New Rules Coming for Entry into U.S.
The events of September 11, 2001 and the subsequent “war on terrorism” that has resulted appear like they will continue to impact the way we travel for years, if not decades, to come.
In the very near future, new legislation passed on the United States Congress will begin to have an effect on the flow of tourists and other visitors to the U.S. The U.S. Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act of 2004 contains provisions that will being to kick in at the end of this year and come fully into effect at the end of 2007.
Essentially, the law requires that all travelers entering the U.S. -- including returning Americans -- carry passports or some other, yet to be determined form of secure I.D. Beginning on December 31, 2006 this will apply to all air and sea travelers into the U.S. And beginning on December 31, 2007 it will be applied to all those crossing at land borders.
While there are still discussions happening between the Canadian and U.S. governments about the possibility of exempting Canada from these requirements, it appears increasingly likely that a flat out exemption is not in the cards. In one way or another, Canadians will have to show proof of citizenship through some form of secure I.D. when traveling to the U.S. in the future. And for most Canadians, this means a passport.
Obviously this has huge implications for Canadian citizens used to going to the U.S. with nothing more than a driver’s license and a copy of their birth certificate. Naturalized citizens of Canada and permanent residents are less likely to be inconvenienced by this change because they are much more likely to a) have valid passports and b) be accustomed to carrying them as I.D. when traveling internationally.
But the effect of this law will also impact Americans since they will have to meet the same requirements as non-U.S. citizens when seeking to re-enter the U.S. and therefore won’t be admitted to Canada without first showing they have I.D. that will allow them to return home. And currently Americans are far less likely than Canadians to hold passports (24% of Americans versus 39% of Canadians have valid passports).
Many Canadian businesses across the country depend on American clientele to keep them profitable. So a major reduction in U.S. visitors to Canada could have a serious negative impact on our economy.
Because of the relatively high Canadian dollar, we are already seeing a decline in cross border traffic in some areas. One of the busiest border crossings in Canada, the Peace Bridge between Buffalo, New York and Fort Erie, Ontario, recently recorded the lowest number of crossings in a 24-hour period since records have been kept. Imagine how a continuously strong Canadian dollar combined with the new onerous requirements to travel to and from Canada will have on the number of Americans visiting us by 2008.
American officials from border states like Washington are just as concerned as their Canadian counterparts about the effect this law could have on cross-border commerce once it is fully implemented. Since 9/11 many Canadian residents, especially immigrants to Canada, have found it to be an increasingly less pleasant experience to travel to the U.S. for business or pleasure as American officials have become more vigilant. The new I.D. requirements could be enough for many people to decide to go shopping or vacation elsewhere.
Some, including the former Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Denis Coderre, have proposed a new, high-tech, national I.D. card as a solution that will allow for the continued efficient flow of people and goods between our two countries. However, such a system will likely take years to implement and would probably end up costing billions of dollars. Moreover, the notion of a compulsory, government-issued I.D. goes against the traditions of civil liberties that exist in both Canada and the U.S. because of the amount of information it would put in the hands of government and the invasions of personal privacy it could lead to.
Others are calling for a “North American security parameter” that would involve harmonizing our border control and immigration policies with the U.S. to a greater degree and allow for the sharing of information and intelligence between the two countries. Many Canadians, however, are uncomfortable with the implications this would have on our sovereignty and our ability to formulate policy in these areas as an independent country.
In the short term it appears that a lot more Canadians will be requiring passports if they expect to continue to make regular visits to our neighbour to the south. At the very least, expect the lines at the passport office to get a little bit longer over the next 18 months.
Immigration Consultants Are Now Regulated
April 13, 2006 marks a significant date for non-lawyer immigration representatives in Canada. By Thursday, all “immigration consultants”, as they have come to be known, must have at least attempted to meet the standards that have been set by the Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants (CSIC) for full membership in order to continue to practice.
In late 2003, the then-Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, Denis Coderre, announced a plan to regulate immigration consultants. Until then, anyone who wanted to could call themselves an immigration consultant and represent, for a fee, clients applying for immigration. Immigration lawyers, public interest groups and many consultants themselves had found this to be unacceptable.
Prior to CSIC, clients of unscrupulous consultants who had been ripped off or given incompetent representation had few options available to them. Given that prospective immigrants are often in a vulnerable position with respect to the Canadian legal system because of a lack of language ability and the fact that they are usually overseas and unable to access Canadian courts, a workable regulatory system was needed to ensure consumer protection.
After considerable efforts on the part of voluntary organizations representing consultants and the issuance of several reports over the years by various government and parliamentary committees calling for regulation, it finally became a reality.
From April 2004 until now, all members of CSIC, an independent, non-profit organization, have been what are called “transitional members”. As the transition period is ending on Thursday, members who have met the requirements for full membership, which include English or French language testing and a comprehensive test of competency, will become full members. Thereafter, full members will be allowed to identify themselves according to the designation Certified Canadian Immigration Consultant (CCIC). (Those who have attempted these tests but not yet met the required standard have until October 31, 2006 to re-write and pass the exams.)
(Full disclosure: Over the course of the last five months, I have done some communications work for CSIC. However, this column was neither commissioned nor paid for by CSIC. As well, I am a member of CSIC myself.)
For those seeking the assistance of someone in the field of immigration, this is all fairly good news. In the very near future, consumers can be assured that all certified immigration consultants will have a professional level of knowledge, competence and language ability.
If you are considering hiring someone to act on your behalf (or on behalf of your family member) you should check to ensure this person is either a Canadian lawyer (i.e., a member of one of Canada’s provincial law societies) or a member of CSIC. These are the only individuals now legally authorized to represent applicants applying for immigration to Canada. Each CSIC member is issued a membership number that they can provide you as proof of membership.
The main goal of regulating immigration consultants is to protect the public, specifically those in need of immigration services of some kind. As noted, many of these individuals are overseas and may have difficulty accessing information as to who can or cannot act on their behalf. CSIC has set up an informative website, www.csic-scci.ca, which lists all of their members as well as how to lodge a complaint if you are dissatisfied with the services that have been provided by a CSIC member.
For regulation to be a success, the Canadian public, as well as those interested in becoming Canadians, need to be properly informed. If unregulated consultants continue to be hired by individuals seeking immigration services, whether out of ignorance or deception, the regulatory system will not have its desired effect. Consumers ultimately need to be responsible for the choices they make. At this time, CSIC is primarily focused on regulating its members; therefore, if a consumer hires a non-CSIC member consultant they are putting themselves in a very vulnerable position with respect to consumer protection.
Regulation of consultants was long overdue when it finally was enacted two years ago. I believe it is in everyone’s interest that it is a success and that those seeking immigration services have proper assurance that they will get competent representation when they hire a certified consultant to act on their behalf. The immigration consulting industry will be healthier because of regulation and consumers will be better served by it.