RCIC's Options to Act and Apply:
Use this Link and particpate in an online petition Your Privacy is completely protected or
Use this Link to download PDF copy for your signatures and then submit direct to the Minister via email or fax
Communication with ICCRC
RCICs Petition for Authorities To Take Actions Against PULA and Other Matter
If the Government can intervene and talk to the US government to protect the interest of hundreds of employees of other industries, why can’t the Government take care of the livelihood of 4200 Canadian citizens by simply dealing with the Canadian Corporation running its operations with Government power?
The Public and the Membership demands an OPEN and an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION on all Affairs of the Council, including financial spendings, complaints and third-party payout to private contractors, since inceptions.
Request to take action as soon as possible and protect the public interest and the livelihood of over 4200 Canadians and their families.
"It is impossible, in my mind, to distinguish between the refusal to receive a petition or its summary rejection by some general order, and the denial of the right of petition." Caleb Cushing
Action Required from the Government:
The Canadian Immigration Consultants are regulated by a federal body known as the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council (ICCRC).
The "ICCRC" currently has over 4200 registered members (RCIC).
The majority of the regulated, licensed Immigration Consultants are competent, honest and helping the public to protect their interest within Canada and globally. Immigration Consultants (RCICs) provide services to the public at a professional standard and highly competitive fees as compared to other legal professionals in the similar industry.
The current board and administration have lost its credibility and trust not only among its own membership but also the government and the public.
ICCRC holds its annual general meeting every year to present and discuss its affairs among the membership.
Our profession is facing a hard time to maintain its professional standards and status due to actions of the current administration, which consists of current and former board members of the ICCRC and senior officers since the inspection. Regular members are not responsible for this turmoil.
In May 2016 the ICCRC board approved a new regulation called "PULA" (Planned and Unplanned Absence) outside of all respect of laws concerning the Canadian Charter of Rights, privacy, confidentiality, the competition, and consumer protection, to name few. No member or public group was consulted.
In the opinion of the majority of the public and the members, "PULA" is not a very well thought-out regulation. It directly affects the livelihood of the 4200 members and their families which are Canadian citizens. In addition, the requirements to comply negatively impacts the public interest as well as the practice of the members, and might eventually discourage the public and (RCIC) consultants to stop doing business in every respect. This oppressive regulation is purely enacted to make the government happy so that they may allow the organization to keep its status as a regulatory body—again, a perfect example of the effort to protect its self-interest.
On November 2, 2017, several members submitted their proposals to discuss and resolve these issues during the upcoming 2017 AGM. These requests were for discussion on the following serious issues:
Matters to Discuss & Resolve:
On November 3, 2017, members also submitted a request to the chair of the board and the chair of the election committee to have the registrar of the council recuse himself from any board election and AGM voting process, since he is the subject of members’ request for investigation and also has a direct conflict of interest by filing direct complaints against members who asked questions about his personal actions and the actions of the board.
On November 7, 2017, the council declined to entertain any such request.
Public and Members Interest At High Risk:
The "PULA" Affect:
The "PULA" regulations are a direct threat to the public interest.
Evidence Click Here (refer to pages # 46, 49, 58, 62, 64)
Outsourcing Complaint & Disciplinary Process!
The ICCRC's Complaint and Discipline Process:
Transparency & Accountability:
The Council’s decision and ongoing renewal of outsourcing our the C & D process to a private corporation owned and operated by the friends of the directors and officers is a major concern and threat to the public interest, and an unfair procedure to discipline the membership at large. (Refer to an independent report dated 2015 and a private contract with the “NRCDS.”)
Membership believes that the C & D contracting had a purpose and that was to redirect the funds out of the Council’s account. Members apprehend that there is a connection between the owners of the private contractor “NRCDS,” former CEO and the current registrar of the Council. This can only be further verified if there is an independent public inquiry.
Members have made several requests and submitted proposals to the board to conduct or order investigations, which have been summarily denied for obvious reasons. If there is nothing wrong with the spending and financial affairs or connection between the parties concerned, then why is the members’ simple request to investigate denied? It does not make any sense and raises great concerns among the membership and the public.
There have been questions about major financial discrepancies in Council's reports, objections were made, but in return, members asking questions were disciplined.
Members Choice and Options:
Members have no choice left other than to ask the government to intervene and protect the public interest and the livelihood of over 4200 members and their families.
A majority of the membership (RCIC) cannot even afford to pay their very high licensing fees, and cannot seek expensive remedy through the Justice system.
On the other hand, the board of directors and the administration is spending millions of dollars received from members in licensing fees to defend its interest via high-profile law firms.
Members efforts to protect the public and their interest:
Since 2013 the membership has at large has expressed its serious concerns about the council's transparency, accountability and mandate to protect the public.
Members have been submitting proposals and changes in the system all denied by the Board to protect their self-interest.
The Council's Response & Actions Against the Membership:
In response to those concerns and questions, the council's administration and board of directors has always retaliated and filed disciplinary complaints and lawsuits to silence the critics.
Recently, the term of an elected member of the board, Mr. Ryan Dean, was simply terminated by the self-interested directors/administration because he demanded a full investigation into its financial spending and major discrepancies and appeared before a parliamentary committee to openly expose the "Bad Actors."
This Council has no mechanism in place to file a complaint or request an investigation against its staff and directors. The code of ethics and policies are only on paper. Such request is processed by the same individuals who are subject to the complaint, having a direct conflict of interest.
Millions of dollars have been paid to lawyers to simply advise and protect the existence of the corporation and to keep the control of current Board and administration within the grasp of the same and few close friends. During Jan 2016 - March 2017 ICCRC spent over $ 2.2 million towards litigation costs, the majority of which was paid to lawyers to protect the interest of the corporation and its directors and no explanation was provided.
Indeed, this $2.2 Million was hidden from the membership and it does not reflect what is shown the current certified and audited ICCRC Financial Statements.
The board of directors has proposed and approved several very oppressive bylaws and regulations purely to protect its self-interest and the interest of its directors and officers. there is no apparent intent to protect the public interest.
Membership Approaching the Government & Response:
In October 2017, UCICA on behalf of its members approached Minister of Citizenship and Immigration The Honourable Ahmed D. Hussen MP and members of the parliamentary committee with direct evidence concerning the public interest and to request a direct meeting with the members at large of ICCRC/UCICA.
Government: No action was taken and the meeting request was denied.
On June 16, 2017, the parliamentary Committee on Citizenship Matters finalized its recommendations to bring major changes to our regulatory system. But no action has been taken since then.
On October 16, 2017, The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration submitted his response to the CIMM report, but again, no action has been taken or a solid plan provided to protect the public and the livelihood of the 4200 members and their families.
If the Government can intervene and talk to the US government to protect the interest of hundreds of employees of other industries, why can’t the Government take care of the livelihood of 4200 Canadian citizens by simply dealing with the Canadian employer running its operations with Government power?
Who is Who:
U.C.I.C.A. UNITED CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION CONSULTANTS ASSOCIATION is a Federal Not for Profit Corporation with a mission to serve and protect the public interest and the interest of its members (RCICs).
UCICA currently has over 2900 members and their supporters who are also members of the ICCRC. UCICA is working to protect the objective interest of all RCICs.
ICCRC protects consumers by mainly:
Managing a rigorous complaints and discipline process
ICCRC regulates RCICs mainly by:
UCICA and its member rely on following statutes when considering an action in this matter against the council by the Government:
LIST OF STATUTES AND REGULATIONS
1. Canada Not-for-Profit Corporation Act, SC 2009, c. 23, ss. 253 to 262;
2. Constitution Act, 1867, s. 92(13)
3. Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SC 2001, c. 27, s. 91
4. Immigration and Refugee Protection Regulations, SOR/2002-227, s. 13.2
5. Regulations Designating a Body for the Purposes of Paragraph 91(2)(c) of the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, SOR/2011-142
6. Rules of Civil Procedure: Rules 10 and 21(2)
Requirements to comply with this regulation: