Changes to pathway to Citizenship

[Amy Zhang]

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"?

[Ali369829]

23 minutes ago, Amy Zhang said:

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.

 

[Ali369829]

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

[ian360]

25 minutes ago, Amy Zhang said:

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.

Well I think it may be something specifically connected to English such as an English major degree etc, but logically it should be any major at an Australian university, because how on earth could you pass your degree without a good level of English in the first place?

[Spinny]

1 minute ago, ian360 said:

Well I think it may be something specifically connected to English such as an English major degree etc, but logically it should be any major at an Australian university, because how on earth could you pass your degree without a good level of English in the first place?

That would be the logical conclusion......when it comes to Dutton????

[ian360]

2 minutes ago, Spinny said:

That would be the logical conclusion......when it comes to Dutton????

And this is where the system of logic breaks down and is replaced with fairies and unicorns and non-existent problems!

[Amy Zhang]

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

 

[Ali369829]

It means skill migration who finished study here, it could be any subject or any level of course...ha ha all study here in English .

so I can say applicants who finished their study in Australia are safe from English test .

but is that Amendment published yet?

[Amy Zhang]

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

[dv4]

Just wondering what the average IELTS score would be if the Australian population were sampled...would everyone score at least 6.0? hmmm...

 

[Sheila]

4.5

[Roberta2]

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.)

[Roberta2]

Possibly true.  Totally irrelevant.

[Amy Zhang]

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.

[Spinny]

50 minutes ago, Amy Zhang said:

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.

That would be the case for most!

As much of a waste of money as it would be....the testing is one thing!

The power that Dutton is trying to grab for himself is another. Most of the dimwits that support these changes for whatever reason (suspect ignorance is playing a big part) don't realize there is the potential for some of his proposals to impact on them as well!

The wheel will turn!

[coker]

This line hidden away in the amendment:

"The bill extends the maximum period of time where the minister can delay an applicant making the pledge of allegiance from 12 months to two years to better align with time frames of some complex investigations."

Looks like increased waiting time for ceremonies.

[bwatt99]

The fact is they dont want us to be citizens as they sure are making it hard for us. Well i already am one but feel sorry for my wife who now needs to wait over a year longer and both our kids and i already are citizens. It was migrants who made australia what it is today and this how they pay you back by making it even harder to get.

[Quoll]

8 hours ago, ian360 said:

Well I think it may be something specifically connected to English such as an English major degree etc, but logically it should be any major at an Australian university, because how on earth could you pass your degree without a good level of English in the first place?

Talking to both my sons who graduated from Australia's number one (apparently) University, both would say that there were plenty of people on their courses who could not speak English well enough to pass a degree but there was a process which included group assessments so the less able were dragged up by the ones who chose to work - alternatively, the ones who chose to work were dragged down by those who could either not speak English or chose to spend their days stoned/drunk/asleep.  Both of them were very scathing of their university experience

[Amy Zhang]

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? ! 

Edited June 15, 2017 by Amy Zhang

[ovel]

I sent an email to my MP 

Recently I was granted with Australian Citizenship, but because my wife and children moved to Australia later than me, they were not eligible by that time. At the present moment they are eligible and meet the 4 years residence requirements, however, my main concern is that DIBP stopped processing all citizenship applications that were submitted after the 20th of April, and, moreover they introduce new requirements like 'having competent English' which means for my wife sitting the IELTS test again and paying extra $300 for the test (additionally to $288 for the application cost). 

 

One interesting thing is that the current citizenship law states that applicants should have:

 

  ... possesses a basic knowledge of the English language; and ...

 

But the DIBP internet site says:

• have a competent knowledge of English (applicants under 60 years of age)

 

http://www.border.gov.au/Trav/Citi/pathways-processes/application-options/partner-spouse/eligibility

 

So, they just go well ahead over the parliament and assume that the new law has been imposed before it happened.

 

However, the most interesting thing is that DIBP is saying on their internet site that 

 

The changes will not apply to applications made before 20 April 2017. The current rules will apply to applications made before 20 April 2017.

 

But the law itself has not been approved by the parliament so far, the amendments exist as a bill, you can look here: 

http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbills%2Fr5914_first-reps%2F0001%22;rec=0

 

so my another question is that is it a normal legal practice to make announcements before the law was approved and backdate the laws ?

 

In my opinion all this looks like barely legal political games and I would like to ask you at least to raise the question before Parliament why applications submitted after the 20th of April are not being processed under the current legislation.

 

This quite seriously affects my family because now I'm Australian, however, my wife and children are not, and it's not known when their status is going to change, however the application fee has already been paid. 
 

 

Thank you very much for your support.

[Roberta2]

It's normal practice.  Both major parties do it when in government, and it won't change.  It is not backdating, because they announced on 20th April that applications made after 20 April would not be processed until a new law was in place.  There are only three sitting days left in this parliamentary session after today-  although it's not unlikely both houses will sit on Friday because there is a raft of contentious bills still going through, of which the proposed change to citizenship laws is only one.  If the government makes enough concessions to meet ALP concerns, the Senate will be irrelevant.  That applies to all these bills, of course.

[Felix123]

Some good news for me. I applied for citizenship on 18th April and have just received invitation for test on 14th September in Melbourne.

Next few weeks of parliamentary discussions will be interesting. DIBP told me application time for citizenship applications is currently 12 months ?

[Roberta2]

6 hours ago, Quoll said:

Talking to both my sons who graduated from Australia's number one (apparently) University, both would say that there were plenty of people on their courses who could not speak English well enough to pass a degree but there was a process which included group assessments so the less able were dragged up by the ones who chose to work - alternatively, the ones who chose to work were dragged down by those who could either not speak English or chose to spend their days stoned/drunk/asleep.  Both of them were very scathing of their university experience

All too familiar, unfortunately.  Academics (I used to be one) are often under pressure to pass students with inadequate English.  There is every incentive just to hold your nose and pass them!   Plagiarism is also rife, despite efforts to control it. Some of our universities now depend on international students for 40% of their income.

[Sheila]

18 minutes ago, Felix123 said:

Some good news for me. I applied for citizenship on 18th April and have just received invitation for test on 14th September in Melbourne.

Next few weeks of parliamentary discussions will be interesting. DIBP told me application time for citizenship applications is currently 12 months ?

 

I applied on 18 as well in Melbourne. Waitng for the email.

[jess6]

29 minutes ago, Amy Zhang said:

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? ! 

6 is a little high indeed (B2 in CEFR). I could see a few Aussies struggling with the Writing Test indeed  

With the English requirement, the government probably wants to avoid people to feel isolated or to isolate themselves from the Australian society.

Basically people could potentially arrive here, pass an English test and then spend the next 4 years inside of their community, speaking their own language without interacting with the Australian society. And that's not what Australia is.

Honestly, I don't care if I have to go through another English test in 4 years. Considering how much cash I spent in the immigration process, $300 less or $300 more won't make a difference.