Amy Zhang

I put my information on the new sheet! I will update once I get the info from DIBP.

Application submitted: 09-05-2017

Residence City: Melbourne

Application type: Paper

Acknowledge of receipt and application fee charged: 30-06-2017

I did paper application on 16th of May, and I got the acknowledgement of receipt on 30th June this year. I will update my status here. Hope everyone's application goes smoothly after this!

After the negotiation, what will be left? What's the point to do that? To solve a problem which does not exist? Just ironic. Waste our time, and up to now, still all the application after 20th April are blocked. How stupid he is!

Hope we can get some results today! finger crossed.

1 minute ago, path2aus said:

I just cant believe that they are going to require us to write English test again. I wrote one last year and got overall score of 8, I wrote one in 2012 and got overall score of 8. Now I am required to write again for Citizenship. This is just ridiculous. A person has already proven that he has more than competent English and has worked in Australia for 4 years after obtaining PR or in some cases even before that, and they still want him/her to prove English competency? I just feel this particular part of the amendment does not make any sense to me. There needs to be more exceptions to this requirement. Why not exempt primary visa applicants from writing the test who have already done that when submitting their application? Competent English is 6 if the test is IELTS, do you think all secondary applicants can pass with 6.0?That's a serious jump over just 4 years. Other countries like US does not have this criteria, so just based on passport they are exempted from English test, what if the person having US passport does not speak English?or for that matter UK passport holder?

Totally agree! Why could not they make more exemptions?

41 minutes ago, seeker said:

Law has mentioned " Language Tests, Score and Passports 2015 (IMMI 15/005) prescribed in the Migration Regulations 1994", which means you can take IELTS or PTE or TOFEL or CAE or OET and  have to demonstrate  competent level score. 

Could you please give me the link? Thanks

I think it is good to increase the English requirement. However, the standard is too high. In this country, even the local people, I do not think they can get the average of 6/9 in each skill when they undertake IELTS. The language hurdle is too high for the migrants, and it is unnecessary. Again, for the skill migrants, if we have already passed the skill assessment which includes the language requirement, why should we do this again? I just want them to think the things comprehensively and take this into consideration when they do the exemption of English test. That's it! I do not want to mention the other parts at all again! We just need to wait, wait and wait! Australian value? ! 

13 minutes ago, Roberta2 said:

It says "specified English language studies at a recognised Australian education institution".  That does not necessarily mean that students from non English speaking countries who graduate from Australian universities will be exempt - unless they have  been studying English as a language.  Studying English and studying in English are not the same.  (Prepositions can be vitally important in English.) Employers are constantly complaining of the poor English language skills of many international students who are allowed to graduate from our universities.  (It's all bums on seats now.)

Thank you so much for your explanation. I think you are right. Well, let's just see how they explicitly explain the "exemption" part. I want to mention when I apply for the PR under the subclass 885 (skilled migration), I have done the skill assessment, which has already included the English requirement. If they ask me to do the test again, for me just like I pay the money to prove my skills again, which is annoying.

Probably there will be more specific explanation on next Tuesday, we have to wait!

13 minutes ago, Ali369829 said:

Could u please give me the link about Amendments @Amy Zhang

Please see the following link:

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=BillId_Phrase%3A"r5914" Dataset%3Ahansardr,hansards Title%3A"second reading";rec=0

I am confused about the last sentence. "applicants who have undertaken specified English language studies at a recognised Australian education institution." What does that mean? May I assume that people who have undertaken tertiary education regardless majors in Australia can be exempted from English testing as long as the medium is English? Or actually it means you should have learned the course 'English language study"?

I saw the amendment as below:

Aspiring citizens are currently required to possess a level of 'basic' English. This is indirectly assessed when an applicant sits the citizenship test. Aspiring citizens will now be required to undertake a separate up-front English language test with an accredited provider and achieve a level of 'competent'. There will be exemptions, such as for applicants over 60 years of age or under 16 years of age at the time they applied for citizenship or those with an enduring or permanent mental or physical incapacity. There will be other exemptions from testing, as is currently the case for skilled migration assessments, such as for citizens of the United Kingdom, the Republic of Ireland, Canada, the United States of America or New Zealand who hold a valid passport or for applicants who have undertaken specified English language studies at a recognised Australian education institution.

1 minute ago, Spinny said:

It seems so....only exception I'm aware is for Kiwis

Well, interesting! What exceptions will the Australian government make especially re the English requirement? If they ask us to take IELTS again, it's just like no point for me. I took the IELTS test 7 years ago when I did the Master degree here. The language hurdle for my major is 7 overall. Now, if it asks me to do the test again, what do they want me to prove? After 7 years, my English is getting worse? I really do not see the necessity except taking $300 from my pocket! Again, why does the government think the potential terrorists could not have excellent English? Why do they think the English requirement could be a good hurdle for protect Australia from potential terrorists?

Well, let's just wait and see. Hopefully next week we can get more clear idea.

Thank you for sharing the view. It's true. I am just wondering whether we can get more information re new citizenship legislation this week or not?

1 hour ago, Ali369829 said:

https://thewest.com.au/news/australia/could-turnbulls-mps-pass-a-citizenship-english-test-asks-opposition-leader-bill-shorten-ng-b88505708z

Thanks for sharing the link! Hopefully we can get more detailed information this week, and again, hope the stupid new citizenship policy will not pass!

The most ironic and ridiculous part is "let's vote the legislation that hasn't been seen yet!" Just wait and see the final result!

7 minutes ago, rammygirl said:

27 minutes ago, Ali369829 said:

http://www.theage.com.au/comment/the-age-editorial/australian-governments-citizenship-test-moves-political-not-practical-20170601-gwia5x.html

The essay at least reflects most of the people's attitude on this stupid new citizenship policy.

9 hours ago, jess6 said:

DIBP does not only processes citizenships, they also process visas. A lot of people and businesses are currently impacted by growing processing times for work or partner visas (permanent or not). 

As an example, I personally applied for my PR in June 2016, processing times were estimated at around 6 months back then. I have been waiting for more than 11 months incl. 4 months on BVA. And I am not the only one in that situation. 

FYI - As I was checking on my PR application status today in my immi account, I just saw the below notification:  

"Australian citizenship applications

The changes to the requirements to become an Australian citizen will come into effect, and apply to applications made from the date of the Government’s announcement on 20 April 2017. The changes will not apply to applications made before 20 April 2017. Applicants will receive communication on the implementation of these measures and any additional information and documentation that may be required to support their  application."

 

Dear， what I say is sarcastic! Of course, they should not cut that much, and let us just hang in there!

1 hour ago, jolie2015 said:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-05-22/citizenship,-visa-grant-waiting-times-may-increase/8548012?pfmredir=sm

• 355 staff have gone from department's visa and citizenship section since the beginning of the financial year
• Growth in visa applications has bigger impact on waiting times than staff cuts, Mr Pezzullo says

No wonder they cut that huge number of staff. What can they do at this stage? nothing! Why can they get paid just sitting in the office and doing nothing. DIBP can hire people later if they need. Again, the ridiculous back dating stuff.

25 minutes ago, wombatinabox said:

Which is why if this is raised to high court a judge will throw the freeze right away. Hopefully migration agents raise this who are in the best position to do this. Might be worth for us to get in touch with some of them. 

That's really a good idea. Any one here has some resources of migration agents?

28 minutes ago, whtzau said:

THEN HOW WILL THEY MANAGE APPLICATIONS AFTER 20/04/2017 BEFORE THE END OF 2017 ?

 

Nothing! Very disappointing. I have submitted my view on the new proposal. We still have one week to express our point view and email to citizenship.submissions@border.gov.au

8 minutes ago, whtzau said:

it means how DIBP managed application lodged on or after 20/04/2017 is against the  law  - Citizenship Act 2007 !!

 

It's true. However, the staff in DIBP assume that they will have no law to follow at this stage for the applications lodged on or after 20th, April. The only thing they can do is waiting, although it shows the Citizenship Act 2007 is CURRENTLY IN FORCE. How stupid it is! They also tried to convince us to wait for at least 6 months, since on the DIBP website, it says all the detailed information will be released at the end of this year.

If we accept the retrospective issue, it means that accept everything. The department has the excuse not to deal with the applications on or after 20th, April. They will say they need to redo the applications anyway if the new legislation will be approved and enacted from 20th, April, why bother to do them right now? They use this excuse to freeze our applications. This is the thing I reckon very stupid. Why the prime minister made the announcement so quickly and all the detailed information is not ready. That's ridiculous.  The staff in such department may just sit on their hand for another 6 months.