paved the way for government spending cuts, a pattern that also appears in Scandinavia. Citizens were told by their government leadership that such cuts were necessary and, to some extent, they trusted the messenger.
IT’S less obvious that the United States can head down the same path, partly because many Americans are so cynical about policy makers. In many ways, this cynicism may be justified, but it is not always helpful, as it lowers trust and impedes useful social bargains.
Forces like the Tea Party movement argue for fiscal conservatism, though it isn’t obvious that they are creating the conditions for success. Over the last year, we have been treated to the spectacle of conservatives defending Medicare against proposed cuts, in large part to curry favor with voters and mobilize sentiment against the Democratic health care plan.
Right now there is plenty of concern about debt and deficits, but little consensus on which expenditures should be cut or reined in. Sooner or later, we’ll have to reconsider virtually every segment of the federal budget.
The issue of fiscal responsibility isn’t going away. So the question is now this: How deeply will we dig ourselves in before we create a more mature and more forward-looking political culture?
Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
Published: April 16, 2010
Source: The New York Times.
AMERICA’S long-run fiscal outlook is bleak, mostly because of an aging population and rising health care costs. To close the gap between expenditures and revenue, we’ll likely see a combination of revenue increases and spending cuts. And we’ll need to focus especially on reducing spending, largely because that taxes on the wealthy can be raised only so high.
Consider the tax burden on high earners once the Bush administration’s tax cuts expire next year. Add up the federal, state, city and sales taxes for a lawyer in New York City who earns $300,000 a year. Depending on the circumstances, this individual could be facing marginal tax rates in the range of 60 percent. Higher income tax rates would discourage hard work and encourage tax avoidance, thereby defeating the purpose of the tax increases.
The most potent way to add revenue is to impose a value-added tax. As its name indicates, a V.A.T. takes some percentage of the value added at each stage of production. V.A.T.’s raise money so readily and so invisibly that they often climb to a range of 15 to 20 percent; politicians like the revenue, and voters don’t always notice the burden.
A move toward a V.A.T., however, also brings price inflation, a big increase in the tax-collecting bureaucracy and the emergence of favored sectors with exemptions or lower rates. Though we may well end up with a V.A.T., it isn’t obviously the best option.
Burdening citizens with much higher taxes would fundamentally change what this country is about. Our founders envisioned a government that would provide public goods but not guarantee everyone’s well-being against every possible obstacle. Immigrants would be offered a franchise to come here and make good if they could — while bearing considerable risk themselves. To this day, this openness has elevated many millions in health, prosperity and liberty — and enabled many newcomers to innovate and offer new goods and services, or scientific ideas, to the world.
Higher levels of government spending and taxation would also soak up resources that might otherwise foster innovation and new businesses. And sentiment would most likely turn ever stronger against those immigrants who consume public services and make the deficit higher in the short run. Current residents might feel more secure in a larger welfare state, but over time the loss of commerce and innovation takes a toll.
The macroeconomic evidence also suggests the wisdom of emphasizing spending cuts. In a recent paper, Alberto Alesina and Silvia Ardagna, economics professors at Harvard, found that in developed countries, spending cuts were the key to successful fiscal adjustments — and were generally better for the economy than tax increases. Their conclusion was based on data since 1970 from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
The received wisdom in the United States is that deep spending cuts are politically impossible. But a number of economically advanced countries, including Sweden, Finland, Canada and, most recently, Ireland, have cut their government budgets when needed.
Most relevant, perhaps, is Canada, which cut federal government spending by about 20 percent from 1992 to 1997. The Liberal Party, headed by Jean Chrétien as prime minister and Paul Martin as finance minister, led most of this shift. Prompted by the financial debacle in Mexico, Canadian leaders had the courage and the foresight to make those spending cuts before a fiscal crisis was upon them. In his book “In the Long Run We’re All Dead: The Canadian Turn to Fiscal Restraint,” Timothy Lewis describes Canada’s move from fiscal irresponsibility to a balanced budget — a history that helps explain why the country has managed the current global recession relatively well.
To be sure, the spending cuts meant fewer government services, most of all for health care, and big cuts in agricultural subsidies. But Canada remained a highly humane society, and American liberals continue to cite it as a beacon of progressive values.
Counterintuitively, the relatively strong Canadian trust in government may have paved the way for government spending cuts, a pattern that also appears in Scandinavia. Citizens were told by their government leadership that such cuts were necessary and, to some extent, they trusted the messenger.
IT’S less obvious that the United States can head down the same path, partly because many Americans are so cynical about policy makers. In many ways, this cynicism may be justified, but it is not always helpful, as it lowers trust and impedes useful social bargains.
Forces like the Tea Party movement argue for fiscal conservatism, though it isn’t obvious that they are creating the conditions for success. Over the last year, we have been treated to the spectacle of conservatives defending Medicare against proposed cuts, in large part to curry favor with voters and mobilize sentiment against the Democratic health care plan.
Right now there is plenty of concern about debt and deficits, but little consensus on which expenditures should be cut or reined in. Sooner or later, we’ll have to reconsider virtually every segment of the federal budget.
The issue of fiscal responsibility isn’t going away. So the question is now this: How deeply will we dig ourselves in before we create a more mature and more forward-looking political culture?
Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
Why Quebec has so much trouble attracting immigrants
By HENRY AUBIN, The Gazette April 17, 2010
One of the most frustrating social trends in Quebec is the way that we as a society treat immigrants.
It's a crazy situation. We need - seriously need - immigrants. We need them to fill jobs that will be left vacant by Quebec's shrinking labour pool. We need them to pay the taxes that will pay for the health and social costs of this province's looming geezer-ization. And we need them to help pay back Quebecers' public debt (including our part of the federal debt), which the province's finance ministry rates as the world's fifth-highest (after Japan, Italy, Greece and Iceland).
And yet, as a study this month by the Montreal think tank CIRANO suggests, we as a society are blowing it.
The study notes, for example, that the jobless rate for immigrants who have a post-secondary education is 13 per cent. According to the 2006 census, that's almost twice the jobless rate among comparable immigrants in Ontario and British Columbia. It's three times the rate for Canadian-born holders of post-secondary diplomas.
This partly explains why only 18 per cent of all immigrants to Canada come to Quebec, too few for a province with 23 per cent of the country's population. (By contrast, Ontario and B.C. between them account for 51 per cent of the population but get 63 per cent of immigrants.) What makes Quebec's situation all the more unacceptable is that for decades the province has wielded more power over the selection of immigrants than any other province. Quebec sets its own criteria on who gets in.
You'd think that those it chooses to welcome would be more likely to do well. Not so: 19 per cent of immigrants age 25 to 54 are unemployed five years after arriving. Compare that with the 12-per-cent level for Canada as a whole.
Why this appalling record? Let's not heap too much blame on Quebec's language law. Yes, the primacy of French here induces many people to settle in English Canada, but it doesn't explain why even French-speakers often fail to crack the job market. Indeed, language theoretically ought to be less of a barrier to finding work here than in other provinces: 60 per cent of immigrants to Quebec in 2008 spoke either French or English upon arrival, the highest rate of any province.
So let's look beyond language.
The study suggests that part of the unemployment problem (although perhaps only a modest part) is Quebec's standing as "l'État providence" - that is, as the province with the most generous social benefits. The study's authors, the Université de Montréal's Brahim Boudarbat and Maude Boulet, note that the 2001 census shows that immigrants age 25 to 54 in Quebec obtained a whopping 52 per cent more public money than did their counterparts in the rest of Canada. The authors note this hardly spurs some people to work at a poorly paid job.
The problem here is not only with freeloading but also with the Quebec government's immigrant-screening process and social-benefits rules. They do too little to guard against parasitism.
A bigger problem is Quebec employers' well-known reluctance to recognize diplomas and experience acquired elsewhere than in North America or Europe. The study says this wariness is more acute here than in Ontario or B.C. Given that most immigrants are visible minorities, the study suggests racial bias can play a role.
The study does not deal with it, but Quebec's business establishment is notably remiss about putting out a welcome mat for visible minorities. Example: Of the 25 members of the Montreal Board of Trade's board of directors, not one is a visible minority.
The Quebec government itself is part of the problem. On the one hand, it recognizes the economic imperatives of attracting more immigrants and, indeed, it is doing so: It settled 49,500 immigrants last year, the most since 1991. On the other hand, it fails to use its own colossal civil service as a model by hiring immigrants or even their born-in-Quebec offspring.
To be sure, politicians say they want to do better. In 1990, the Bourassa government expressed embarrassment that a minuscule 1.7 per cent of its public service was from the cultural communities (loosely, first- or second-generation immigrants); it said it would double the rate by 1994. Only now, 16 years later, are we reaching Robert Bourassa's modest interim target. Most other provincial governments are miles ahead.
No other province needs immigrants so badly. No other province has so much power to choose desirable applicants. And yet, of the three provinces that receive the lion's share of immigrants, Quebec has the most trouble easing immigrants into roles in which they can contribute to society.
Crazy.
haubin@ thegazette.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Quebec+much+trouble+attracting+immigrants/2917753/story.html#ixzz0lS0EWIW5
One of the most frustrating social trends in Quebec is the way that we as a society treat immigrants.
It's a crazy situation. We need - seriously need - immigrants. We need them to fill jobs that will be left vacant by Quebec's shrinking labour pool. We need them to pay the taxes that will pay for the health and social costs of this province's looming geezer-ization. And we need them to help pay back Quebecers' public debt (including our part of the federal debt), which the province's finance ministry rates as the world's fifth-highest (after Japan, Italy, Greece and Iceland).
And yet, as a study this month by the Montreal think tank CIRANO suggests, we as a society are blowing it.
The study notes, for example, that the jobless rate for immigrants who have a post-secondary education is 13 per cent. According to the 2006 census, that's almost twice the jobless rate among comparable immigrants in Ontario and British Columbia. It's three times the rate for Canadian-born holders of post-secondary diplomas.
This partly explains why only 18 per cent of all immigrants to Canada come to Quebec, too few for a province with 23 per cent of the country's population. (By contrast, Ontario and B.C. between them account for 51 per cent of the population but get 63 per cent of immigrants.) What makes Quebec's situation all the more unacceptable is that for decades the province has wielded more power over the selection of immigrants than any other province. Quebec sets its own criteria on who gets in.
You'd think that those it chooses to welcome would be more likely to do well. Not so: 19 per cent of immigrants age 25 to 54 are unemployed five years after arriving. Compare that with the 12-per-cent level for Canada as a whole.
Why this appalling record? Let's not heap too much blame on Quebec's language law. Yes, the primacy of French here induces many people to settle in English Canada, but it doesn't explain why even French-speakers often fail to crack the job market. Indeed, language theoretically ought to be less of a barrier to finding work here than in other provinces: 60 per cent of immigrants to Quebec in 2008 spoke either French or English upon arrival, the highest rate of any province.
So let's look beyond language.
The study suggests that part of the unemployment problem (although perhaps only a modest part) is Quebec's standing as "l'État providence" - that is, as the province with the most generous social benefits. The study's authors, the Université de Montréal's Brahim Boudarbat and Maude Boulet, note that the 2001 census shows that immigrants age 25 to 54 in Quebec obtained a whopping 52 per cent more public money than did their counterparts in the rest of Canada. The authors note this hardly spurs some people to work at a poorly paid job.
The problem here is not only with freeloading but also with the Quebec government's immigrant-screening process and social-benefits rules. They do too little to guard against parasitism.
A bigger problem is Quebec employers' well-known reluctance to recognize diplomas and experience acquired elsewhere than in North America or Europe. The study says this wariness is more acute here than in Ontario or B.C. Given that most immigrants are visible minorities, the study suggests racial bias can play a role.
The study does not deal with it, but Quebec's business establishment is notably remiss about putting out a welcome mat for visible minorities. Example: Of the 25 members of the Montreal Board of Trade's board of directors, not one is a visible minority.
The Quebec government itself is part of the problem. On the one hand, it recognizes the economic imperatives of attracting more immigrants and, indeed, it is doing so: It settled 49,500 immigrants last year, the most since 1991. On the other hand, it fails to use its own colossal civil service as a model by hiring immigrants or even their born-in-Quebec offspring.
To be sure, politicians say they want to do better. In 1990, the Bourassa government expressed embarrassment that a minuscule 1.7 per cent of its public service was from the cultural communities (loosely, first- or second-generation immigrants); it said it would double the rate by 1994. Only now, 16 years later, are we reaching Robert Bourassa's modest interim target. Most other provincial governments are miles ahead.
No other province needs immigrants so badly. No other province has so much power to choose desirable applicants. And yet, of the three provinces that receive the lion's share of immigrants, Quebec has the most trouble easing immigrants into roles in which they can contribute to society.
Crazy.
haubin@ thegazette.canwest.com
© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/business/Quebec+much+trouble+attracting+immigrants/2917753/story.html#ixzz0lS0EWIW5
Regulator Cautions the Public: Only Use Immigration Representatives Authorized by the Canadian Government
/CNW/ - The RCMP charged an uncertified immigration consultant in Windsor with fraud yesterday, prompting the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) to warn consumers who might decide to hire a paid immigration representative to only hire one that is authorized by the Canadian Government.
Francesco Salvatore (Sam) Burgio is facing eleven charges for fraud after clients allegedly paid his firm thousands of dollars to submit their immigration applications and got no service in return. CSIC revoked Burgios membership in 2006.
That should have set off red flags for anybody who was considering hiring him, said John Ryan, CSIC Chair and Acting CEO. Most people would never consider hiring an unlicenced doctor or lawyer, and consumers need to realize that hiring an uncertified immigration consultant is just as unwise. Its easy to check because there is a list of all current and former members on the CSIC website.
Only members of CSIC, a provincial or territorial bar, or Quebec notaries can advise, represent or consult clients on immigration matters before the Government of Canada for a fee.
CSIC membership is important because CSIC members must meet rigorous ongoing educational requirements and adhere to strict Rules of Professional Conduct. In addition, CSIC provides extensive consumer protection measures by offering a complaints and discipline process, requiring members to carry errors and omissions insurance and maintaining a client compensation fund.
Unfortunately uncertified immigration consultants, known as ghost agents, have exploited legal loopholes that allow them to continue offering immigration services with little danger of law enforcement taking action.
CSIC has long advocated for legislative changes that would introduce penalties for those who pretend to be Certified Canadian Immigration Consultants. We look forward to the changes promised by the Honourable Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism.
The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants is the professional regulatory body for Certified Canadian Immigration Consultants. Established in 2004 it currently has nearly 1,700 members. CSICs mandate is to protect consumers of immigration consulting services. Consequently, it is responsible for ensuring the education, competency testing and the discipline of its members. CSIC also requires its members to carry errors and omissions insurance and to contribute to a compensation fund. The best way to find a CCIC is via CSICs toll free referral line, 1-877-311-7926.
Francesco Salvatore (Sam) Burgio is facing eleven charges for fraud after clients allegedly paid his firm thousands of dollars to submit their immigration applications and got no service in return. CSIC revoked Burgios membership in 2006.
That should have set off red flags for anybody who was considering hiring him, said John Ryan, CSIC Chair and Acting CEO. Most people would never consider hiring an unlicenced doctor or lawyer, and consumers need to realize that hiring an uncertified immigration consultant is just as unwise. Its easy to check because there is a list of all current and former members on the CSIC website.
Only members of CSIC, a provincial or territorial bar, or Quebec notaries can advise, represent or consult clients on immigration matters before the Government of Canada for a fee.
CSIC membership is important because CSIC members must meet rigorous ongoing educational requirements and adhere to strict Rules of Professional Conduct. In addition, CSIC provides extensive consumer protection measures by offering a complaints and discipline process, requiring members to carry errors and omissions insurance and maintaining a client compensation fund.
Unfortunately uncertified immigration consultants, known as ghost agents, have exploited legal loopholes that allow them to continue offering immigration services with little danger of law enforcement taking action.
CSIC has long advocated for legislative changes that would introduce penalties for those who pretend to be Certified Canadian Immigration Consultants. We look forward to the changes promised by the Honourable Jason Kenney, Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism.
The Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants is the professional regulatory body for Certified Canadian Immigration Consultants. Established in 2004 it currently has nearly 1,700 members. CSICs mandate is to protect consumers of immigration consulting services. Consequently, it is responsible for ensuring the education, competency testing and the discipline of its members. CSIC also requires its members to carry errors and omissions insurance and to contribute to a compensation fund. The best way to find a CCIC is via CSICs toll free referral line, 1-877-311-7926.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Check our online courses now
Click Here now!!!!