Roberta2 Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 The Dept of Immigration and Border Protection has a discussion paper on its website. Submissions close 31 October. It says that full details of the new visa will be announced later this year, and the new visa arrangement will start 1 July 2017. The five year period can be extended for up to five years at a time. However, it's clear that there will be no access to Medicare. The new visa will require a VAC. Looks like it won't be cheap. "The level of the VAC will need to be set in consideration of the potential budget impact of temporary parent visa holders who will not be in the workforce. This would include their impact on all services and infrastructure that are in day-to-day use. This reflects (sic) that people who arrive in Australia at the end of their working life have not made financial contributions to the development and maintenance of infrastructure and services, such as roads and public transport". "In order to apply for the new visa, it will not be necessary for the parent to have also applied for a permanent parent visa. Parents can, however, continue to lodge a permanent visa application if they wish". At the back are 14 questions that those making submissions may wish to comment on. Certainly a lot of issues in play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted September 24, 2016 Author Share Posted September 24, 2016 +After winning the election, Dutton is left with sky high expectations around parent visas from an agitated cross-section of the community who will demand he follow through on his promise. If this new tourist visa is out of reach for the standard parent, the community backlash will be loud and sustained, particularly given the Labor alternative regardless of it’s flaws, was “comprehensive, clear and reasonable” to quote the largest non-SBS Indian news outlet, Indian Link. His Department are likely trying to work out a compromise solution, knowing the demand for a simple parent tourist visa could possibly attract hundreds of thousands of elderly, non-English speaking new migrants. There are a myriad of potential issues to work through. For example, what would happen if their sponsor, in this case an Australian citizen, were to die? Should grandparents on a temporary visa be allowed to stay in Australia without their sponsor to look after children? Is it a good thing to have people living for decades in Australia but not of Australia in the form of citizenship? Unfortunately this is what happens when immigration policy is so completely dominated by asylum. Between elections, there is zero focus on these questions of family migration, or nearly any other kind of migration. Despite the total overhaul of immigration policy away from family reunion since the 1990s, the lack of thinking and engagement behind the scenes means the policy vacuum is filled by knee-jerk responses to pressure points applied at exactly the right time. There was no conversation about how to deal with a 25 year wait for elderly parents wanting to be with their family. There was no conversation about whether it is right or proper to pay over $40,000 for a visa. There was no consideration of what would happen to a growing community of elderly temporary residents and access to appropriate healthcare. Instead we get policy announcements at twenty paces outside the media bubble. As asylum policy blinded our collective conscious to the issues of temporary migration and the labour market for years, the first skirmish in the policy around parent visas for up to one in four Australians, first-generation migrants, has all the hallmarks of heading in the same direction, under the radar and away from public discussion until it’s likely too late.+ Source: Henry Sherrell. Under pressure in particular from Indian migrant groups in key marginal seats, the ALP promised in the last election campaign to bring in a new three year parent visa. It sailed pretty much under the radar screen. It talked about a bond of only $5,000 to cover costs. About these ads [h=3]Please share this:[/h] Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window) 7 Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) 7 Click to email (Opens in new window) [h=3]Related[/h]Immigration: Nation building or gatekeeping?In "Australian Immigration in the 21st Century" Compulsory voting and immigration legislationIn "Democracy" A Mongrel Nation?In "arthur calwell" This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.[h=1]Post navigation[/h]← Submission to the Working Holiday Maker review A British-Australia Free Trade Agreement? Focus on immigration → [h=2]ONE THOUGHT ON “UNDER THE RADAR: MAKING IMMIGRATION POLICY DURING AN ELECTION CAMPAIGN”[/h] Canberraon September 5, 2016 at 3:41 pmAustralua does not need to import pensioners, we are soon to face enough problems paying for our home grown ones, before I am called racist, xenophobic or any other such name, I am basing this on a purely economic basis . These policies were in place when the person sought citizenship, it should not be news to them how you can, or cannot bring your parents to Australua.Reply [h=3]Leave a Reply[/h] Search[h=1]SUBSCRIBE BY EMAIL[/h]Join 809 other followers [h=1]FEATURE WRITING[/h] Australian Immigration in the 21st Century [h=1]ABOUT ME[/h]My name is Henry Sherrell. I mostly write about migration, both in Australia and internationally. I used to work for the Migration Council Australia and the Department of Immigration and Citizenship. If you would like to get in contact, my twitter handle is @HENrysherrell and my email is henry.sherrell [at] gmail.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 (edited) The Dept of Immigration and Border Protection has a discussion paper on its website. Submissions close 31 October. It says that full details of the new visa will be announced later this year, and the new visa arrangement will start 1 July 2017. The five year period can be extended for up to five years at a time. However, it's clear that there will be no access to Medicare. The new visa will require a VAC. Looks like it won't be cheap. "The level of the VAC will need to be set in consideration of the potential budget impact of temporary parent visa holders who will not be in the workforce. This would include their impact on all services and infrastructure that are in day-to-day use. This reflects (sic) that people who arrive in Australia at the end of their working life have not made financial contributions to the development and maintenance of infrastructure and services, such as roads and public transport". "In order to apply for the new visa, it will not be necessary for the parent to have also applied for a permanent parent visa. Parents can, however, continue to lodge a permanent visa application if they wish". At the back are 14 questions that those making submissions may wish to comment on. Certainly a lot of issues in play. Have absolutely no intention of applying for this visa, but it will be interesting to see what the conditions will be. Raises lots of unanswered questions, eg will you be allowed to buy property, and if so with what restrictions, will you be allowed to work? When we came we could buy with FIRB permission, but could only rent out a new home, not allowed if purchasing an existing property, had to get permission to re-sell and I think someone has told me we now have a charge if we sell? It almost sounds like a mix between our 410 retirement visa ( ceased in 2005 to new applicants) the very expensive 405 investor retirement visa both self funded with no access to Medicare, and a temporary parent visa on similar lines. One interesting point about our visa is that it was initially a 2 year visa, then increased to 4 years, and now issued for 10 years, and has always been renewable. So who knows if it might end up for longer than 5 years? one problem with living here on a temporary retirement visa is the cost of health insurance for us oldies. It's very expensive and went up 42%, yes that is right, this year which really put a strain on many retirees! so has to be factored into the overall cost of living here. My husband actually went in to check that they hadn't put the decimal point in the wrong place!!! I think it might be a very expensive way to live here, time will tell. Edited September 24, 2016 by ramot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpleal Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 Have absolutely no intention of applying for this visa, but it will be interesting to see what the conditions will be. Raises lots of unanswered questions, eg will you be allowed to buy property, and if so with what restrictions, will you be allowed to work? When we came we could buy with FIRB permission, but could only rent out a new home, not allowed if purchasing an existing property, had to get permission to re-sell and I think someone has told me we now have a charge if we sell? It almost sounds like a mix between our 410 retirement visa ( ceased in 2005 to new applicants) the very expensive 405 investor retirement visa both self funded with no access to Medicare, and a temporary parent visa on similar lines. One interesting point about our visa is that it was initially a 2 year visa, then increased to 4 years, and now issued for 10 years, and has always been renewable. So who knows if it might end up for longer than 5 years? one problem with living here on a temporary retirement visa is the cost of health insurance for us oldies. It's very expensive and went up 42%, yes that is right, this year which really put a strain on many retirees! so has to be factored into the overall cost of living here. My husband actually went in to check that they hadn't put the decimal point in the wrong place!!! I think it might be a very expensive way to live here, time will tell. How much is your health insurance Ramot, if you don't mind me asking? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 How much is your health insurance Ramot, if you don't mind me asking? As far as I know you have to get overseas visitors insurance on a temporary visa, but check this, I'm no expert.We were lucky and got a very good deal through Medibank, you can't get the same one now, and it costs a lot more now, so I'm out of date. Ours is about $9,000 a year, we have top cover and have been able to claim everything, but I think a new policy will cost more now. Best Google Medibank, Bupa, web sites to get an idea. Another potential worry is that there was a rumour that one of the providers was refusing to renew people on the 405 visa because they have to completely re-apply for a new visa every 4 years, whereas ours is renewable every 10, so we haven't had any problem so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purpleal Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 As far as I know you have to get overseas visitors insurance on a temporary visa, but check this, I'm no expert.We were lucky and got a very good deal through Medibank, you can't get the same one now, and it costs a lot more now, so I'm out of date. Ours is about $9,000 a year, we have top cover and have been able to claim everything, but I think a new policy will cost more now. Best Google Medibank, Bupa, web sites to get an idea. Another potential worry is that there was a rumour that one of the providers was refusing to renew people on the 405 visa because they have to completely re-apply for a new visa every 4 years, whereas ours is renewable every 10, so we haven't had any problem so far. Wow - that is pretty steep. When we first moved here on a 457 (2005), our insurance through BUPA was almost $500 a month - initially a family of 3 but then we were 5. It didn't go up much with each addition though. Luckily, my husbands company paid for it until our PR came through. I would imagine then that a single retiree would be at least 5,000 a year. We will find out when my Mum comes over I guess! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 Wow - that is pretty steep. When we first moved here on a 457 (2005), our insurance through BUPA was almost $500 a month - initially a family of 3 but then we were 5. It didn't go up much with each addition though. Luckily, my husbands company paid for it until our PR came through. I would imagine then that a single retiree would be at least 5,000 a year. We will find out when my Mum comes over I guess! I really am no expert, but as we aren't eligible for Medicare, and are on an unusual visa, we have top cover, and on our visa we are restricted to the policy we can get. I really don't know anything about insurance cover for any one on the parent visa. Might be very different conditions, and more options available. Didn't mean to depress anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted September 24, 2016 Author Share Posted September 24, 2016 Health care is obviously one of the key questions. So is aged care. Question 12 at the back of the issues paper asks "What (if any) limits should be placed on the total liability of sponsors where their parent incurs significant health or aged care costs not covered by their private health insurance?" The relationship between this proposed new parent visa and the existing parent visas is also murky. Question 6: "The visa will not provide a pathway to permanent residence. Given the estimated lifetime cost to the budget identified in The Migrant Intake to Australia report (Productivity Commission Report - my addition) are there any circumstances where permanent residence should be available to parents?" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted September 24, 2016 Share Posted September 24, 2016 http://www.gm-parent-visas.com/new-temporary-visa-for-parents-with-children-in-australia-consultation-announced/ See a summary of the proposed new parent visa pathway here. Also (when the DIBP website is up - it is presently down for maintenance): https://www.border.gov.au/about/reports-publications/discussion-papers-submissions/temporary-visa-for-parents Best regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted September 25, 2016 Author Share Posted September 25, 2016 There has certainly been a lot of chopping and changing with the 410 visa. Holders are not eligible for the private health insurance rebate, so the cost of their health insurance is bound to increase. Even for those Australians entitled to the rebate, the cost of private health insurance has been going up annually at a rate much higher than inflation. (Currently a subject of the usual public controversy). The group Beria has long been campaigning for a path to permanent residency for holders of these 410 visas, to no apparent effect. No doubt the government fears the precedent that would be created if retirement aged holders of temporary visas were given a path to permanent residency, which would mean immediate access to Medicare. And eventually to aged care. November 2013: The Department of Immigration categorically announced that ‘the provision of a pathway to permanent residence for retirement visa holders is not currently under active consideration across Government’. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted September 25, 2016 Share Posted September 25, 2016 (edited) There has certainly been a lot of chopping and changing with the 410 visa. Holders are not eligible for the private health insurance rebate, so the cost of their health insurance is bound to increase. Even for those Australians entitled to the rebate, the cost of private health insurance has been going up annually at a rate much higher than inflation. (Currently a subject of the usual public controversy). The group Beria has long been campaigning for a path to permanent residency for holders of these 410 visas, to no apparent effect. No doubt the government fears the precedent that would be created if retirement aged holders of temporary visas were given a path to permanent residency, which would mean immediate access to Medicare. And eventually to aged care. November 2013: The Department of Immigration categorically announced that ‘the provision of a pathway to permanent residence for retirement visa holders is not currently under active consideration across Government’. [/QUote] There has actually been almost no change to the 410 visa in the 14 years we have been on it. The only changes have been positive since then. Changed from a 2 year visa to 4 and now valid for 10,renewed almost instantly and work restrictions lifted. ref. your last statement our group met with Mr Dutton recently, he kindly arranged a meeting with us and was with us for about 1 hr 30, and the visa is under review with a definite answer reference the possibility of PR due this year? We were also assured that theoretically(my words) we were safe on this visa, no plans for change apart from the PR review. There are apparently only approximately 3,500 left of us in the country, so not a large group and fading fast!!! We have no complaints being on this visa, we knew the conditions and as previously written there have been no major changes. I agree that the cost of health insurance seems to increase annually, but no other policy type (overseas visitors? I think) was slugged with a 42% increase like us. Your last point about being eligible for Medicare etc. if offered PR. is the reason why we are considering now we can of applying for the parent visa, out of our group which meet up occasionally only 2 of us have children here. Edited September 25, 2016 by MaggieMay24 Fixing quote Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted September 25, 2016 Author Share Posted September 25, 2016 I have been trying to work out why it's the Indians and not the Chinese who have pushed so hard for this new visa. Have just read that it's because the Chinese, but not the Indians, who can generally meet the Balance of Family test for the Contributory Parent Visa quite easily- because of China's decades long one- child policy. Duh! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toOZ2012 Posted September 27, 2016 Share Posted September 27, 2016 Add to the fact that a CPV is taking upto 2 years and will only get worse in the coming years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted September 27, 2016 Author Share Posted September 27, 2016 If the CPV continues at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roberta2 Posted October 22, 2016 Author Share Posted October 22, 2016 The economist Judith Sloan has an op ed in The Australian today. She says that the number of planned permanent immigrants is too high and has been for some time. In relation to the proposed temporary migrant parent visa she says " In theory, those entering under this new visa category will be required to have private health insurance but, as in the case with international students, this requirement is impossible to police. (International students lob up at emergency departments of public hospitals and are not denied treatment even if they can't or won't pay. There is also no integrity in relation to the use of Medicare cards.) And does anyone honestly think the government will insist on 80 year old granny being deported when her five year visa period expires?" In relation to the real cost to the taxpayer of the contributory parent visa, she says "if Morrison were really serious about budget repair, he would be doing something about this scheme". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javadxster Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 will the parents have to pass family balance test for this temporary visa? guess will find out soon in july Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MaggieMay24 Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 will the parents have to pass family balance test for this temporary visa? I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that they would not have to pass the BoF test for this visa. It sounds essentially similar to the 461 visa - temporary, no path to PR, no access to Australian government benefits (Medicare, pension, etc.) IMO, it's a good visa for those who want to spend a long period here with family but for whatever reason the existing parent visas aren't an option, e.g. BoF test, cost, time to process, etc. The economist Judith Sloan has an op ed in The Australian today. She says that the number of planned permanent immigrants is too high and has been for some time. In relation to the proposed temporary migrant parent visa she says " In theory, those entering under this new visa category will be required to have private health insurance but, as in the case with international students, this requirement is impossible to police. (International students lob up at emergency departments of public hospitals and are not denied treatment even if they can't or won't pay. There is also no integrity in relation to the use of Medicare cards.) And does anyone honestly think the government will insist on 80 year old granny being deported when her five year visa period expires?" In relation to the real cost to the taxpayer of the contributory parent visa, she says "if Morrison were really serious about budget repair, he would be doing something about this scheme". I assume students who rock up at the hospital with no health coverage, will eventually find their student visa cancelled for breaching the condition to have health coverage. The same should happen with those with this new parent visa if the health coverage isn’t in place. I would also assume the government will deport an 80-year old granny if she doesn’t renew this visa and overstays the existing one. Why should they be treated differently than any other visa holder. I’ve also read that the government is considering the costs of the CPV since it doesn’t offset the cost to the government over the life of the visa holder. Perhaps if this new visa comes in, the number of CPVs will drop and it will become less of an issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted November 30, 2016 Share Posted November 30, 2016 I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that they would not have to pass the BoF test for this visa. It sounds essentially similar to the 461 visa - temporary, no path to PR, no access to Australian government benefits (Medicare, pension, etc.) IMO, it's a good visa for those who want to spend a long period here with family but for whatever reason the existing parent visas aren't an option, e.g. BoF test, cost, time to process, etc. I assume students who rock up at the hospital with no health coverage, will eventually find their student visa cancelled for breaching the condition to have health coverage. The same should happen with those with this new parent visa if the health coverage isn’t in place. I would also assume the government will deport an 80-year old granny if she doesn’t renew this visa and overstays the existing one. Why should they be treated differently than any other visa holder. I’ve also read that the government is considering the costs of the CPV since it doesn’t offset the cost to the government over the life of the visa holder. Perhaps if this new visa comes in, the number of CPVs will drop and it will become less of an issue. I can only speak for our experience of living in Oz for 13 years on a long term temporary totally self funded visa with no access to Medicare. The first thing we are asked for is our Medicare card, either at the Dr's etc. then we explain we are not eligible and have private health coverage. We are then presented with the bill when we leave and have to pay there and then, and reclaim against our health provider. So far we have not had to go to a state hospital for any emergency treatment, so I don't know what happens there, and I don't know what would happen if someone who should have health cover doesn't. We would be in breach of our visa conditions, so I can only assume that your visa would be in jeopardy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toOZ2012 Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Asking for a relative: Anyone on a 405 visa? There seems to be some changes to health insurance requirements and compliant policies from providers have been pulled - possibly for a review? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted December 1, 2016 Share Posted December 1, 2016 Asking for a relative: Anyone on a 405 visa? There seems to be some changes to health insurance requirements and compliant policies from providers have been pulled - possibly for a review? We know several, I seem to remember them mentioning that certain providers had decided not to insure people on this visa? Apparently there are only about 300/350 in the country on this visa according to Peter Dutton when we met with him. Our insurance on the 410 visa went up 42% this year!!!! Not funny. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toOZ2012 Posted December 4, 2016 Share Posted December 4, 2016 We know several, I seem to remember them mentioning that certain providers had decided not to insure people on this visa? Apparently there are only about 300/350 in the country on this visa according to Peter Dutton when we met with him. Our insurance on the 410 visa went up 42% this year!!!! Not funny. That's terrible. I called around. BUPA has it at ridiculous prices, justifying it by saying that they cover a few useless extras. Australian Unity pulled the cover down. Was told to call a few weeks later in case a new one will take it's place. Medibank don't insure people on 405 The only good one so far is HCF. They are insuring 405s with the same policy as 457s, which is pretty comprehensive and top hospital cover costs $240/month. I am seriously worried about the future of 405, if there are such small numbers in the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted December 4, 2016 Share Posted December 4, 2016 That's terrible. I called around. BUPA has it at ridiculous prices, justifying it by saying that they cover a few useless extras. Australian Unity pulled the cover down. Was told to call a few weeks later in case a new one will take it's place. Medibank don't insure people on 405 The only good one so far is HCF. They are insuring 405s with the same policy as 457s, which is pretty comprehensive and top hospital cover costs $240/month. I am seriously worried about the future of 405, if there are such small numbers in the country. The thing that the people we know on the 405 visa are finding, is that it is just unaffordable long term, especially with no hope of PR. Several have been here for over 10 years, and almost all are giving up. They say that they have to re-apply about 9 months before the 4 years is up because the whole visa has to be re-applied for, medical done, police record, and of course pay a lot of money, and it takes so long to be processed. Sorry if if all this is negative, but this is what is mentioned when we meet up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted December 4, 2016 Share Posted December 4, 2016 The thing that the people we know on the 405 visa are finding, is that it is just unaffordable long term, especially with no hope of PR.Several have been here for over 10 years, and almost all are giving up. They say that they have to re-apply about 9 months before the 4 years is up because the whole visa has to be re-applied for, medical done, police record, and of course pay a lot of money, and it takes so long to be processed. Sorry if if all this is negative, but this is what is mentioned when we meet up. You can apply for the renewal of the 405 visa a day before the current visa expires if needs be - a Bridging Visa is granted upon submission of a valid onshore application. Also, there are valuable tax exemptions available in respect of foreign income and capital gains. Best regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ramot Posted December 4, 2016 Share Posted December 4, 2016 (edited) You can apply for the renewal of the 405 visa a day before the current visa expires if needs be - a Bridging Visa is granted upon submission of a valid onshore application. Also, there are valuable tax exemptions available in respect of foreign income and capital gains. Best regards. Thank you I will pass that on, I think the people I know just feel vulnerable without the visa renewed. I was only passing on what the approximate 10 couples we know have said when we meet up, so hopefully didn't mislead anyone. Does your income advice apply to 410 visa holders as well? Thank you. Edited December 4, 2016 by ramot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan Collett Posted December 4, 2016 Share Posted December 4, 2016 Thank you I will pass that on, I think the people I know just feel vulnerable without the visa renewed.Does your income advice apply to 410 visa holders as well? Thank you. It does, yes. Best regards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.