I've just lifted the followig extract out of the DIAC annual report for 2006/7. Unfortunately, all that it does is to confirm the advice which Alan Collett and other Agents started to give about 7 or 8 months ago.
Here are the Official Words, though, anyway:
****************************
Parent visas
All 1000 places available in the non-contributory parent category were filled in 2006-07. The contributory parent migration category came into effect on 27 June 2003 and there were 3500 visas granted in this category in 2006-07.
The category was capped for the first time in June 2006. In 2007-08 there will again be 4500 visa places available – 1000 in the parent category and 3500 in the contributory parent category.
Processing times for the offshore contributory parent category visas did not meet published performance standards through 2006-07. The number of applications received by the Perth Offshore Parents Centre (POPC) have more than doubled in three years (from about 3000 cases in 2005 to more than 7000 cases at June 2007) and the average application rate is 325 cases (525 people) per month. With only 3500 visa places available under the programme, POPC faced a rapidly increasing workload and consequent backlog.
The department responded to this situation by putting in place a number of revised management practices to ensure smarter processing, including restructuring POPC and introducing streamlined processing methods to improve productivity and efficiency.
The expected gains did not show immediately and it will take some time for these measures to take effect and catch up with on-hand applications.
**************************
I presume that bundling Parent and CPV applicants into the backlog at the LCU is part of the new "streamlined processing methods".
Cheers
Gill
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 23-12-2007 at 01:27 AM.
Thanks for that Gill, I'm just gonna trust to fate and hope that by the time it's my turn, they will be so streamlined and efficient, having had enough time to practice, that I can sail through as if on golden wings. What do you reckon on my chances????????
I had an e-mail from someone yesterday telling me that her Agent has said that the LCU is curetnly processing PR meds received on 27th ovember. If so, they have managed to cut a 13 week backlog which built up during the summer down to about 2 weeks now, which is bearable.
However, when the backlog was at its worst, Alan Collett contacted some senior DIAC people to discover the reason forthe delay. He was told it ws because of a whole load of meds for people who had applied for Student visas. The courses were due to start during September, so the Students were getting priority on meds-processing, holding all other applicants up. Eventually the LCU got some extra staff who have been workig all week and all weekend to try to catch up, but I don't know what will happen prior to September 2008.
In some ways, the streamlining of the POPC, hinted at in the DIAC report, does seem to be working. Not long ago, the wait for a CO had reached about 10-11 months after lodgement. Caz Beckham then heard from her CO after 9 months, the Bond has been paid and with the Meds backlog dramatically reduced too, I aree with Caz: I think she & Baz might well have their visas by the end of Jan, meaning that the whole process for their CP 143 will have taken just under a year.
There have been two or three "Got a CO" posts from CP applicants since Caz's. The later people are reporting hearing from the CO 7 & 7.5 months after lodgement, which is back to 2005-ish timelines The POPC really do seem to be clipping along briskly with granting visas as well.
In or about early June 2007, the POPC announced that DIAC had run out of Parent & CP visas forthe 2006/7 Program Year and would be unable to grant any more until 1st July.
The figures reported by DIAC indicate that that will definitely happen again in 2007/8. I think the only question is exactly when they will cap the visas and decline to grant any more. The don't seem to me to be trying to pace the rate of grants so as to eke out the supply of these visas for as long as they can.
Instead, they seem to be saying, "For as long as we have a supply, we will not waste time about meeting demand. When the supply runs out, grants will stop for as long as is necessary."
I think we just need to wait and see what they actually do in the next few months.....
Thanks for that Gill, it does seem a bit more encouraging, will keep fingers crossed, they will probably have knit together by the time I get a shot at it.
We are due to settle in perth june 08 hopeing to bring mum over soon after via a last remaining relative visa any pointers would be appreciated - p.s. initial 2 years would be on a visiting visa app so i know she would need to come back to the uk before applying for permant visa
We are due to settle in perth june 08 hopeing to bring mum over soon after via a last remaining relative visa any pointers would be appreciated - p.s. initial 2 years would be on a visiting visa app so i know she would need to come back to the uk before applying for permant visa
Hi Nikki
Errrm....
Parents are specifically excluded from eligibility for the Remaining Relative visa, chooks, so Plan A is a non-starter. Please see here:
A non-dependent child of 18 or over can sometimes join a Parent via a Remaining Relative visa but not the other way around, unfortunately.
It is also not possible to get a tourist visa which permits a 24 month stay in Australia. Doesn't matter how you try to cut that - the idea does not work. Nothing in the legislation or the Policy is capable of making it work, chooks.
Is it the case that your Mother would not be eligible for Parent migration because of the Balance of Family Test? In that event, is there any chance that she might be able to afford an Investor Retirement visa instead? Please see here:
If you want help to follow the arguments properly, please let me know.
Best wishes
Gill
Hi Gill
Good bit of detective work, yes that is me, I follow everything about parent visas, have got a rough plan in mind and hoping it will work, but advice and opinions are always welcome. The plan so far is to apply for a 12 month visa, let my house out while away, come back to UK after the 12 months spend a couple of months here, then dependant on daughters situation, ie, jobs houses etc; either apply for temp CPV (that way no assurer needed) and visitor at same time or if can't prove they are settled apply for a 6 or 12 month visitor, which ever they will give me. Then would have to apply for CPV as soon as can.
Then the plan gets kind of hazy, as a lot depends on when I can apply for CPV, so many ifs and buts, the way I see it, it's going to be a case of taking whatever actions are appropriate at the time, but know that its not going to be easy. At some point am going to have to sell the house but don't want to do that until I have applied for CPV, so will have to come back to UK for that, but don't want to go backwards and forwards too often because of the cost. the more I think about it the more it becomes a nightmare, my daughters got a lot to answer for, bless them!!! (thats just in case they read this) Just keep telling self, will all be worth it in the end
Just trying to figure out the difference between the Parent Visa and the Contributory Parent Visa. Is it just the cost?
Cara
Hi Cara
It isn't only the cost.
With a non-contributory Parent visa, the Bond is currently only $5,000 for a couple and the Assurance of Support only lasts for two years, as opposed to $14,000 and 10 years for the CP visa. With both categories, the Parent cannot claim the Australian Aged Pension (ie the State Pension) until 10 years after the visa is first granted.
The AoS issue is quite significant especially if the Parent does not have a reasonably good income.
Let us say that a penniless Parent, from a country with no Welfare State, eventually gets a non-contributory Parent visa and moves to Oz. For the first 2 years, any money that this Parent claims from Centrelink will be clawed back from the Bond and if that is not sufficient to cover the whole debt, Centrelink can and will chase the Assurers for the rest.
However, this stricture falls away after 2 years, and the non-Contributory Parent can then claim Income Support (the Ozzie equivalent thereof) until such time as s/he can claim the Australian Aged Pension instead. The restrictions bind the CPV holder and his/her Assurers for 10 years, so the family gets zilch help from the State for a lot longer than with the non-contributory visa.
As against that, the family can confidently expect to wait for around 15 yaers before a non-contributory Parent visa will be granted. The meds are assessed early on, before the applicant is allowed to join the official Queue. They meds are then required again shortly before the visa is granted. There is a substantial risk that something will go wrong with the health of one of the Parents during the inordinately long wait and if one fails the Meds, neither will get the visa. By cutting down the wait very substantially, the CP visa does tend to guard against this risk.
Let us say that a British couple, both currently aged 45, have a 22 year old child who has married an Australian Citizen. (For simplicity, this is the couple's only child.) The Parents both work full-time in the UK and have no plans to retire much before reaching 65, plus they are currently in good health.
Because their jobs would resrict how much time they can spend in Australia pre-retirement, this couple does not necessarily want a Parent visa within the next couple of years because the Australia Govt would expect them to make a permanent move to Oz within 5 years of the grant of a CP 143 visa. If not, there could well be hassle with Resident Return visas later on etc.
The British couple are both still pretty young. If they apply for a non-contributory Parent visa, it will string things out till they are ready to retire, plus the costs will be minimal once they are ready to retire. There may be advantages for them in taking the long-winded route, even though the health risk cannot be ignored.
It is a very, very individual decision which the family alone has to make - assuming that they are sufficiently well-heeled to have a choice about which of the visas to go for.
Cheers
Gill
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 31-12-2007 at 03:01 PM.
Parent & CP Visas
, yes that is me, I follow everything about parent visas, have got a rough plan in mind and hoping it will work, but advice and opinions are always welcome. The plan so far is to apply for a 12 month visa, let my house out while away, come back to UK after the 12 months spend a couple of months here, then dependant on daughters situation, ie, jobs houses etc; either apply for temp CPV (that way no assurer needed) and visitor at same time or if can't prove they are settled apply for a 6 or 12 month visitor, which ever they will give me. Then would have to apply for CPV as soon as can.
