My husband is a plumber and just completed the 1 day St John ambulance first aid course. Was told could have done the Red cross one as well.
Was accepted by VETASSES no problem.
We also going through the DUC.
Has his skills test in Feb
Thank you! And congratulations on taking the first steps into investigating this new adventure for you. I'm sorry to see that the thread has been highjacked with so many negative comments, on what I'm sure was meant to be a humorous throw away comment.
I totally understand why PR is the best option for you - the schooling thing is something I wasn't aware of. I'd have liked to go out on PR but didn't have time on the job availability, and not sure I'd pass a PR medical at the moment as I had (early stage) cancer in 2017, so will apply once we're there.
If you want any more info about Women's Hospitals in Perth feel free to message me.
Hi VERYSTORMY. Yes, I'm quite familiar with the 482 having lived in WA previously on a 457. This is the most common pathway for hospital doctors and I know lots of people who have progressed on to PR without problems. I am very aware that they have mooted taking some medical professions off the skills list, and some have gone e.g. anaesthetics. WA very much struggles to supply its public hospitals with Consultant Obstetricians/ Gynaecologists as most of the local trainees goes straight into private practise. I was going to apply for PR 4 years ago when I first moved back to the UK (really wish I had now!) but a number of life events got in my way, and I unfortunately can't apply for a while as I had (early stage) cancer in 2017 and was advised it was better to be 2-3 years clear to be more confident of passing a PR medical. We don't have kids and my husband has had no problems finding a job as a GP, and going on my visa - and they would be very happy to sponsor him if situations change and he needs a 482 visa. We are planning on a review after 2-3 years to see if we want this move to be permanent, and hopefully will be able to apply for PR before then anyway (either myself or him as main applicant) which is obviously something we want to achieve as soon as is feasible for the security, ability to buy a house etc
I think it’s reasonable to assume few parents that arrive on a parent visa will work for many years and pay into the system. The reality is actually the opposite, they are likely one day to cost the country a lot of money in medical bills/old age care. The ones in their late teens/early 20’s for example are likely to work into their 60s and beyond paying tax for many decades. You only hear on this forum about the ‘dependants’ that are mid 20’s because most are probably not true dependants and it understandably angers people. There are probably a great many more that are still at school or university that are dependent and will indeed give far more to the economy than parents in their 60’s/70’s/80’s. If you were running the country would you prefer old people who are a hip/knee replacement/heart problems/dementia/aged care dependent waiting to happen or a young healthy 20 + year old? Not being disrespectful to the elderly, it’s just fact. May well be me one day, of course someone 30 + years younger than me is a better bet. Im not saying they should be prioritised, I’m just responding to your post of why would someone think these children are tax positive, compared to old people who wouldn’t?