ryanshaw

Not from his constituency office. However, I had a meeting with my local federal MP just after the election. She agreed that the treatment of people who had visas withdrawn after posting an Aos was unfair, and she thought that Scott Morrison (the new immigration Minister) would agree. She has agreed to take it up personally with him. She did state that if there are cost consequences he may not be able to change it even if he wants to (eg the Treasury runs the Government) but she did mention that the issue was that Labor Ministers simply didn't look at the detail at all and let the civil servants run the department, which is why things like this happened. I would STRONGLY suggest that all those in the same boat visit (in person) their local FEDERAL MP and ask them to make the same representation. If the Minsiters office hears this from multiple sources they are much more likely to change it. Remember that the change of Minister and Government make it much easier to justify a change to policy. My personal view is that this might be resolved in next years release of visas - eg around July 2014. I certainly pushed the point that the Department need to release enough visa's to clear the backlog of people released from the queue. My MP also agreed with the point that the LRR visa was a valid visa category, approved by parliament, and that she was concerned that visa numbers had been reduced to the level that made it useless for any new applicants.

I wrote to his office before the election asking him to state his position on family visas. I followed up and unfortunately they refused to reply. Not looking hopeful.

Hi Regarding complaints to the Ombudsman, unfortunately they are a waste of time. The Ombudsman does not exist to investigate your complaints, they exist to provide an outlet so that you can go somewhere else to blow off steam. The Ombudsman only actually deals with very trivial matters of procedural irregularity. All that will happen here is that they will tell you that the DIAC has followed the correct procedure in responding to your letters and that, since the issues you raised are matters of policy, it is outside of their scope. The only basis on which you could realistically complain to the Ombudsman is that DIAC has not been following a fair queuing system - this is an administrative matter so it would be within their scope. However, you have no proof that it is happening, and the Ombudsman will almost certainly refuse to launch an investigation. Obviously, you do not have access to the documents which might prove this and the Ombudsman can get them, but they usually just say there is no basis for an investigation based on suspicion. The Ombudsman will simply write to the DIAC and ask them whether they have a proper queue system, the DIAC will reply (saying basically yes, but covering their arses) and the Ombudsman will accept their reply and close their file. The problem here is that there is no point dealing with civil servants, of any department, if you want something done. They do not see it as their role to pass on your concerns, but simply to defend their department and restate the departments position. Their job is to STOP any difficult questions getting to the minister if at all possible. If you want something done, you need to bypass the civil service and insist on a dialogue with the minister or one of the parliamentary staff. Unfortunately, there is nobody there during the election, and afterwards they will probably be far too busy to bother talking to people who don't get to vote for another three years. The slightly better option is go via your local MP, who you will be able to meet, but insist that the matter is raised with the Minister and not their staff, since usually all that happens is your MPs staff write to the ministers staff and neither of them ever actually get involved.

I might be able to help with some information here. My brother in law is also in the same boat. Firstly, I suspect that the queuing system is a farce. We also have the same queue date as many here. I think what happened was in 2010 they basically just sat on all the applications as they did not have enough visas. Then, when they started the queue they just put a pile of people in the April 2011 queue date regardless of when their applications were actually lodged. We also were asked for and paid the AoS just before they pulled the visa. However, they are also saying that there were not enough visas either in FY 2013 or likely to be in FY 2014. Basically, what the Minister is doing here is trying to do away with the LRR visa without bothering to go back to Parliament. The reason is simple - money. The Family Stream is not a money spinner. No country can reasonably refuse to grant marriage and dependent children visas, so they have to do those and they are not allowed to cap. But they can't charge too much for them. As the numbers increase, instead of just increasing the allocation to the Family stream from say 60,000 to 61,000, they tried to keep it the same but pinched the visas from the Other Family streams where they are allowed to cap. They just wont add any visas to an area where they cannot make money. The only focus is for visa classes either required by business or where they can cash in by charging a big fee (or in the case of students, get them to subsidise the Australian education system). I agree that the next step will be contributory Family Visas. They might as well just auction the bloody things on Ebay. Anyway, there are a few avenues available: - I have written to the Shadow Immigration Minister and asked him to make a position statement on the various issues prior to the election. Might be able to get him to commit to a review. I will let you know if he replies. If you like in Cook (NSW) he is your local guy so hit him up for an answer. - I am highly tempted to launch a Freedom of Information Act request to find out exactly what happened to the queue - however, past experience is that they are always allowed to block any information they want, despite the law, and in this case you have a department that wants to cover up what they are doing. However, I would suggest that everyone effected not only complain, but also insist to know their exact queue number. I cannot see that they are legally able to refuse to provide it. My suspicion is that people are not being released in order of lodgement date. - I heard from my migration agent that as many as 700 LRR visa applicants were released from the queue and now do not have visas. If the total Other Family Stream has 580 visas, then LRR probably has no more than 150 of those. On these figures, you can see it will take years just to clear the backlog of people they just promised had been released for final approval. This is probably why they don't want to be honest with the figures. - If you have not been asked for the AoS yet, you are probably down the queue and looking at a wait of up to 5 years. - I suggest the moment the election is over, bombard your local MP and the new minister with complaints. Don't bother talking to civil servants (they just cover up for the department whatever, and will never take your concerns to the Minister). Insist on speaking to one of the Parliamentary aides - they are actually MPs and therefore (in theory) represent you. The argument I am running is that (1) it is inhumane to remove visas from people who are just about to be granted, especially for several years and (2) it is an end-run around parliament - if the department want to kill the Other Family Stream they need to get the legislation changed, not just kill it by reducing the numbers to unviable levels. My migration agent has confirmed that in 20+ years she has never seen the department withdraw visas once an Assurance of Support is requested. It was a disgrace and typical of the high handed approach of government departments. If you want it changed, hope for a change of minister and complain like crazy!