Once I checked my inbox this morning I discovered a very important electronic mail from a company of immigration professionals which I belong to.

The truth is, this electronic mail is so essential to my means to observe immigration legislation that I forwarded it to all of my workers, saved it in our firm's digital address book, and printed it for inclusion within the binder that sits on my desk proper by my telephone.

But, the truth is that this electronic mail makes me feel like I am a silent associate in a bit of a deception being perpetrated on the general public by CIC. Let me explain.

Residentship and Immigration Canada clearly takes nice public delight within the quantity of information and resources it supplies to the general public through its website and call centre. CIC boasts that "All the varieties and data that you want to apply for a visa are available for free on this website."

Therefore, it is no surprise that within the website's FAQ, the answer to the query: "Do I want an immigration representative to assist me apply?" is a "no."

The public is told that "The Authorities of Canada treats everyone equally, whether or not they use a representative or not."

Will your case be processed more rapidly when you hire a consultant? CIC advises that "For those who select to hire a representative, your utility is not going to be given special attention by the immigration officer."

Is this really true? Is all the information you want really on the market? Do you want a lawyer? Wouldn't it make any difference you probably have one? Put one other way: are people who find themselves using attorneys and consultants to deal with their immigration purposes just throwing away their money?

I hate answering these questions since doing other folks's immigration work is how I make my living. Individuals would be justified in being sceptical about my answers to those questions.

But the fact is "all the information you want" is not really on the market and, sure, in lots of cases a lawyer or guide's involvement can spell the difference between success, delay, or abject failure.

The knowledge at cic.gc.ca is common in nature and cannot probably contemplate the infinite factual situations that applicants would possibly current when applying. Furthermore, the brokers at the call centre cannot and do not provide callers with legal advice. It is simply not in their mandate to do so. Instead, they give "common information on the CIC lines of business... provide case particular information, and settle for orders for CIC publications and utility kits."

In other words, they can not inform you what you 'ought to' do when confronted with obstacles or strategic choices to make.

Additionally, when you encounter a problem that must be escalated, which will not be unusual, you'll discover precious little info on the CIC website as to where to direct your grievance or question.

Not so with immigration professionals.

The e-mail I received this page morning is an replace of CIC's protocol on how immigration professionals should direct their queries. The correspondence accommodates the e-mail address for every Canadian visa publish abroad and the names and e-mail addresses of the immigration program managers at each of these offices. It tells us how, and to whom, to direct case-specific enquiries to the Case Administration Department in Ottawa and when and learn how to comply with up if we do not obtain a timely reply. It provides instructions on the way to direct communications relating to high quality of service complaints, conditions involving potential misconduct or malfeasance of immigration officers, procedures, operational and selection coverage, and processing times and levels.

To my information, this data shouldn't be shared with members of the public. CIC's failure to publicise this data doesn't replicate preferential remedy for individuals who are represented. Instead, it's merely an acknowledgement that immigration professionals do, and have at all times, played a vital position in making an overburdened and under-resourced program operate in any respect (if not operate well).

Sharing this information with the general public would result in an avalanche of correspondence being directed at senior officials who're spread out so thinly that they may by no means get another work done.

It is true that, except in exceptional and deserving cases, hiring a lawyer or guide can't get an software moved from the back of the road to the entrance of the line. Also, an officer will not approve an applicant who shouldn't be qualified just because he or she is represented. Nevertheless, additionally it is true that an trustworthy and experienced representative won't clog up the system by submitting an software that merely won't fly.