Bozzy

Maybe, but if I was coming in on a skilled visa (I am an Actuary, 6 years of University,6 years of work experience and forced out of my own country because of this) that is all I'd have to show. If I could renounce my citizenship, I could get into my own country far easier.

So the point is, in the UK the requirements got through parliament and the laws changed. By the way, my wife and I would easily meet those requirements so I'd be happy for those changes. At the moment, the Australian law of the land is this: MIGRATION ACT 1958 - SECT 87 Limit does not prevent visas for certain persons (1) Section 86 does not prevent the grant of a visa to a person who applied for it on the ground that he or she is the spouse, de facto partner or dependent child of: (a) an Australian citizen; or (b) the holder of a permanent visa that is in effect; or (c) a person who is usually resident in Australia and whose continued presence in Australia is not subject to a limitation as to time imposed by law. (2) For the purposes of this section, a child of a person is a dependent child if the child: (a) does not have a spouse or de facto partner; and (b) either: (i) is under 18; or (ii) is 18, 19 or 20 and is dependent on the person for: (A) financial and psychological support; or (B) physical support. The government is ignoring this and bringing in other visa classes at the expense of my family reunion rights, so I am extremely pissed.

Thanks, but 3 points here: -How hard is it to check my marriage certificate, child's birth certificate, wedding photos, and 4 years worth of joint financial statements? -If I was trying to commit Australian immigration fraud, I would not be looking to get into a fake marriage with an Australian citizen. I'd be looking at getting into a fake partnership with a "skilled" migrant in my home country, as no rigorous checks are applied to any other family relationship in Australia unless an Australian citizen is involved. The person who replaced me at my old job in Perth (I had to move to NZ to avoid this cluster*f) was a skilled migrant, his entire family was brought over in less then a month, and they are all on the way to PR. I'll be advertising this fact more if it will help slow down the skill ques; -Why do they continue to cap the Partner visas? Each year, the number of partner visas issues is +/- the planning level issued by the Home affairs department. As the article explains above, section 87 is clear this cannot be. Not having a go at you, thanks for responding but yeah no other country does this.

Well in my case I am an Australian citizen, who cannot come back without being separated from my wife and my child due in July. The law above is pretty clear to me, Parliament makes the law not the immigration department or Peter Dutton.

Well, I'm getting a better reaction in other places, but doesn't matter what you or I think. My main issue is the Home Affairs department is not complying with the Migration Act with respect to Spouse Visas for Australian citizens. Abul Rizvi, who the media consults for immigration issues (was on ABC the drum recently, former immigration deputy secretary, writes for SMH on immigration issues) has described this issue as the biggest scandal currently engulfing the home affairs department: https://twitter.com/RizviAbul/status/1110666104894963712 In particular, the Home affairs department claims that partner visas are capped, as per the following release (Only 39,799) partner visas are allowed to be granted this financial year according to them: https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/what-we-do/migration-program-planning-levels However, section 87 of the migration act clearly states that Partner visas are demand driven, with the legislation explicitly stating that visas cannot be capped for spouses of Australian citizens: MIGRATION ACT 1958 - SECT 87 Limit does not prevent visas for certain persons (1) Section 86 does not prevent the grant of a visa to a person who applied for it on the ground that he or she is the spouse, de facto partner or dependent child of: (a) an Australian citizen; or (b) the holder of a permanent visa that is in effect; or (c) a person who is usually resident in Australia and whose continued presence in Australia is not subject to a limitation as to time imposed by law. This was also confirmed by Abul Rizvi, with parliament voting twice against the ability to cap partner visas: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1104231035389194240 I think my rights as an Australian citizen should trump anyone else immigration rights, the law above seems to suggest this as well. I don't see why Australia owes English migrants special preference either, which is what some of the above posters were suggesting. Instead of saying take my place in the que, tell my why a capped visa class (skilled migration) should take precedence over an uncapped one. Also someone brought up the UK situation. Whilst that seems pretty bad, their parliament voted to change the laws. In Australia, the above passage is still the law of the land. Dutton has choose to ignore it, hence why I am angry.

Hi everyone, I am trying to get some political action going regarding both the partner visa wait times and cost before the election next Saturday. I have been spamming Twitter and helped to get this published: https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/partner-visas-another-dutton-scandal,12649 It seems to be one of the most shared articles on the site in only 4 days, so there are alot of people sympathetic to our plight. If possible, can you comment with your partner visa horror stories, and share the article widely on social media. This is urgent and needs to be done before the election in order to get change. I also suggest sending to your labor candadite/mp via email or in person if you are in Australia.