Am i resticted on moving state on a 176

[TraceyandAlan]

Hi all,

I know there was a tread about this before and the general consensus was that by law D.I.A.C could,nt intervene if you chose to move from the state in which you had been granted your 176,but with the release of the S.M.P s for a couple of states is there anything in it to say that this has changed?

[melbournegirlinny]

No. I've written on this question many times on PIO. If you do a search, you'll see my comments on this topic and in some of them I've given the legal basis.

 

But I'll go over it here again. Australia is a federation. The Federal government is the only government in Australia with powers over migration and citizenship (set out in the Constitution). The states have no legal power whatsoever over migration or citizenship and therefore cannot attach conditions to a visa. Hence, it does not matter that some states have issued new SMPs. It is only the Federal government that can attach conditions to a visa and they do not attach any condition to a state sponsored 176 visa. In other words, there is no legal condition attached to a 176 visa which requires you to live in the state that sponsored you.

[Guest UFO]

No. I've written on this question many times on PIO. If you do a search, you'll see my comments on this topic and in some of them I've given the legal basis.

 

But I'll go over it here again. Australia is a federation. The Federal government is the only government in Australia with powers over migration and citizenship (set out in the Constitution). The states have no legal power whatsoever over migration or citizenship and therefore cannot attach conditions to a visa. Hence, it does not matter that some states have issued new SMPs. It is only the Federal government that can attach conditions to a visa and they do not attach any condition to a state sponsored 176 visa. In other words, there is no legal condition attached to a 176 visa which requires you to live in the state that sponsored you.

 

IF I may, i like to ask a follow up question:

 

What if you have sponsor from WA, and you objective is to get msc/phd in computer science for the tirst three years of living in Australia.

 

But all the universities in WA have rejected you, but University of Sydney accepts you, is this reasonablel cause to transfer the sponsor?

[melbournegirlinny]

IF I may, i like to ask a follow up question:

 

What if you have sponsor from WA, and you objective is to get msc/phd in computer science for the tirst three years of living in Australia.

 

But all the universities in WA have rejected you, but University of Sydney accepts you, is this reasonablel cause to transfer the sponsor?

 

 

If you have a 176 visa this means you have permanent residency. You can go and live anywhere you want in Australia and can study anywhere you want in Australia.

 

If you do not yet have a visa but have applied for it using a WA state sponsorship, then you just wait to get your 176 visa. You do not need to transfer sponsor.

[Peach]

But morally you have to weigh up how you feel about taking a visa from the quota for that state, that might otherwise have gone to someone who actually wanted to live there. But all's fair in love and visa applications or so they say. :wubclub:

[Guest clayty]

I think you have a moral obligation to give the state that was good enough to grant you sponsorship a fair go first....but thats me.....

 

Cheers

Paul

[vinnybow]

australian law dictates that you are allowed to move 4 inches to the right, 3 to the left, 5 to the rear, and an applaudable 6 forward, hope this helps

[TraceyandAlan]

I think you have a moral obligation to give the state that was good enough to grant you sponsorship a fair go first....but thats me.....

 

Cheers

Paul

 

Hey Paul,Not sure when you applied for your visa ,but for us it's been 2 years and numerous changes on D.I.A.C s behalf i have'nt felt much "moral obligations" coming from there side so sorry if you think i'm not play fair with them.. no offence intended though!

Having said that the Q was purely hypothetical.Cheers

[Peach]

Nothing to do with playing fair with DIAC, but it is to do with playing fair with the other people who are applying for state sponsorship with the intention of living in their nominated state...

[Guest clayty]

Hey Paul,Not sure when you applied for your visa ,but for us it's been 2 years and numerous changes on D.I.A.C s behalf i have'nt felt much "moral obligations" coming from there side so sorry if you think i'm not play fair with them.. no offence intended though!

Having said that the Q was purely hypothetical.Cheers

 

I too have been at it for some time thanks

 

Australia owes us nothing, we are not entitled to a visa......they can do as they wish,just wish this country was half as fussy

All I am saying is maybe if the DIAC thinks this system is being manipulated they will make yet further changes.....so it might be that the few spoil it for the many

 

Cheers

Paul

[Ozzieland]

I too have been at it for some time thanks

 

Australia owes us nothing, we are not entitled to a visa......they can do as they wish,just wish this country was half as fussy

All I am saying is maybe if the DIAC thinks this system is being manipulated they will make yet further changes.....so it might be that the few spoil it for the many

 

Cheers

Paul

 

No we are not entitled to a visa but we are entitled to a fair system. Yes, we wish to be in Australia becaiuse that is what we want for our lives and therefore, we have paid visa fees and have been promised a prossessing time of 6 months not a waiting period of over 2 years. Rules are changing faster than ever and with so much of money invested in uncertainty, that leaves the investor at a loss and no turning back. Australia are not calling out for people because they like our faces but because they need the skills we have. It has to be a win win situation for all and once the ground rules are laid and fees have been paid, you cannot back off from what is promised just because of your whims and fancies. It talks a lot of the integrity of the person and unfortunately the country that they represent.

[Guest clayty]

No we are not entitled to a visa but we are entitled to a fair system. Yes, we wish to be in Australia becaiuse that is what we want for our lives and therefore, we have paid visa fees and have been promised a prossessing time of 6 months not a waiting period of over 2 years. Rules are changing faster than ever and with so much of money invested in uncertainty, that leaves the investor at a loss and no turning back. Australia are not calling out for people because they like our faces but because they need the skills we have. It has to be a win win situation for all and once the ground rules are laid and fees have been paid, you cannot back off from what is promised just because of your whims and fancies. It talks a lot of the integrity of the person and unfortunately the country that they represent.

 

Look, at the end of the day you would have applied for a 175 if you had the required points.......so if you are applying for a 176 from a certain state simply in order to gain a visa (with no intention of ever moving to the sponsoring state) then you are manipulating the system,and possibly taking the place of a family that genuinely wants to live there.

I have read on here that DIAC actually read what is said on this forum,therefore I'm sure they are aware of this.

If you are going to do it I can't understand why you would want to advertise the fact?

The state have offered to sponsor you in good faith,and at the same time your points requirment is less as well.

It just seems wrong to me,thats simply my opinion

Good luck to you all

Cheers

Paul

[Ozzieland]

Look, at the end of the day you would have applied for a 175 if you had the required points.......so if you are applying for a 176 from a certain state simply in order to gain a visa (with no intention of ever moving to the sponsoring state) then you are manipulating the system,and possibly taking the place of a family that genuinely wants to live there.

I have read on here that DIAC actually read what is said on this forum,therefore I'm sure they are aware of this.

If you are going to do it I can't understand why you would want to advertise the fact?

The state have offered to sponsor you in good faith,and at the same time your points requirment is less as well.

It just seems wrong to me,thats simply my opinion

Good luck to you all

Cheers

Paul

 

Unquestionable... but a person who has been treated the way many have been, only know how DIAC / the Government have manipulated their own system by changing the rules so many times. I am not justifying anyone's wrong doings but I can understand what the person has gone through after investing their livelihood only to realise that this was all a game.

[musmanasghar]

Circumstances change with person to person

IMHO i am v much satisfied with ACT and there behavior till now .. ACT is the only state who kept there selves with there applicants and they responded every time.

I am sure ACT will be more welcoming regarding to job aspects and living .... i will try to make sure that my commitment with ACT must be fulfilled.

your State sponsored you because they need u.

but still its your decision .... do whatever you want ....

[Guest]

I think too, that if you promised a state that you would live there for 2 years, you should at least attemt that.

We applied for a state where we would love to live for 2 years, 2 years ago. Now our situation has changed and I have opportunities in another state that I do not want to miss (PhD research, which is hard to get into for me). On top of that, there are't many jobs in that state at the moment anyway, so it would be hard to get a good opportunity for that as well, which would improve after further study. So they can wait a little I reckon, or at least I won't feel guilty that I won't live there for the first 2 years, but I will go on holidays and stuff.

 

Situations change and sometimes it just is not the best thing to keep your promise. But I think that if you possibly can, you should. "State is boring" is not a very good excuse to break a promise I think.

[Guest Lankan1]

If you have a 176 visa this means you have permanent residency. You can go and live anywhere you want in Australia and can study anywhere you want in Australia.

 

If you do not yet have a visa but have applied for it using a WA state sponsorship, then you just wait to get your 176 visa. You do not need to transfer sponsor.

 

 

Hi

 

If you get a SS from a state you are not eligible to apply for centerlink for 2 years. Is this only centerlink or you cannot apply for medicare as well??? Please some one clarify

 

Tx

[melbournegirlinny]

Hi

 

If you get a SS from a state you are not eligible to apply for centerlink for 2 years. Is this only centerlink or you cannot apply for medicare as well??? Please some one clarify

 

Tx

 

You are eligible for Medicare from the beginning of having your PR visa.

 

See:

Skilled – Sponsored (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 176)

 

Also, it is true you have to wait for most benefits from Centrelink even if you have PR. But not all. See the following link:

 

Payments if you have a permanent residence visa

 

I think you are eligible for child care benefit from the beginning and Special benefit if you are in dire financial circumstances. But you'd need to check at the time you move to Australia on what is available.

[ovel]

Unquestionable... but a person who has been treated the way many have been, only know how DIAC / the Government have manipulated their own system by changing the rules so many times. I am not justifying anyone's wrong doings but I can understand what the person has gone through after investing their livelihood only to realise that this was all a game.

 

 

So, I didn't understand, for example, I have been assessed as a Telecommunication Engineer, and currently I see the VIC SMP doesn't have available position for my occupation. However if we just watched at seek.com.au, we'd see that Melbourne has 738 vacancies there, but Adelaide, those SMP contains my occupation, has 158 vacancies only. The question is: can I get, for example, SA SS and then 176 visa, but going to live and work in VIC ? I've read all topic, but couldn't find answer on this simple question

 

p.s. I was very disappointed when I saw the VIC SMP didn't have a Telecommunication Engineer occupation

[Guest GC73]

To answer this question you simply have to look at the DIAC site. Under the obligations of a 176 State Sponsored Visa it states:

 

Skilled – Sponsored (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 176)

Main applicant and secondary applicant obligations

 

1. You and any secondary applicants must comply with all Australian laws as permanent residents.

2. If you are nominated by a State or Territory government, you need to agree to:

 

• remain in the State or Territory for a period of at least two (2) years
  
• keep the State or Territory government informed of changes in address details before and after arrival
  
• be prepared to complete surveys and provide information as required.
  

Before lodging an application, please read all related obligation requirements.

[Peach]

GC73 that's not the compete answer, as melbournegirlginnie points out http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/99720-am-i-resticted-moving-state-176-a.html#post912435

 

The obligations in 176 are only moral, there's nothing in law to back them up - so you are free to move states without risk to your visa.

[Guest GC73]

Yes I am aware this is only a moral obligation and have read many views on it over the past month or so, but how long do you think it will remain the case?

 

The more internet forums such as this promote the fact you can just ignore your obligations and switch states as you choose, the more likely DIAC are to do something about it.

 

Now State Sponsorship carries such a premium by way of priority processing, I'd not be at all surprised to see DIAC introduce some stricter measures regards honouring your comittments to the state that sponsored you. I'm sure there'll always be genuine cases for switching states, but if it becomes the norm that people expect this, then it does take away opportunities from those who have reason for and intentions of living and working in that particular state.

[ovel]

Now State Sponsorship carries such a premium by way of priority processing, I'd not be at all surprised to see DIAC introduce some stricter measures regards honouring your comittments to the state that sponsored you. I'm sure there'll always be genuine cases for switching states, but if it becomes the norm that people expect this, then it does take away opportunities from those who have reason for and intentions of living and working in that particular state.

 

I hope DIAC won't introduce changes soon. However, I see the VIC SMP was wrong calculated, or how could they explain that amount of Telecom Egineer vacancies in VIC more than in SA?

[Peach]

I hope DIAC won't introduce changes soon. However, I see the VIC SMP was wrong calculated, or how could they explain that amount of Telecom Egineer vacancies in VIC more than in SA?

 

Easy, they don't base the SOL on a snapshot of current vacancies?

[JayBone]

There is absolutely nothing to stop somebody moving interstate at anytime, even during the first two years.

 

How can a government possibly say to a migrant that you must remain in a specific area in the country, isn't that a form of imprisonment?

 

In my opinion, the DIAC will not make changes to the system to remedy this because it would be against peoples human rights, remember, a 176 visa lasts for 5 years, what if you have been applying for work in NT for 3 years, with no luck and then you are offered a job in WA, you are not doing anything bad by any other DIAC applicant who may only want to go to NT, you are looking after yourself, what else could you do?

 

I personally appled for PR in SA, i am going there in 2 weeks, i will then travel for a year, then i want to return there, if after that year i cannot find work in SA or FIFO, i will move, simple. It is not morally wrong, it is not unfair to other SA SS applicants, it is just the way the cookie crumbles xxx

[ajs604]

Hi all,

I know there was a tread about this before and the general consensus was that by law D.I.A.C could,nt intervene if you chose to move from the state in which you had been granted your 176,but with the release of the S.M.P s for a couple of states is there anything in it to say that this has changed?

 

Dear all I had to respond to this post as I feel quite strongly about this matter regardless of the numerous other posts that contain similar contents. I am also a holder of a 176 visa & live in Victoria. My feeling is that the holder of a 176 visa made a moral obligation & commitment to stay in the identified sponsoring state for the 2 year period during the application stage. There has been a lot of discussion on this matter. People should really do their research before applying for sponsorship in a state & area they want to live, work, send children to school ect.

I know a lot of people apply for 176 visa's as the processing time is typically quicker than a 175. It seems that a lot of people use the 176 visa to get entry into Australia regardless of the moral obligation. I feel that a 2 year obligation is nothing & it also allows you to give something back to the state that brought you here in the first place. In my opinion people who move state with in this 2 year period should be made to apply for another visa or be asked to leave Australia - which would allow opportunities for other genuine people passionate on moving here. I am sorry if this post has angered people & I realise that everyone’s situation is different. However, I feel strongly on the obligations of the 176 & feel that this period should be mandatory. Just remember 2 years is nothing compared to a whole life time here