Parent visa application timelines (143 & 173)

[Adam111]

Gee the rug has been pulled in just a few short years.

So we now have over 120k application for the contributory visa in queue and at current rates of ~6k approvals per year the wait for anyone new applying is 20 years+ based on current numbers. So in 10 years it's gone from 1 year processing to 20 years. In a year or two it will probably be up to 30 years like the non-contributory visa. The criminals at Immi are still happy to take everyone's first instalment application fee though which people are applying for based on their website still quoting 67 months.

Effectively this means unless you have young parents with no health concerns (<60 years) there's no point bothering applying for a contributory visa, they'll either be dead or fail the final medical when they're asked to do it in their 80s or 90s. New migrants will never be able to fully reunite with their parents regardless of how much financial responsibility they're willing to guarantee it seems.

T

[Marisawright]

1 hour ago, Adam111 said:

New migrants will never be able to fully reunite with their parents regardless of how much financial responsibility they're willing to guarantee it seems.

The question is, why should they?

If the migrant child was willing to pay ALL the costs for their parents to come to Australia, then parents would be welcomed with open arms.  The problem is that 90% of the cost of the parent is met by the Australian taxpayer, not by the child, including the enormously high cost of medications and treatments for end-of-life diseases.   Research has shown that the CPV fee doesn't come anywhere close to covering those costs.  

If Australia was still crying out desperately for skilled migrants, no doubt the government would be willing to meet those costs  However, (leaving aside the disruption of Covid), the opposite is the case.  Every year, thousands more people want to come to Australia than can be accepted. 

There are thousands of migrants who are delighted to come and live in Australia without ever needing, or wanting, to bring their parents with them.  Equally, there are many parents who,  in spite of their children living in Australia, have no desire to uproot themselves from their home and their friends to join them.  Those people are more than enough to satisfy Australia's needs. If that changes, only then will policy change.

Edited July 3, 2022 by Marisawright

[Adam111]

4 minutes ago, Marisawright said:

If the migrant child was willing to pay ALL the costs for their parents to come to Australia, then parents would be welcomed with open arms.  The problem is that 90% of the cost of the parent is met by the Australian taxpayer, not by the child, including the enormously high cost of medications and treatments for end-of-life diseases.   Research has shown that the CPV fee doesn't come anywhere close to covering those costs.  

 

Well that's actually the point of my final sentence, this isn't possible. The blowout in applications vs spots over the past 5 years effectively means that no new applicants now will ever be granted the visa. Even if a child is willing to accept full financial responsibility for their parent(s) there's no way this visa can actually (effectively) be granted.

They need to either:

A) Pull this visa from list of visas or at the absolute minimum provide a realistic timeline - it's misleading and dishonest to suggest this is a realistic option for most people anymore. The website quotes 5 years when it's actually >20 years now. Immi is just collecting >$4k from people on the misguided belief this visa can be possibly granted to them based on the info immi is providing, which is no longer true. 

B) Amend the visa to make it far more 'contributory' in nature. i.e. either massively increase the fee, increase the AoS period, or add some additional conditions that shift the financial cost more onto the sponsors. If costs can be more adequately recovered then I believe family's ought to be permitted a realist opportunity to reunite. Not every argument needs to be a strictly economic one 'how much can this person add to Aus GDP over their lifetime' - there is a human element to humans and in many cultures looking after one's parents in old age is really important. Our country is one of migrants after all. 

[Marisawright]

2 hours ago, Adam111 said:

Well that's actually the point of my final sentence, this isn't possible. The blowout in applications vs spots over the past 5 years effectively means that no new applicants now will ever be granted the visa. Even if a child is willing to accept full financial responsibility for their parent(s) there's no way this visa can actually (effectively) be granted.

Yes, but the ONLY way the child can accept full financial responsibility is if they change the visa conditions, which would be best served by creating a completely new visa, similar to the old 410 visa. That means the parent has no eligibility for Medicare, pensions and aged care, and the child meets all of those costs (or takes out insurance to cover them). 

Frankly I don't understand why they got rid of the old 410 visa, but the fact that they did, suggests they would be reluctant to reinstate something like that for parents. 

I agree they should shut down the parent visa to new applications immediately, as they did in New Zealand and Canada when the lists got ridiculously over-subscribed. We may even become like the UK, where there are no parent visas.

It's true that in some countries, the culture is to look after one's parents in old age. However the fact remains that for every migrant who wants to bring their parent to Australia, there are several others who don't want to or need to.  If Australia can find enough of the latter to satisfy demand, why should they bother to cater for the former? The children always have the choice to go home. 

[LindaH27]

5 hours ago, Adam111 said:

Gee the rug has been pulled in just a few short years.

So we now have over 120k application for the contributory visa in queue and at current rates of ~6k approvals per year the wait for anyone new applying is 20 years+ based on current numbers. So in 10 years it's gone from 1 year processing to 20 years. 

Where does it say 120 k for contributory visas? Any lists I’ve seen in the recent past would imply that 120k is actually the combination of both contributory AND non contributory visas. Quite a lot of those visas are also aged parent visas for those over 67 - and they are allowed to wait onshore whilst waiting for their grant,  and if from one of 11 countries they will get reciprocal health care in Australia,  so it’s likely the applications for these visas are really blowing out now as people are changing to them because of the wait times . 

However yes the wait is very long and the visas  should be halted temporarily whilst the new govt decides what to do. They have stated that they are looking at the wait  times for all visas including the parent backlog. They have an awful of of work to do as they’ve only just been elected. Give them a chance to see what they suggest 

[ramot]

2 hours ago, Marisawright said:

Yes, but the ONLY way the child can accept full financial responsibility is if they change the visa conditions, which would be best served by creating a completely new visa, similar to the old 410 visa. That means the parent has no eligibility for Medicare, pensions and aged care, and the child meets all of those costs (or takes out insurance to cover them). 

Frankly I don't understand why they got rid of the old 410 visa, but the fact that they did, suggests they would be reluctant to reinstate something like that for parents. 

I agree they should shut down the parent visa to new applications immediately, as they did in New Zealand and Canada when the lists got ridiculously over-subscribed. We may even become like the UK, where there are no parent visas.

It's true that in some countries, the culture is to look after one's parents in old age. However the fact remains that for every migrant who wants to bring their parent to Australia, there are several others who don't want to or need to.  If Australia can find enough of the latter to satisfy demand, why should they bother to cater for the former? The children always have the choice to go home. 

As the 410  visa was stopped in 2005, and the new very expensive  405 visa started, there must have been a good reason, there were rumours of rorts, for the government to end the 410. and then also ending the new 405 in 1918? The 405 seemed such a lucrative one for the government, I thought they were on a winner. 

The reality of starting a new type of 410, is that there would possibly be thousands and thousands and thousands who would go on it, all getting older, and getting too expensive for them and their families to cover and then trying desperately to get government help. Perhaps that is what happened to people on both visas? we had to re-apply for our visas, initially every 2 years, then extended to 4 years, before then extended to 10, if we couldn’t get the visa renewed we had to leave, this did happen, so there is a level of insecurity on this type of visa.

One reason quite a few people I knew who left, was that the cost of living just getting too high, and the exchange rate to the pound getting worse. It was $3 to the pound when we came in 2003, so the prospect of returning to the UK permanently, with free health care was also a deciding factor.

Edited July 3, 2022 by ramot

[Tulip1]

5 hours ago, Adam111 said:

Even if a child is willing to accept full financial responsibility for their parent(s)

This would be impossible to implement.  How much would the child need to guarantee this.  A million dollars or more, to be increased each year to cover rising costs.  One or both of their parents may live into their 90’s with high medical needs including around the clock care.  What if they had millions but 20 years later when their parents needed expensive care it had been spent.  Should the parents then use Australian tax payers money or should they be deported and the children be ok with this based on the fact they didn’t keep to the agreement.  I expect the child would be going to the press with the story of how mean Australia is trying to kick an old person out from their home.  There would be the usual photo of all the family around the bedside trying to make out Australia is in the wrong not them.  Making it possible to bring parents over at no cost to tax payers sounds a good idea in principle but it could never be implemented or policed.  The website should be clear about the timescales and then the child knows they either leave their parents behind and start their new life without them or they stay put to be near them.   

[Nemesis]

2 hours ago, Tulip1 said:

This would be impossible to implement.  How much would the child need to guarantee this.  A million dollars or more, to be increased each year to cover rising costs.  One or both of their parents may live into their 90’s with high medical needs including around the clock care.  What if they had millions but 20 years later when their parents needed expensive care it had been spent.  Should the parents then use Australian tax payers money or should they be deported and the children be ok with this based on the fact they didn’t keep to the agreement.  I expect the child would be going to the press with the story of how mean Australia is trying to kick an old person out from their home.  There would be the usual photo of all the family around the bedside trying to make out Australia is in the wrong not them.  Making it possible to bring parents over at no cost to tax payers sounds a good idea in principle but it could never be implemented or policed.  The website should be clear about the timescales and then the child knows they either leave their parents behind and start their new life without them or they stay put to be near them.   

You would also have the problem of what happens with the parents if the children leave Australia? I've heard of cases where the parents come over and then the kids, with the grandkids, decide they want to go home.So many scenarios that as you say the policy could never be implemented. I do find it a bit strange that so many people migrate and then expect that their extended families can follow them - did they not look into this before moving?

[purplealster]

56 minutes ago, Nemesis said:

I do find it a bit strange that so many people migrate and then expect that their extended families can follow them - did they not look into this before moving?

Perhaps the people that migrated made their decision to move here on the basis of there being a parent visa available - which until a couple of years ago had a processing time of 18 months attached to it on the Immi website. 

Edited July 3, 2022 by purplealster

[TADec16]

4 minutes ago, purplealster said:

Perhaps the people that migrated made their decision to move here on the basis of there being a parent visa available - which until a couple of years ago had a processing time of 18 months attached to it on the Immi website. 

I raise my hand to that! I and my wife Brought (paid for) our 5 dependents (back then) education, so they could migrate and We would follow afterwards.

[Guru81]

Finally some progress: We have received a request from Home Affairs to submit additional docs and AOS today. Our acknowledgment date for 143 was 24th of August 2016.

Edited July 8, 2022 by Guru81

[Juliet7]

Same here, so things are definitely moving.  

[Guru81]

15 hours ago, Juliet7 said:

Same here, so things are definitely moving.  

All the best

[Arashtinbenmik]

Does anyone has the word  doc link to check?! 

[DuongT]

Hello,

My mom applied for 173 visa, acknowledgement date 31/08/2016 but haven’t received anything yet. 
 
Any new update? 
Thanks!!!

[Prasad.mahadik]

HI All,

Received an email for AOS & additional docs (Medical/PCC/AFP) on 28/7/22.

SO it seems things are moving slowly..

[DuongT]

Any one applied 173? Can give me some infomation?

Thanks 

[amsaini15]

On 29/07/2022 at 11:34, Prasad.mahadik said:

HI All,

Received an email for AOS & additional docs (Medical/PCC/AFP) on 28/7/22.

SO it seems things are moving slowly..

Please keep us updated. Thanks

[Kukoo 19/10/16]

Good news. When did u apply. What is acknowledgment date.

[Kukoo 19/10/16]

I applied in Oct.2016. When we will hear a good news.

[purplealster]

My mum has been requested to provide more documents. Application date 13/09/2016

[Kukoo 19/10/16]

We applied on 21/10/2016. So for nothing heard from IMMI. Will any let me know whether we can get pcc from Australia/UK/India in advance. These days we are in UK for about 4 months.

[RJ27]

Hi guys,

Has anybody applied 143 around the 25th of September in 2016 being requested for additional docs & AOS in recent days?

Thanks!

[Ryllo]

Can anyone speculate on the following please? Are visa applications for Ukrainians getting priority at the moment?

Nationality: Irish
Country of Birth: Ukraine

143 application 06/07/2022
Additional docs incl AoS, medicals, police certs: 13/07/2022
Contact from Centrelink re AoS payment: 15/08/2022
Medicals scheduled for Sept 2022

Approval likely soon after medicals? 
When would 2nd instalment of payment be due and how long is given to make that payment from notification?

Thank you
 

[RJ27]

On 15/08/2022 at 15:26, RJ27 said:

Hi guys,

Has anybody applied 143 around the 25th of September in 2016 being requested for additional docs & AOS in recent days?

Thanks!

Hi guys,

We received an email for AOS & additional docs (Medical/PCC/AFP) today! 

 

Applied offshore visa 143 on 29/09/2016.

Acknowledgment received on 29/09/2016.

Received request for additional docs & AOS on 17/08/2022.