Changes to pathway to Citizenship

[path2aus]

22 minutes ago, path2aus said:

I have one question though "people who can work are working, or are actively looking for work or seeking to educate themselves". Does that mean that everyone above 18 at home need to work? Like if my wife stays home taking care of our new born, she cannot apply for citizenship? Since she is young and can work? That does not make sense to me. All countries have single person earning families. Do all Australians work? There are no stay at home mom's in Australia?

Again just to make it clear, my wife intends to work but currently cannot because we have a new born. Her English is very good and she did write IELTS 2 times and both the times got 6-7 in all categories (She wrote IELTS as she is not a native English Speaker and we did not want to pay the fee). She was working in one of the largest insurance companies in the US and also worked in collections in the US. I am just asking as that statement is pretty blanket and does not mention any exception. Also forcing people to work does not make sense as every country has non working spouses.

[08SEP]

I started my application 2 weeks ago but needed to wait for payday. Just submitted today and all went through fine. Hoping we're are still going to get this  

[Guest Khushi02aug]

52 minutes ago, Beffers said:

Think you've hit the nail on the head. There's a plethora of families migrating with only one English speaker. The new citizenship test means that ALL family members need to have competent English. I don't see this as a bad thing. Language is a key barrier to integration. And how can people confirm they support Australian values when they don't even speak the country's main language? It'll shake up a few people I would imagine. 

You are right..i know so many people from my country who came here with their partners and got permanent residency by paying immigration more than $5000 instead of english test . They cant even speak , read or write properly in english. Many of them staying at home with Centrelink benefits. It will definitely shake up many as of now on they have to join english school( which are free for residents m sure). People will come out of their shell and i hope many of them perform better when they will be out of their comfort zone..

Just feeling a bit sad as i just got my PR and i have waited for a long time for it. Hoping for the citizenship in one year n its going away too. 6 each doesnt matter but m scared there will be a lot more changes in 4 years.

God bless everyone!!

[llessur]

33 minutes ago, path2aus said:

Again just to make it clear, my wife intends to work but currently cannot because we have a new born. Her English is very good and she did write IELTS 2 times and both the times got 6-7 in all categories (She wrote IELTS as she is not a native English Speaker and we did not want to pay the fee). She was working in one of the largest insurance companies in the US and also worked in collections in the US. I am just asking as that statement is pretty blanket and does not mention any exception. Also forcing people to work does not make sense as every country has non working spouses.

I'm sure they'd take childcare and other caring roles into account in these cases. Similarly, I can't really see they'd discriminate against someone who chooses not to work because their partner is a high income earner. The overall spirit of the announcement seemed to suggest they were looking to avoid awarding citizenship to people who had deliberately chosen not to integrate into Aussie life e.g. people living on welfare despite being physically and mentally able to work, not learning to speak at least a basic level of English after four years of residency, not integrating into the community through clubs, events etc.

I would suspect that the main drivers for citizenship will be meeting the residency requirement, passing the citizenship test and passing an English language test (which may be waived for those who are from a native English-speaking background). My gut feeling is that the other factors relating to how you integrate into the community would only come into play in terms of applicants from high-risk countries during an extended citizenship interview (i.e something longer than the one I had as a UK-born migrant where I basically said hello and confirmed my name/address).

In reality, the big change here is the residency requirement. The citizenship test could certainly do with beefing up as in its current form is nothing more than a tick-box exercise implemented purely so that the government can tell voters they subject applicants to what sounds like a scary exam when in reality it's just a very easy 20-question multiple choice questionnaire which you can attempt repeatedly until probability dictates you'll score 70%. I don't imagine it will be much different in its new incarnation, but of course most voters won't know that...

Edited April 20, 2017 by llessur

[Stevwtosh]

12 minutes ago, Khushi02aug said:

You are right..i know so many people from my country who came here with their partners and got permanent residency by paying immigration more than $5000 instead of english test . They cant even speak , read or write properly in english. Many of them staying at home with Centrelink benefits. It will definitely shake up many as of now on they have to join english school( which are free for residents m sure). People will come out of their shell and i hope many of them perform better when they will be out of their comfort zone..

Just feeling a bit sad as i just got my PR and i have waited for a long time for it. Hoping for the citizenship in one year n its going away too. 6 each doesnt matter but m scared there will be a lot more changes in 4 years.

God bless everyone!!

In the first place they shouldn't have been accepting money for spouse of those who are applying PR visas who can't pass basic English, I mean the 4.5 requirement. So Immigration contributed to this problem aswell initially.

[ian360]

43 minutes ago, path2aus said:

I have one question though "people who can work are working, or are actively looking for work or seeking to educate themselves". Does that mean that everyone above 18 at home need to work? Like if my wife stays home taking care of our new born, she cannot apply for citizenship? Since she is young and can work? That does not make sense to me. All countries have single person earning families. Do all Australians work? There are no stay at home mom's in Australia?

I am wondering something along the same lines. I have another 6 months to go and then I will have done my 4 years straight on PR. But I am also confused about the work part. Since I arrived in 2013, I worked the first 1.5 years as a teacher, and since then I have been doing a new startup business for the last two years. The business is running at a profit and is improving all of the time but I have not paid any tax since starting it two years ago as I have made less than the $18k tax free threshold, so did not have to pay any tax. My wife earns a lot more than me so financially we do okay and she is happy to support me if required while I build the business.

My concern is will this be seem as not a good citizenship candidate as I have not paid tax for 2 years? On a side note: I have never applied for or received any Centrelink payments - everything I have done has been self-funded.

[llessur]

1 hour ago, Irish83 said:

As someone who has recently received their PR I'm still in the little honeymoon period of the relief that it has brought. Had always planned to apply for citizenship when the 12 months was up, but would have been relaxed about it being granted, unlike the PR, my life was a constant stress.

The news of having to wait 4 years doesn't really bother me. I have an aussie partner, I plan on being here anyway so I don't see the big deal. However, am I missing something obvious which will effect me by remaining a PR holder rather than a citizen?

Other than the previously mentioned voting rights and consular assistance, the other benefit that I was always worried about was that whilst I do not plan to leave Australia other than for holidays, if either of my parents in the UK have no other option than to rely on me for care in the future (I have my sister and her family in the UK so hopefully that's unlikely) then my other half and I have agreed we would need to move back to the UK temporarily to look after them.

My understanding is that the initial PR visa is valid for 5 years, after which a Resident's Return Visa (RRV) needs to be applied for if you are planning on travelling outside of Oz. I think this is valid for another 5 years. If this expires whilst you are outside of Australia then it can be difficult to be granted a visa to get back in and you'll need to go through the rigours of proving genuine and continuing ties to Australia (which presumably can be difficult after you've spent 5+ years living somewhere else). Citizenship is forever - therefore if circumstances change in the future and I need to leave the country for 5-10 years (highly unlikely I know) then I know I'll always be able to return.

This is a pretty far-fetched scenario and as such probably won't be a worry to most people but I like the certainty.

Edited April 20, 2017 by llessur

[ian360]

5 minutes ago, llessur said:

Other than the previously mentioned voting rights and consular assistance, the other benefit that I was always worried about was that whilst I do not plan to leave Australia other than for holidays, if either of my parents in the UK have no other option than to rely on me for care in the future (I have my sister and her family in the UK so hopefully that's unlikely) then my other half and I have agreed we would need to move back to the UK temporarily to look after them.

My understanding is that the initial PR visa is valid for 5 years, after which a Resident's Return Visa (RRV) needs to be applied for if you are planning on travelling outside of Oz. I think this is valid for another 5 years. If this expires whilst you are outside of Australia then it can be difficult to be granted a visa to get back in. Citizenship is forever - therefore if circumstances change in the future and I need to leave the country for 5-10 years (highly unlikely I know) then I know I'll always be able to return.

This is a pretty far-fetched scenario and as such probably won't be a worry to most people but I like the certainty.

You are correct. If your 5 year RRV runs out when you are overseas, it would be difficult to get back in. I had an RRV in the past and came rushing back about a week before it expired. So yes, getting your citizenship would give you peace of mind if your parents needed your help.

[path2aus]

25 minutes ago, llessur said:

I'm sure they'd take childcare and other caring roles into account in these cases. Similarly, I can't really see they'd discriminate against someone who chooses not to work because their partner is a high income earner. The overall spirit of the announcement seemed to suggest they were looking to avoid awarding citizenship to people who had deliberately chosen not to integrate into Aussie life e.g. people living on welfare despite being physically and mentally able to work, not learning to speak at least a basic level of English after four years of residency, not integrating into the community through clubs, events etc.

I would suspect that the main drivers for citizenship will be meeting the residency requirement, passing the citizenship test and passing an English language test (which may be waived for those who are from a native English-speaking background). My gut feeling is that the other factors relating to how you integrate into the community would only come into play in terms of applicants from high-risk countries during an extended citizenship interview (i.e something longer than the one I had as a UK-born migrant where I basically said hello and confirmed my name/address).

In reality, the big change here is the residency requirement. The citizenship test could certainly do with beefing up as in its current form is nothing more than a tick-box exercise implemented purely so that the government can tell voters they subject applicants to what sounds like a scary exam when in reality it's just a very easy 20-question multiple choice questionnaire which you can attempt repeatedly until probability dictates you'll score 70%. I don't imagine it will be much different in its new incarnation, but of course most voters won't know that...

Passing English test isn't something I am worried about. My wife and I both lived in the US for a long time. I studied there and worked for 12 years before deciding to move to Australia. The problem for me is telling that all immigrants who are able need to work to integrate into Australian way of life. That does not make sense to me. I am not saying my wife will not work at all, she will and probably very soon but again, to not have the option to stay at home if necessary does not make sense. Isn't this a type of discrimination? To say that everyone needs to integrate with Australian way of life and deny the freedom Australians have is contradicting to me. I understand the part about centrelink/welfare as it is valid but the must work/study part isn't.

Edited April 20, 2017 by path2aus

[PierreC]

Again just to make it clear, my wife intends to work but currently cannot because we have a new born. Her English is very good and she did write IELTS 2 times and both the times got 6-7 in all categories (She wrote IELTS as she is not a native English Speaker and we did not want to pay the fee). She was working in one of the largest insurance companies in the US and also worked in collections in the US. I am just asking as that statement is pretty blanket and does not mention any exception. Also forcing people to work does not make sense as every country has non working spouses.

The law hasn't been passed yet. It is hard to give you a bit more information on something that doesn't exist yet.

 

We only got the general idea at this stage not the fine prints.

 

 

Sent using Poms in Oz mobile app

[llessur]

16 minutes ago, path2aus said:

The problem for me is telling that all immigrants who are able need to work to integrate into Australian way of life. That does not make sense to me.

This is not how I read or understood it. The announcement by Turnbull was along the lines of "applicants will be asked to demonstrate that they have integrated into Australian society, for example by joining clubs or by providing evidence that they are employed and their children are in school". He used being in employment as an example of integrating into Australian life - of which there are many variations.

A spouse not working due to bringing up a newborn baby sounds pretty legitimate and is hugely commonplace amongst both new and established Australian residents/citizens. Presumably you'll be able to provide evidence that you're working and that your wage is enough to support your family (I doubt claiming state childcare benefit would count against you because everyone who has a kid does it). Plus by then you might have evidence of your kid attending kindy etc. Maybe you support an Aussie rules or NFL team and have membership? Perhaps you or your wife assist at local community events or something child-related (apologies, is it obvious I don't have kids nor know very much about what they get up to?)?

I'm pretty sure that as long as you're both not sitting at home on the dole, not speaking English, not sending your kids to school and never attending any community/sporting events etc then you'll be just fine.

If you're really worried then you've got a few years to get involved in some stuff which you know would look good on your application.

But, this is all just speculation until the full details are announced.

Edited April 20, 2017 by llessur

[doubter]

I am confused is this statement related to temporary visa holders who go on to PR? I thought citizenship rules changed a few years ago from 2 to 4 years on PR.So before these rule changes if you were on a 457 you only had to total 4 years with 12 months of that as PR,is that correct?

[ian360]

3 minutes ago, doubter said:

I am confused is this statement related to temporary visa holders who go on to PR? I thought citizenship rules changed a few years ago from 2 to 4 years on PR.So before these rule changes if you were on a 457 you only had to total 4 years with 12 months of that as PR,is that correct?

Correct. And now they are saying that the 12 months on PR must now be a full 4 years on PR.

[doubter]

11 minutes ago, ian360 said:

Correct. And now they are saying that the 12 months on PR must now be a full 4 years on PR.

That stinks ?

I have always been a strong believer if you have a skill to bring be it in Australia or the UK let the best person for the job get it.I can't be doing with this, "taking Australian jobs" the same mantra people use in the UK.I agree tighten the rules for unskilled workers but not if you have something to offer.You shouldn't be penalised for time spent on a temporary visa when you are contributing to the economy.

[wombatinabox]

Can someone help me figure out these new rules?

So these new rules apply for all applications Starting 20th April 2017 (today), BUT the bill will only pass towards end 2017/early 2018. The material of the new tests and english language exam is also not ready.

That means if someone eligible to apply in May 2017, which test will they go through if its still not ready? do they need to "prove integration" ? What if you're approved before these rule pass parliament? 

or does this mean ALL citizenship applications will be frozen starting April 20 until the whole thing passes by end of 2017/early 2018 and the new tests are ready?

Edited April 20, 2017 by wombatinabox

[K974]

I have same question , applied today 20th about 2pm. I had my year done on pr since feb.

 

what will happen ? Surely there could be an argument you applied at 8am ahead of announcement , wouldn't it surely come into effective as of a certain date in the future , seems very strange it can be back dates and implemented with warning .

 

not to mention it should only apply to new pr approvals people have bought into a pathway and if they are on that pathway they should be able follow it thru, australia campaigned for workers overseas and provided the 3 457 & 1ye pr as a pathway it's now like adding 20min to a soccer match in the 70mim

if they wanna make it 110min it should be from the next game 

[Annoisa]

https://www.change.org/p/department-of-immigration-and-border-protection-australia-vote-against-4-years-after-pr-eligibility-towards-oz-citizenship?source_location=minibar

[doubter]

How can we help you when this idiot doesn't know what he is talking about ??

https://mobile.twitter.com/mattdegroot_/status/854831561685975040/video/1

 

[AJ]

11 hours ago, path2aus said:

The only confusing thing about the requirement is that skilled migrants already have to prove their English skills while applying for permanent residency. Why should they take English test again for citizenship? The comment that Migrants should learn English does not make sense as people who migrate through skilled visas, get their PR only because they at least have functional English. Don't understand that part.

The partners dont though so it will be to ensure they have English skills also

[path2aus]

11 hours ago, AJ said:

The partners dont though so it will be to ensure they have English skills also

What if the partners did? My wife did IELTS as we are not native English speakers. I am not saying we will not take it, we will. I just took IELTS last year for different reason and got 8, so I am not worried. I am just saying that if you have tested people already on their English during their skilled migration application, what is the reason to test them again? Unless they think living in Australia for 4 years deteriorates your English skills.

[llessur]

4 minutes ago, path2aus said:

What if the partners did? My wife did IELTS as we are not native English speakers. I am not saying we will not take it, we will. I just took IELTS last year for different reason and got 8, so I am not worried. I am just saying that if you have tested people already on their English during their skilled migration application, what is the reason to test them again? Unless they think living in Australia for 4 years deteriorates your English skills.

Mate, I reckon you'll be fine. I feel these changes are more geared towards giving the Dept of Immigration more power in situations where, for example, a guy brings his family over as his dependents and then leave his non-English speaking wife and kids sitting in the house all day not integrating into the community. These changes will make it more important for the whole family to learn English and to integrate into Aussie life, rather than just the main visa holder. I think this is a good thing, but for 90% of applicants won't change much.

Try not to worry about it until the full details are released - I strongly suspect that not all aspects of the announced changes will apply in every situation (e.g. I would have thought it quite possible there would be an exemption from the English test for native speakers and/or those who have already passed their IELTS for their initial visa application). Might as well wait for things to be clarified before worrying

[path2aus]

12 minutes ago, llessur said:

Mate, I reckon you'll be fine. I feel these changes are more geared towards giving the Dept of Immigration more power in situations where, for example, a guy brings his family over as his dependents and then leave his non-English speaking wife and kids sitting in the house all day not integrating into the community. These changes will make it more important for the whole family to learn English and to integrate into Aussie life, rather than just the main visa holder. I think this is a good thing, but for 90% of applicants won't change much.

Try not to worry about it until the full details are released - I strongly suspect that not all aspects of the announced changes will apply in every situation (e.g. I would have thought it quite possible there would be an exemption from the English test for native speakers and/or those who have already passed their IELTS for their initial visa application). Might as well wait for things to be clarified before worrying

Not worrying at the moment :). Just debating the pros and cons from the initial announcement information. It is fun doing that :). We still have 4 years left. We are sure there will be lots of people who will go through the new system before us for us to learn from. We understand that the law itself is in its infancy at the moment. 

Edited April 20, 2017 by path2aus

[KidA]

13 hours ago, wombatinabox said:

Can someone help me figure out these new rules?

So these new rules apply for all applications Starting 20th April 2017 (today), BUT the bill will only pass towards end 2017/early 2018. The material of the new tests and english language exam is also not ready.

That means if someone eligible to apply in May 2017, which test will they go through if its still not ready? do they need to "prove integration" ? What if you're approved before these rule pass parliament? 

or does this mean ALL citizenship applications will be frozen starting April 20 until the whole thing passes by end of 2017/early 2018 and the new tests are ready?

They will be frozen.

I'm hoping that Labour opposes and that it won't go through, in it's current form at least.  If Labour opposes then the government will need the support of eight crossbenchers in the Senate. 

I'm going to apply today and hope for the best. 

[Parley]

[AJ]

1 hour ago, path2aus said:

What if the partners did? My wife did IELTS as we are not native English speakers. I am not saying we will not take it, we will. I just took IELTS last year for different reason and got 8, so I am not worried. I am just saying that if you have tested people already on their English during their skilled migration application, what is the reason to test them again? Unless they think living in Australia for 4 years deteriorates your English skills.

They cannot do it on a case by case basis, it just has to be one rule.  Unfortunately the people who have moved here already and not bothered their arses to put any effort into learning english or integrating have spoiled it for others now.