ovel

On 08/08/2017 at 17:22, Roberta2 said:

It actually says that  it estimates the Bill will not pass in its current form.  Hardly a surprise.   All Bills on contentious issues are subject to horsetrading.  No one should expect that the Bill will be rejected in toto.  Dutton is a powerful and determined Minister who has chalked up a number of successes lately and has significantly expanded his empire, (much to the chagrin of other senior Ministers) and Turnbull needs his support to fend off Abbott.

My main concern now is the frozen applications and the retrospectivity aspect. The Committee gave a good response on their retrospective stuff, but finally they passed on all the stuff on the Senate. Quite interesting reading here: http://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committees/Senate/committee/scrutiny/scrutiny_digest/PDF/d08.pdf?la=en

I have some plans, and I don't want my family locked in the country, but we have already spent overseas about a year within the last 4, so basically we can't go anywhere now. 

3 hours ago, Roberta2 said:

Not sure about that one.  Suspect everyone will have to apply or reapply under the new rules once the new law is put into effect.   I doubt officials are going to trawl through thousands of frozen applications to make sure the applicant is eligible under the new laws. The Senate committee is due to report on 4 September.

I wonder what happens in my case. I'm already a citizen, but my wife and children are not, we have already submitted, and eligible under old and new rules. The only thing that may affect the application is if my wife fails ielts. So, what are they going to do then ? they will grant children with citizenship, and skip my wife but will invite her on the ceremony or what ? 

On 22/07/2017 at 10:58, Parley said:

Given none of you can vote, do you really think politicians care what you think ?

Surely they would listen to voting citizens in their electorates.

I can vote, moreover, i'm in Dutton's electorate area. 

13 hours ago, Roberta2 said:

I suspect the government initially did think Shorten would be on board because Shorten has shown himself unwilling - in the light of recent history- to allow much daylight between himself and the government on national security/refugee/asylum issues.   Dutton's electorate of Dickson is based in Strathpine, in the northern outskirts of Brisbane.  About 20ks from the CBD.    He holds it by a very small margin.  Similar demographics to One Nation's heartland near Ipswich/Gatton.  He will certainly be feeling the heat from them.   

All politicians think they are prospective PMs, but I sense that Dutton is now joining the ranks of those who think Abbott has gone too far. There's a strong move behind the scenes, from the moderates who control the Liberal Party in NSW,  to get a good candidate to run against Abbott for pre selection in his own seat.  

Yes, Dutton will want a win, but he won't want to crash in flames either, so will have to compromise on the Citizenship bill.  Dutton, a former cop, has shown that he is tough.  But if he wants to be PM, there a lot of rivals for that job (including ScoMo) and he needs to show also that he is smart, and has the ability to compromise when necessary.   Being a headkicker gets you only so far.  Paul Keating, for example, was a headkicker (and very witty, which Dutton is not) but he was also smart. 

Actually, watching Senator Birmingham last week, I did wonder whether he might be a future contender for the top job.  If he hadn't bothered to go and visit Lambie in her home town, in a heavily Catholic area,  she probably would not have voted for his education bill. He's in the wrong House of course, but that can be fixed....Maybe I'm dreaming....But if you can get that far in politics with ears like a VW with its doors open, greater things might be possible...

I live in Dutton's electorate area, and sent him an email recently saying that I'm not going to vote for him because of these new rules. 

23 minutes ago, Roberta2 said:

It's a bit confusing, but technically this Bill is to amend -  in effect replace - two previous Acts of Parliament.  Next stage is for the Opposition, the Greens and possibly independent Members of the House of Representatives to propose their own amendments.  After that, it's a process of negotiation(haggling)  to see whether the Government can get this Bill (as amended) passed in the lower house, where it has only a one seat majority.  If the ALP supports an amended version of the bill, it will pass through the Senate without further amendments because the crossbenchers will not be able to stop it.  

Thanks for the explanations, but still not clear why all our applications are on hold then ? Why they  actually have already put the requirement about competent English posession on the DIBP site? Is this ok to do like that before the law actually came in effect ? 

35 minutes ago, path2aus said:

Still does not make sense, people who are on PR have already integrated into the community and are working and contributing. This makes us feel that a person will only start contributing after getting citizenship. Also some who probably transitioned from Work visa to PR might have worked for 6 years in Australia before applying for Citizenship. Now are they saying that people who are contributing for 4-6 years and have proven their English competency, suddenly after being in Australia have regressed? I think the GOVT is confused about skilled migration and have forgotten about the requirements to obtain a PR. Every individual who is a primary applicant needs to display at least competent English to even qualify. Now after 4 years of staying, working and contributing, you say that the person needs to prove the English competency again. This proves what one of the posters above mentioned about even the locals might not be able to get 6 in all categories. The Australian GOVT agrees, that speaking and interacting with the locals for a period of 4 years can damage an immigrants English competency, so it needs to be tested again. Now I get it and I don't mind giving the test again. Probably I will take it every year to prove my English competency has remained the same for 4 years?  

I think it's all more for partners who were waived the IELTS (and then their main applicant paid ~$4000 to be taught up to IELTS 4.5 overall). My wife, for example got IELTS overall 5.5  five years ago. Maybe she has a better level now, but, to be honest the exam itself is quite stressful, especially the writing part where you need to write an essay about some stupid topic which you simply have no idea of. +extra $300 fee. i don't get this. 

I sent an email to my MP 

On 2017-6-4 at 15:48, seraphim said:

Quote

 

No one this affects can vote, so politicians are going to focus on the things that will earn them re-election from those who can vote them out.  Where is their incentive to fight for people without a voice in parliament? If/when those affected finally make it through the process in the future, the chances they'll then bother campaigning still for those still stuck in the system are slim I'd imagine. As migrants, ,this is incredibly frustrating given the time, , investment and commitment given so far to Australia, , and the desire to give more and integrate further/completely.  I assume it would be thrown out but who except migration agents who this must hit hard have the legal knowledge to take this on?

Quote

Actually, i'm a citizen now and I can vote and my next step will be kicking our MP in regards to the issue. The problem is that i've obtained the citizenship, but my wife and children moved here a little late than myself, so they became eligible only a month ago (after they had lived here for 4 yrs as PRs obviously). So for me, personally, these new laws are complete bullshit making adverse impact on our family life and plans. My wife's application is being on hold (or in limbo) now.

 

An interesting view: http://insidestory.org.au/a-new-class-of-migrants-the-never-to-be-citizens

Applied on behalf of my wife yesterday. We have 4years of PR in Australia so let's look how it's going.