CIMM#72: Exploitation scheme targeting certain international students

NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the officials for coming to our committee today.

I'd like to go back to the numbers just a bit.

The minister and officials came last week and indicated that, of the 304 people who have been flagged as having a potential issue regarding misrepresentation, 57 received a removal order from the IRB. Your number seems to indicate that it's higher than 57.

I just want to circle back to that number 57. Is 57 the correct number for this cohort of students?


Aaron McCrorie
Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency

Again, I think we want to be very careful about the numbers. This is a live investigation. We are working with our IRCC colleagues in the task force in real time.

What I would say is that the numbers are subject to change. Today I can tell you that 52 removal orders have been issued.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Does that mean the discrepancy is such that those other students are no longer facing a removal order and it has now been eliminated? Or is it just that there's a simple discrepancy in the number?


Aaron McCrorie
Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency

It's the best information available at that moment in time. That's what I would say.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I see.

The CBSA, of course, enforces deportation orders. In this instance with the students who have been identified, some of them are awaiting meetings with the CBSA. Will the CBSA be having separate meetings with them, or will they be rolled into part of the task force investigation?


Aaron McCrorie
Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency

Just bear in mind that the universe of potential people being removed from Canada is considerably larger than the 300 we're talking about or even the 52. However, with regard to the individuals implicated in this case, we're going to put them through the task force process to understand exactly what their statuses are. Were they legitimate, genuine students or not? At that point, we'll be closing the loop with the individuals involved.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

Okay, so they won't have to do both meetings—a meeting with the task force and then an additional one with the CBSA.

I'm just trying to determine whether we are duplicating the effort here. Do the students have to meet with the CBSA and then go through the task force process separately?


Aaron McCrorie

Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency

I don't anticipate that the task force will meet with the students, although it may meet with officials to gather information about particular cases. In particular, if we don't have evidence that they attended a school, we will give people the opportunity to provide that information.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

That means the meetings will be ongoing, so they will be meeting with the CBSA separately from the task force.


Aaron McCrorie

Vice-President, Intelligence and Enforcement, Canada Border Services Agency

Conceivably.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you.

Madam Chair, at this juncture I'd like to raise an issue as a question of privilege. As you will recall, I flagged the issue and discrepancy around the press release. It's very upsetting to me that this has occurred. I note that you have since sent an email to all committee members with your explanation. However, your explanation, frankly, does not resolve the issue, in my view.

Just by way of background, on June 5, I moved the following motion:

That, following news reports that international students admitted into Canada with valid study permits were issued fraudulent college acceptance letters by immigration consultants, and are now facing deportation, the committee issue a news release to condemn the actions of these fraudulent ‘ghost consultants’ and call on the Canada Border Services Agency to immediately stay pending deportations of affected international students, waive inadmissibility on the basis of misrepresentation and provide an alternate pathway to permanent status...or a broad regularization program.

That motion was subsequently amended by MP Sukh Dhaliwal to add the following: “that the committee invite the Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship for one hour, the Minister of Public Safety for one hour, and department officials for one hour each to provide a briefing on the situation, for a total of four hours.” That amendment was passed unanimously.

Following that debate, a Conservative member, MP Brad Redekopp, moved an amendment to change the language of my motion from “provide an alternate pathway to permanent status for those impacted” to “provide a path to reapply for permanent residency for those impacted”. I objected to that proposed amendment. After some debate with the committee, that amendment was called to a recorded vote and it was defeated. There was some other ongoing discussion, but ultimately the motion that was finally passed unanimously incorporated my wording of the motion along with the amendment proposed by MP Dhaliwal. I won't belabour the point in terms of what that language is. I already put that on the record.

Then on June 14, one week following the adoption of that motion, committee members received a copy of the press release from the clerk. To my dismay, the release did not reflect the language of the motion passed. In fact, it misconstrued the motion that was passed. It contained information that was not part of the motion. Namely, it indicated that the committee will begin a study on the issue.

Moreover—and more critically, from my perspective—it omitted critical language, that being the call for the government to waive inadmissibility based on misrepresentation and to provide an alternate pathway to permanent residency to the international students. That language was not incorporated. There were clearly editorial measures taken with the drafting of that press release.

Madam Chair, after I raised that with you, as indicated, you sent committee members an email on June 19. We received your email, and your explanation is as follows:

The text was drafted with the intention of providing a coherent, accurate, and faithful news release based on the information available at the time and the motion adopted by the committee on June 7. As Chair, I approved this draft and instructed staff to publish it.

Then you went on to say, “It is regrettable that all members of the committee were not satisfied with the final form of the news release.”

What's clear, Madam Chair, is that you directed this press release to be issued and the press release does not reflect the direction from the committee. It omitted, as I indicated, critical information. It editorialized other information that you perceived to be valid for the press release.

To that end, I believe that all committee members' privilege has been violated. In the past, press releases have been issued. For example, I cite when my good colleague sitting next to me, MP Brunelle-Duceppe, moved a motion related to the Uyghurs. That motion and the intent of it were entirely reflected in the press release. It did not have editorialized language in it, as we do in this instance. The press release did not omit critical information, as we are seeing in this instance. That is to say that I believe a violation of privilege has occurred, and I am therefore seeking a remedy.

On the committee chair's role, the online “Privileges and Immunities” chapter states:

Unlike the Speaker, the Chair of a committee does not have the power to censure disorder or decide questions of privilege. Should a Member wish to raise a question of privilege in committee, or should some event occur in committee which appears to be a breach of privilege or contempt, the Chair of the committee will recognize the Member and hear the question of privilege, or, in the case of some incident, suggest that the committee deal with the matter.

It goes on to say:

The Chair, however, has no authority to rule that a breach of privilege or contempt has occurred. The role of the Chair in such instances is to determine whether the matter raised does in fact touch on privilege and is not a point of order, a grievance or a matter of debate. If the Chair is of the opinion that the Member’s interjection deals with a point of order, a grievance or a matter of debate, or that the incident is within the powers of the committee to deal with, the Chair will rule accordingly giving reasons. The committee cannot then consider the matter further as a question of privilege. Should a Member disagree with the Chair’s decision, the Member can appeal the decision to the committee.... The committee may sustain or overturn the Chair’s decision.

Madam Chair, I do believe—and I'm so sad to say this—that committee members' privilege has been violated. This is not something I enjoy doing today, but I am very upset about it. We debated the issue. I trusted that the process would follow suit, but the end result shows something different.

I have a motion ready and written out in both French and English, Madam Chair, if you find this was indeed a breach of privilege.

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

I'll suspend the meeting for a few minutes. I need to get advice before we proceed any further.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Lac-Saint-Jean, QC

Bloc

Even before I say something....

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

Yes.

I need some advice. Then we will go from there.

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

I call the meeting back to order.

With regard to what Ms. Kwan has raised, I would like to give my ruling.

On June 7, 2023, the committee adopted a motion to issue a news release concerning international students who were victims of fraud. The motion indicated what message the news release should convey but did not go as far as to require specific, unchanged wording.

As is normally the case, a draft was prepared using the best information at the time and seeking to remain faithful to the terms of the motion. The chair used due and proper discretion to approve this draft based on the chair's interpretation of the motion. While the chair recognizes that certain members are not satisfied with the final form of the news release, and while I'll make sure as chair to endeavour to avoid this situation in the future by consulting the committee, the order of the committee was nevertheless duly carried out. Accordingly, the matter raised by the member does not relate to privilege.

That's my ruling.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

I challenge the chair.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

Based on what Ms. Kwan has said, we will vote. The question is, shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?

(Ruling of the chair overturned: nays 6; yeas 5)

Go ahead, Ms. Kwan.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much.

To that end, Madam Chair, I have a motion that I would like to move. I have copies of it in both French and English. I'll pass them down.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Bloc

Do you want me to pass them around?

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Yes, if you will, please.

Thank you very much to my very helpful colleague MP Brunelle-Duceppe.

I'll wait for everybody to get a copy of this motion. My staff is also sending it electronically to the clerk.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

I'll suspend the meeting for two or three minutes so that all members can read the motion, and then we will come back.

I'm sorry to both our witnesses.

Sukh Dhaliwal Surrey—Newton, BC
Liberal

Madam Chair, I had my hand up.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

Mr. Dhaliwal, you have the floor.

Sukh Dhaliwal Surrey—Newton, BC
Liberal

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just want to make sure that I thank the officials. This was a very important issue, very near and dear to me and to some of my constituents—

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

Mr. Dhaliwal, I'm sorry for interrupting, but that's not a point of order.

I am suspending the meeting for two minutes so that everyone can look at the motion, and then we will come back.

The meeting is suspended.

The Chair Salma Zahid

I call the meeting back to order. I request that all members take their seat.

Go ahead, Ms. Kwan.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I move the following motion:

That the committee report to the House of Commons the potential breach of privilege resulting from the issuance of a press release by the committee on June 14, 2023, which altered the language that was adopted in the motion unanimously on June 7, 2023, by editorializing the content of the motion, adding additional information that was not part of the original motion, and outright omitting information, including the specific call to waive inadmissibility on the basis of misrepresentation; the motion specifically instructed the committee to issue a news release to “condemn the actions of these fraudulent ‘ghost consultants’ and call on the Canada Border Services Agency to immediately stay pending deportations of affected international students, waive inadmissibility on the basis of misrepresentation and provide an alternate pathway to permanent status for those impacted, such as the Humanitarian and Compassionate application process or a broad regularization program” and this was not accurately reflected in the content of the issued press release.

I will speak very briefly to it.

I don't normally like these procedural games. Those who know me will know that this is not the kind of thing I do. I don't relish this moment, but I think it is wrong for the work of the committee—when we agreed and a motion was passed unanimously—to not be carried out.

The explanation you provided, Madam Chair, is deficient. It does not even acknowledge the very premise of the discrepancy that did occur. It's not a matter of interpretation when the motion very specifically calls for inadmissibility to be acknowledged and for it to be waived.

We debated the matter with respect to making the broad regularization program available and providing the alternate permanent residency status initiative to the students. We debated this and still the press release came out not reflecting it. Rather, it very much aligned with what the government is going to proceed with.

That is not acceptable. That is why I'm moving this motion.

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

Thank you, Ms. Kwan.

I have a speaking list.

We'll go to Mr. Redekopp and then Mr. Dhaliwal.

Brad Redekopp Saskatoon West, SK
Conservative

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Bloc

Point of order, Madam Chair.

I asked to speak before you decided to suspend the meeting. My name should have been on the list quite awhile ago.

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

I gave the floor to Mr. Redekopp, so we will come to you after that.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Bloc

Madam Chair, I raised my hand 10 minutes ago.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

We suspended. I'm sorry for that.

I gave the floor, so we will come back to you, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Fayçal El-Khoury Laval—Les Îles, QC

Liberal

Can I have a copy of the press release to analyze it and understand what was released exactly?

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

Okay. We will get it to you.

Go ahead, Mr. Redekopp.

Brad Redekopp Saskatoon West, SK
Conservative

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I have a couple thoughts on this motion.

I agree with what Ms. Kwan is saying. In this specific motion, she highlighted that when we talked about this at committee, we agreed with part of it. We wanted to make some changes. Quite frankly, we weren't super happy with the final version of this motion, but it was better that than nothing, so we did agree to it. It was unanimous, as she pointed out. The point is that it wasn't exactly what we wanted, but it was close enough, so we went with it.

I agree with her that I don't think the way the press release came out at all reflected what was passed by the committee. I may have agreed or disagreed with what the press release looked like, but that's not the point. The point is that the committee made a decision. Whether I agreed with it fully or not is also not the point. The committee made a decision and that's how it should have come out. That's the reason I agree with this.

Another point related to that is that I find a bit of a similarity here. As you all know, I moved a motion four times to study this issue of international students and four times it was voted down by the NDP and the Liberals. Ultimately, it was eventually adopted in a different motion by Ms. Kwan, which was massaged and changed into something that was better suited to, I think, what the Liberals wanted.

My point is that it's the same type of thing: We wanted to do something, and then it was massaged over time and changed into something else. That's a little like what we're seeing here with this press release. That concerns me. If we make a decision, I think we need to do it. That's why I'm supporting what Ms. Kwan is talking about here.

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

Thank you, Mr. Redekopp.

We will go to Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe, I'm sorry for that confusion. At that time, the meeting was suspended.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Lac-Saint-Jean, QC
Bloc

There’s no problem, Madam Chair. You know you’re my favourite chair, even if I vote against your decisions.

There are barely five minutes left for our meeting and we won’t be able to go past 6:15 p.m. because of House resources.

I therefore propose to my honourable colleagues that we proceed to the vote immediately if we want to move on to something else at the next meeting. Otherwise, we’ll have to come back to this.

The Liberals are signalling that they don’t agree with me; I have a feeling I won’t be successful, which is unfortunate, because we should be doing our job. We already know how everyone is going to vote. I know exactly how my Conservative friends are going to vote and I know exactly how Ms. Kwan is going to vote. Of course, I also know how I’m going to vote.

I think we should end the meeting by doing our job, by voting on the motion, by not trying to filibuster and by making the people we represent in the federal government proud. Those are the words of a Quebec sovereignist.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

The Chair Salma Zahid

Liberal

Thank you, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Go ahead, Mr. Dhaliwal.

Sukh Dhaliwal Surrey—Newton, BC
Liberal

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, I always respect my dear friend Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe. On the other hand, I have to be accountable to my constituents and have to make sure that I put things on the record as well.

Earlier, Mr. Redekopp mentioned that we Liberals did not support his motion. That has never been the intent. The intent was to make sure that we finished the citizenship bill first and then continued with this study. This study was equally important, but at the same time, we as committee members had a legislative agenda in front of us that we needed to finish. In fact, we know exactly who filibustered that one. I don't need to mention it, because I don't want to get into an argument on this.

I can tell you that as soon as that bill was reported to the House, we as a committee started important work on the issue that the students are facing. Those victim students already have a lot of toll on their minds, and they want to clear up many questions. I had a meeting with them in June and they raised many questions. In fact, I was ready to ask those questions today of the officials from the CBSA so those students could have first-hand answers from the CBSA. Unfortunately, with the way things are going now, I don't think I will be able to get to those questions on what students faced. I can tell you that the intent from every member was to help those students, whether members were Conservative, Liberal, NDP, you name it. However, that is another issue.

The issue right now is the students who were victims of this fraudulent scheme, which is very important. We need to know what the process from the CBSA is going to be. I know the CBSA had already said to us that if the students have gone to university, have completed their education, are working in a workplace and have not been involved in any criminal activities.... Those types of students were genuine students. I wanted to make sure that I was able to ask questions today of the CBSA so the victim students have that information.

I feel very sorry that we all have to go through this, not only me. In fact, I am very frustrated today seeing all this petty politics just for one press release. We are taking time away from the officials, who have come all the way here to give the answers that students want to hear.

Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe Lac-Saint-Jean, QC

Bloc

Point of order, Madam Chair.

We were debating the motion on the table, but I think my colleague is getting a little off track.

Unfortunately, it is now 6:14.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

That's not a point of order. Mr. Dhaliwal has the floor.

Go ahead, Mr. Dhaliwal.

Sukh Dhaliwal Surrey—Newton, BC
Liberal

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I had to clear that up because I'm really mad and frustrated that we are all here. In fact, on the mind of every member on this committee was helping those students. Are we helping those students now by bringing in one motion after the other?

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

I'm sorry for interrupting, Mr. Dhaliwal.

We don't have resources available for this committee after 6:15 p.m. It's already 6:15 p.m., so I will have to suspend the meeting, and we'll come back on Wednesday.

The meeting is suspended.

[The meeting was suspended at 6:15 p.m., Monday, June 19]

[The meeting resumed at 4:50 p.m., Wednesday, June 21]

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

We are resuming meeting number 72 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Citizenship and Immigration.

When the meeting was suspended on June 19, the committee was debating a motion moved by Ms. Kwan to report a question of privilege to the House. Mr. Dhaliwal had the floor.

Go ahead, Mr. Dhaliwal.

Sukh Dhaliwal Surrey—Newton, BC
Liberal

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, first of all today, I would love to wish everyone a happy National Indigenous Peoples Day.

You were talking about my tie, Madam Chair. This was embroidered by former chief Karen Telford.

I want to thank Madam Kwan for bringing forward her motion.

The point Madam Kwan has made is an important one and should be addressed. However, it's also important, Madam Chair, that we hear from the panels of witnesses on this matter concerning international students. Therefore, I move that the debate be now adjourned.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

MP Dhaliwal has moved a motion for the debate to be adjourned. I will ask the clerk to take the vote.

(Motion agreed to: yeas 5; nays 0)

We will go back to our study of the exploitation scheme targeting certain international students. We have the witnesses for the first panel. I will suspend the meeting for two minutes so witnesses can take their seats.

I call the meeting back to order.

For this panel, we are joined by three witnesses: Mr. Balbir Singh, Mr. Lovepreet Singh and Madam Sarom Rho.

The witnesses will have five minutes for their opening remarks.

Two witnesses, Mr. Balbir Singh and Mr. Lovepreet Singh, are sharing a presentation.

You will have five minutes. Please begin.

NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you to all the witnesses for their presentations today.

I also had the pleasure of meeting the students.

Also, to the Migrant Workers Alliance for Change, thank you for the incredible work you do—not just on this situation but on many others as well—for people who are seeking regularization and landed status on arrival.

I just want the committee to be very clear in terms of support for the students into the future. We now have a situation in which the government has established a task force. It has temporarily halted your deportation, and it's investigating the cases to ensure that the victims are not going to be penalized.

The government is ensuring that inadmissibility based on misrepresentation is a component or part of the solution, which I think is very important.

Today, at our briefing with officials, they confirmed that they will be using section 25.2 of IRPA to apply the inadmissibility, so that's really good.

The question I have for you, though, is in terms of the long term. Many of you, of course, come to Canada to study not only to develop your education. I think many of you hope to also stay here in Canada permanently. Part of the solution I don't yet see clearly from the government in addressing this is whether or not the government will actually offer you an ultimate pathway to permanent residency. My question to you, as impacted students who are victims of this fraud scam, is this. Are you calling for the government to provide you with an ultimate permanent residency pathway?


Lovepreet Singh

As an Individual

Yes, 100%, because we have already suffered a lot from the last two to three years. Many of the students may have to spend two to three more years.

Our recommendation and our suggestion is that we be given an alternative pathway to permanent residency, yes.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you, Mr. Lovepreet Singh.

How about you, Mr. Balbir Singh?


Balbir Singh
As an Individual

Yes, I think the same way as Lovepreet Singh.

We have been studying for a long time, and mentally, financially.... We don't want to spend that much money again with lawyers and other things. It's a big financial burden on us, so that's why all the students need some kind of easier pathway for their status here.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

Some people would argue that the PR pathway should be the process that you would otherwise just continue to embark on.

Do you think that would be the appropriate approach, or do you think there should be a special immigration measure targeted at the victims?


Lovepreet Singh
As an Individual

If they treated us as victims and, in the investigation, took whatever recommendations we provided to the investigation team so they could find the genuine and the not genuine.... If the student got a clean sheet from the investigation, then 100%, a permanent pathway would be appreciated.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much.

I'm going to turn to Ms. Sarom Rho on this question.

Many of the students come to Canada with temporary status, and then we see in this instance that they are being cheated by unscrupulous immigration consultants. Other temporary foreign workers come to Canada and are also abused by the system, just because of the temporary status piece.

On this question, the NDP believes in the principle that if you're good enough to work here and if you're good enough to study here, you're good enough to stay here.

Could you advise us on whether or not that is an immigration policy the government should be adopting?


Sarom Rho
Organizer, Migrant Workers Alliance for Change

Yes, it's a policy decision to bring people here on temporary permits and keep them permanently temporary. These are the people who grow our food, but also students who are working in warehouses, in delivery and in restaurants, and many of the students who are part of the committee that held down the permanent protest.

Permanent resident status is not really just about the ability to stay or live in the country. It's fundamentally a mechanism for people to access the same rights, and protections and services.

Had the students had permanent resident status, they would have had the power to protect themselves and speak up when these agents did wrong, when colleges did wrong, which was largely what The Fifth Estate documentary was about.

Our work with care workers and with farm workers has shown us that without joint and several liability, without a regulatory mechanism, it's impossible for people to protect themselves.

Fundamentally, we call for permanent resident status and, in the lead-up to that, a regulatory regime for international students, hundreds of thousands of whom at a time are coming into the country each year.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

The students who are already here and who have been subject to this fraud scam are the students, in many ways, whom Canada is looking for. We're still looking for international students to come, but many of them are already here.

The government is embarking on a process of regularization. That's regularizing people and giving full status to people who are temporarily here in Canada, who have lost status, who are undocumented or who are refugees.

Do you think that as part of the measure for addressing this situation, the government should regularize the victims of this scam?

Maybe we'll start with Lovepreet.

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

Give a quick answer.


Lovepreet Singh
As an Individual

Yes, you're right. As you said earlier, if a person is good enough to study and work here, they should stay here.

NDP

Thank you.

I also just want to take a moment to recognize the South Asian community. When I was at the gathering in Brampton, there were about 200-300 people who showed up to support the students, and who just really treated you as though you were their children. It was very lovely to see. It was the strength of the community that really showed, which I very much appreciated.

I want to make a point of clarification here in terms of the supposed “special treatment” of giving the victims or the students an alternate permanent residency pathway. Isn't it the case that the students have paid exorbitant amounts of tuition fees, not because you're international students but because you're victims of fraud? You have had to pay tuition fees multiple times, and didn't actually get a return for those education fees. In addition to that, you're also faced with a situation in which you have had to hire lawyers to fight this battle, which is also costing a significant amount of money.

In light of the emotional stress and the trauma that you have experienced throughout all of this, the call is for the government to recognize that, to act in a compassionate and humanitarian way, and to offer you a special alternate pathway for permanent residency. Isn't that what you're calling for? It's just for me to be clear and to understand.


Lovepreet Singh
As an Individual

Yes, you're right.

We have to understand what our biggest loss is in this process. Our biggest loss is not the money. Our biggest loss is our precious time. That time, and the mental harassment we are facing right now.... We are feeling helpless. That mental harassment and the precious time we lost cannot be compensated for.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Some of your family members have reported the matter to the police. In some cases, I'm advised by students that when they reported it to the police, the police wouldn't believe them. In fact, the unscrupulous actors were harassing your families back home. That is a price the family is paying, too.

Can you elaborate on that for us?


Balbir Singh
As an Individual

Most of the students filed a complaint against those agents, but in the initial stage, the police didn't file anything against them, because these guys have political connections. Maybe they are so financially strong in India, and that's why the police didn't file anything, but now we are seeing some success in that.

There are some files and cases against them, so we hope for the best.

NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for their presentations.

Mr. Casey, first off, thank you for your work as the representative for the Federation of Students and, of course, for advocating for international students as well.

You mentioned in your presentation the concern that international students pay five times the tuition than that of domestic students. In the case of these victims, not only are they subject to the high tuition fees, but they are subject to having to pay it sometimes twice, if you will, because of the fraudulent activities that took place with the unscrupulous actors. In addition to that, they are also faced with legal fees that they have already incurred. Some of them have had to file to the Federal Court and to deal with this entire situation.

On the issue around ensuring that this is properly addressed, students are calling for the government to stay their deportation, to waive the inadmissibility based on misrepresentation and then, finally, to provide them with an alternative pathway to permanent residency. You touched on that, as well, in your comments.

Can you advise the committee?

Do you think that in providing them with an alternative pathway to permanent residency, such as the H and C application process or the regularization process, we're giving them special treatment compared to other international students?


James Casey
Research and Policy Analyst, Canadian Federation of Students

Yes. That's actually a great point.

When we visited these students and spoke to them directly, they wanted me to communicate one thing to this committee and to all the different stakeholders trying to see that these students have a pathway to justice. They made it a point for me to mention to everyone that they're not looking for any special treatment. What they are looking for is fairness.

They are making a specific point that they want the integrity of our immigration system to be upheld. They want it to be strong. They want it to be fair. At the same time, they are in the situation right now where for many of them, as far as we have heard from those different announcements from the minister, inadmissibility is not really subject to those actions that are currently taking place.

Again, the words aren't really matching up with the actions, so to speak. These students are more concerned about ensuring that the system is fair to everyone who comes here. They've made a specific point that they want the integrity of our system to be upheld and that they are not looking for any special treatment.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Yes, we've heard from the students that for them to be given an alternative pathway to permanent residency is not really deemed special treatment per se.

Do I understand that correctly from you?


James Casey
Research and Policy Analyst, Canadian Federation of Students

Yes, that's correct.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

In terms of dealing with the unscrupulous actors, this was something, as you mentioned, back in 2017. The committee studied this issue. These ghost consultants are still carrying on and preying on individuals. In this instance, it happens to be students. In other instances, it would be other immigration measures.

However, since 2017...these recommendations came forward and there's not much that seems to have corrected the situation. Here we are once again.

If actions were to be taken by the government, what would you say the government needs to do to address the issue of ghost consultants? How do we deal with these unscrupulous actors? How do we ensure that they don't prey on the students the way they are right now?


James Casey
Research and Policy Analyst, Canadian Federation of Students

I would say, because you mentioned that study or report from a few years ago, I believe it's recommendation 17, specifically, that talks about ghost consultants.

As well, we certainly need to have not just more regulation, but actual regulation around ghost consultants in this country. The fact of the matter is that these different ghost consultants...in this situation, this is just one education consultant who has so many different cases connected to him. We saw it as far back as 2013, when we knew he was forging documents and defrauding different students. The fact that it didn't raise any flags in the system or with the different departments is quite concerning.

We definitely need to tackle unethical practices and ensure that DLIs actually have the tools and resources to communicate among one another. We need to see them take a proactive approach to making sure that if they see a student coming to them and saying, “Hey, I just got told by my consultant there aren't any spaces here, but I was told I actually have a placement here. What's going on?”....

I would think, and I think most Canadians would think, that in an ideal situation, they would try to create some sort of communication within CBSA or IRCC whereby they are actually investigating this case, instead of letting it go on.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

For the students who have been subjected to fraud, of course, it is enormously distressing for them. But even without that situation, in your capacity at the Federation of Students you see lots of international students. What kinds of supports do you think need to be in place to support international students when they're away from their home and trying to build on their educational development, and also contribute to Canada as well? Is there anything that the universities or colleges can do to provide better support for their students?


James Casey
Research and Policy Analyst, Canadian Federation of Students

As a start, we shouldn't be raising giant, exorbitant amounts of tuition fees on these students. I have some of the figures in front of me for international undergraduate students. They pay $36,123 every single year, just on average. Here in Ontario it's significantly higher. I actually received an email yesterday from the University of Ottawa saying that they're raising international student tuition by 12%. That's already on top of a nearly $50,000 annual tuition fee on international students.

The facts are in front of us. It's very clearly a two-tiered system between domestic students and international students. As I mentioned before—

The Chair Salma Zahid
Liberal

I'm sorry. You have to wind up.


James Casey
Research and Policy Analyst, Canadian Federation of Students

—we see many different crises, but the actual solution to put in place to ensure that these students have the resources and the supports that they need is to essentially treat them like domestic students.

NDP

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for their presentation.

My question is to Ms. Boyden, who is the ADM from Ontario, from the Ministry of Colleges and Universities.

Could you advise the committee what the regulatory process is for private colleges in Ontario?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

Madam Chair, I'm hoping I can ask for a little clarity around the member's question. In terms of regulatory process, there's extensive legislation and regulation that exists related to registered private career colleges. Is there a specific component?

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

Okay, maybe more specifically, if there were a complaint about a particular private college, who investigates that and could you explain to the committee how that would be dealt with?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

If a concern was reported to the Superintendent of Private Career Colleges, there is an enforcement and inspection team that's responsible for working with our private career colleges. There's a whole range of different activities that can happen. We have a scaling enforcement model that begins with education and supporting our private career colleges proactively to ensure compliance with our regulations with our Private Career Colleges Act, and, as a result of that, through progressive enforcement we work to educate the operators and can scale that up through escalating compliance action if required.


Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

Is that a government superintendent or is that self-regulating? Do the colleges and universities themselves choose someone to be that superintendent?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

No, the superintendent is at arm's length of government but works within my division.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC

NDP

So when you say it's at arm's length of government, who makes the selection of that superintendent to do this task?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

Of the superintendent? That falls to the public servants in the Ontario public service.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

So the process of that investigation is done within government, that is to say maybe not within the ministry itself but it's within government. Am I right to understand that?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

It is within government but there is a very clear line between political involvement and the role of the superintendent.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Okay, I think I understand. Maybe I'll search it up.

Previous to this panel, we had a representative from the federation of students, Mr. James Casey, who advised the committee that international students—of course we know this—pay five times the tuition fees of their domestic counterparts. He also advised that the tuition fee for international students is slated to increase by another 12% in Ontario.

Is that correct?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

Institutions in Ontario, publicly funded colleges and universities, are established by acts of legislature, and there are separate legal entities that are responsible for the academic, operational and administrative matters of their organizations. This includes responsibility for administrative process and operational policies, including charging, collecting and reimbursing international student tuition and fees. It rests with the individual institutions to determine the fees that are charged to international students.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

What's the average comparison, then, between the international student fees and those of domestic students for Ontario? Can you give us a broad figure?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

I'm sorry, but I don't have that information at hand.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Is there something you can provide to the committee at a later time?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

I'd have to follow up.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

Thank you very much. I would appreciate that. I think that's an important piece to look into.

Also, in terms of the tuition fee increase, I understand that it's up to individual institutions to make that decision.

With respect to, I guess, follow-up information, if you can also provide the committee with information on the anticipated potential increases, on average, that might be taking place with international students.... Is that something you can provide us with by way of information?


Anna Boyden
Assistant Deputy Minister, Ministry of Colleges and Universities, Government of Ontario

Again, to reiterate the province's role, the tuition rates set for international students are done independently at each respective institution. It wouldn't be information that I would have easy access to any more than a member of the committee would.

Jenny Kwan Vancouver East, BC
NDP

The Ministry of Colleges and Universities has no idea whether the tuition fees are increasing or not. That's a little bit disturbing.

I think an issue here that was raised by the Federation of Students, and that is impacting international students, is that this whole fraudulent scam is also related to the tuition fees they pay. I just want to flag that as a major concern.