What would you say to the Minister of Immigration? Really.

[Guest guest17301]

we were really hoping for some sort of positive news today.... guess this was one of those wishful thinking meetings today.

 

we have decided not to give up, (175 application was lodged 30.08.2008, CO assigned 17.8.2009, meds and pcc finalised 23.9.2009).

 

we are starting the process again by applying for a new assesment from the ACS. my husbands original assesment code is not on the CSL, so we'll try for one thats on the CSL and lodge a new application, pay a new fee and hope no funny surprises will pop up :-)).

 

well try to get some sort of compensation from the DIAC.........

 

I wouldn't be too hasty if I were you...everything met...you've probably only got a few months delay...just my opinion though and I'm no expert. If I were you I would save my cash and sit tight, probably not long to wait.

[Guest renette]

that is exactly why we are trying everything to get to perth, for the sight of the sea to sooth our souls too.. we are living in Austria, and the snow does not have that effect on my soul as the sea does:cute:.

 

well, we were looking at the processing times for 175 CSL, and i think that the processing for a 175 CSL will be quicker than a 175 non csl with WA state sponsorship??? have been working on our aus visa for almost 2 and a half years now, and just want the thing to be finalised now

[Guest Jamie Smith]

It is a prime example of how numbers do and will need to be reigned in at times, the very thing that can upset applicants affected.

 

Not at all Wanderer.

 

Had the last Government acted 2 years ago when DIAC first went to them with the model showing how students would saturate the GSM and GSM numbers were increasing anyhow, or had the next (current) Govt acted one year ago when they got shown the worse situation 12 months on, the numbers would not need to be reined in and applicants need not suffer.

 

This is nothing more than a knee jerk reaction to a situation was previously ignored by the knee jerkers. It is entirely the fault of the current Minister and his predecessor, the highly ineffective Kevin Adrews(?).

 

It is also the fault of DIAC senior management to fail to draw the Minsiters' attention. Methinks they didn't cry wolf loudly enough.

[basil]

:sigh: ....what would I say to the minister of immigration?

 

Right now it would be 'Please Sir, Can I have my money back?'

 

Would quite like to just forget this whole 'journey' of a visa process, rather than constantly be waiting and hoping....and waiting.

[Guest TheHollies]

:sigh: ....what would I say to the minister of immigration?

 

Right now it would be 'Please Sir, Can I have my money back?'

 

Would quite like to just forget this whole 'journey' of a visa process, rather than constantly be waiting and hoping....and waiting.

 

I think theres a few of us that would like to say something abit stronger than that right now :twitcy::wink:

[Guest timkerbell2009]

 

we are starting the process again by applying for a new assesment from the ACS. my husbands original assesment code is not on the CSL, so we'll try for one thats on the CSL and lodge a new application, pay a new fee and hope no funny surprises will pop up :-)).

 

well try to get some sort of compensation from the DIAC.........

 

 

Hi good luck starting again, you are braver than me! As for the compensation thing just a thought; maybe it would be better to wait until you have the visa in your hand before applying for compensation?

[basil]

I think theres a few of us that would like to say something abit stronger than that right now :twitcy::wink:

 

I know, me too, but i'm at the point where i'd consider some Oliver Twist style begging to get my visa .....or a refund.....or even some better timescales and more detailed news.

 

I can't help but feel there must be a difference in timescales between someone who applies december 31st 2009 and someone who has everything met since August.......we can't ALL be waiting until 2013 surely?

[Guest TheHollies]

I know, me too, but i'm at the point where i'd consider some Oliver Twist style begging to get my visa .....or a refund.....or even some better timescales and more detailed news.

 

I can't help but feel there must be a difference in timescales between someone who applies december 31st 2009 and someone who has everything met since August.......we can't ALL be waiting until 2013 surely?

 

 

our thoughts exactly :yes:

[Guest wanderer]

Jaimie,

Had the last Government acted 2 years ago when DIAC first went to them with the model showing how students would saturate the GSM and GSM numbers were increasing anyhow, or had the next (current) Govt acted one year ago when they got shown the worse situation 12 months on, the numbers would not need to be reined in and applicants need not suffer.

 

Oversupply of cooks and hairdressers of dubious quality etc. is one thing but you would really need to look at the actual figures and besides, two years ago the economy was booming.

One year ago Rudd was trying to get attention at the UN when Freddie and Fanny became so prevalent I don't think you'll find them too popular as baby names in the US at least for a couple of centuries and Rudd came home developing his stimulus packages on the back of an envelope.

 

All that aside you call the scaling back of immigration a knee jerk reaction!, now there's a great line there somewhere.

Off course the numbers need to be reined in now and possibly even more so depending on where the unfixed GFC decides to head, likely into a worse orbit unfortunately.

 

The theory of immigrants creating work is fine in buoyant times but we do not exactly have those but if you like having more people come on board to share the pain could work I suppose if they are bringing their life's savings to spread about, not something I'd be recommending though.

[Guest Jamie Smith]

Suggestion to applicants.

 

Write to a) the CEO of DIAC, b) the DIAC manager for Migration and Visa Policy and c) the Minister of Immigration (their details later).

Something like this:

 

Dear Sir

 

I wish to lodge a formal complaint about the handling of my visa application by DIAC.

The application was lodged at a time that the most senior people responsible for running the Australian migration programme (being the CEO of DIAC, the Manager of Migration Visa Policy and the Minister of Immigration) knew Skilled Independent and other MODL based visa numbers were becoming higher than the programme could allow for in any year.

 

You were made aware up to two years ago that DIAC modelling indicated that the numbers of students who were likely to apply for permanent residency would compound the problem.

Yet you let the student numbers develop unabated and did not change policy settings or processing priorities in a timely manner.

You failed to advise me that these rising volumes meant there could be delays in deciding my application, the likelihood as you knew was that the visa grant date for my case would go well beyond the processing times shown in recent visa grants being tracked by applicants and agents the world over.

I had a fair and reasonable expectation that my visa would be processed within normal timeframes as DIAC advise in budget estimates and service quality standards on their website.

 

I also made the application under Australian laws, knowing that I would not be discriminated against based on my occupation and necessary choice of visa subclass.

You failed to advise me that the Minister instructed DIAC in January to hold off processing visas in my subclass, based on my non-CSL MODL based occupation. This may have caused me to withdraw my application, but it would certainly have given me pause for thought before incurring any additional costs as processing continued.

 

You failed to advise me that DIAC continued to process my application against the Minister's wishes, with DIAC asking me to incur significant costs plus expend a great deal of personal time.

Your neglect to advise me properly also raised my expectations that due process was being applied to my application such that these new costs and requests for information would soon result in grant of a visa.

As these requests for more information and documentation with associated costs were evidently against the Minister’s instructions and my visa would no longer be granted in a timely manner, so you failed to ensure that I was properly informed and I thus have had my rights as a consumer of Australian Government services impinged upon.

You are responsible for my recent costs and frustration, and I require compensation.

 

That compensation can either be by way of:

 

 

• Immediately restoring the assessment and decision making process for my visa subclass and ultimately granting my application within two months, or
  
• Agreeing to accept a claim from me for costs that I have incurred since the Minister instructed DIAC to restrict processing on my visa subclass in January PLUS restoring the visa decision making process for my visa subclass and ultimately granting my application within two to six months, or
  
• Cancelling my visa application without future prejudice to my making subsequent applications and offering me a full refund - including all third party costs incurred relevant to making my application and complying with DIAC requests for information and documentation, of course this claim will be backed by receipts. Costs will include police clearances, migration agent fees, medical checks, skills assessments, post and courier, visa application fees and anything else reasonably documented and related to my application.
  

 

The Minister mentioned to the Senate on 20 October that a number of Sri Lankan boat people just wanted to work in Australia - well so do we!

 

The Minister also mentioned on that same day that he insisted on doing the morally right thing by the family of the 5 people drowned on an unseaworthy vessel purchased as a result of DIAC cost cutting, regardless of legal technicalities.

 

We believe the Minister should show us that his moral character is not limited to a one off event where people had to die to get his attention. We are after all following the proper procedures and legal requirements, we are not trying to jump any queue or provide false information.

 

We believe that the Minister should take responsibility and demonstrate that his moral position is consistent, that it extends to cover the thousands of customers affected by your combined lack of earlier action in managing the inflow of MODL applications once the problem was brought to your attention.

 

Setting limits and shaping migration programme volumes was your job to do at the time you knew the inflow was changing, and you missed that opportunity.

 

DELETE AS NECESSARY – My family now suffers as a result of this lack of timely decision making.

The late response and subsequent over-reaction to the rising inflow of MODL based visas means we will now be ineligible to migrate as a family if we wait the two years advised to us. My son/daughter will then no longer be able to be included in our application and thus will not be able to migrate with us. We will migrate as a family and add to the Australian workforce for years to come, or we will not migrate at all.

It is your job to help lift the unfair and discriminatory suspension of processing of non-MODL cases.

We ask for nothing more than a) that our natural rights be accorded us and b) that our reasonable expectations be met - rights that were created in dealing with your Government and expectations that were formed as a result of information provided by DIAC on many occasions.

We trust that you will do the morally right thing, "regardless of the legal technicalities".

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

CONTACT DETAILS

Senator Chris Evans

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

Telephone: +61 2 6277 7860

Fax: +61 2 6273 4144

Email: minister@immi.gov.au

 

 

 

 

Mr Andrew Metcalfe

Secretary, Department of Immigration and Citizenship

PO Box 25

Belconnen ACT 2616

Telephone: +61 2 6264 2560 / 2561

 

Fax: +61 2 6264 2670

 

Email: andrew.metcalfe@immi.gov.au

 

 

 

 

Mr Peter Vardos PSM

 

First Assistant Secretary

Migration and Visa Policy Division

 

Department of Immigration and Citizenship

PO Box 25

Belconnen ACT 2616

Telephone: +61 2 6264 1888

Fax: +61 2 6264 1887

Email: peter.vardos@immi.gov.au

 

 

 

 

Come on everybody! :Randy-git:

[merlino]

Suggestion to applicants.

 

Write to a) the CEO of DIAC, b) the DIAC manager for Migration and Visa Policy and c) the Minister of Immigration (their details later).

Something like this:

 

Dear Sir

 

I wish to lodge a formal complaint about the handling of my visa application by DIAC.

The application was lodged at a time that the most senior people responsible for running the Australian migration programme (being the CEO of DIAC, the Manager of Migration Visa Policy and the Minister of Immigration) knew Skilled Independent and other MODL based visa numbers were becoming higher than the programme could allow for in any year.

 

You were made aware up to two years ago that DIAC modelling indicated that the numbers of students who were likely to apply for permanent residency would compound the problem.

Yet you let the student numbers develop unabated and did not change policy settings or processing priorities in a timely manner.

You failed to advise me that these rising volumes meant there could be delays in deciding my application, the likelihood as you knew was that the visa grant date for my case would go well beyond the processing times shown in recent visa grants being tracked by applicants and agents the world over.

I had a fair and reasonable expectation that my visa would be processed within normal timeframes as DIAC advise in budget estimates and service quality standards on their website.

 

I also made the application under Australian laws, knowing that I would not be discriminated against based on my occupation and necessary choice of visa subclass.

You failed to advise me that the Minister instructed DIAC in January to hold off processing visas in my subclass, based on my non-CSL MODL based occupation. This may have caused me to withdraw my application, but it would certainly have given me pause for thought before incurring any additional costs as processing continued.

 

You failed to advise me that DIAC continued to process my application against the Minister's wishes, with DIAC asking me to incur significant costs plus expend a great deal of personal time.

Your neglect to advise me properly also raised my expectations that due process was being applied to my application such that these new costs and requests for information would soon result in grant of a visa.

As these requests for more information and documentation with associated costs were evidently against the Minister’s instructions and my visa would no longer be granted in a timely manner, so you failed to ensure that I was properly informed and I thus have had my rights as a consumer of Australian Government services impinged upon.

You are responsible for my recent costs and frustration, and I require compensation.

 

That compensation can either be by way of:

 

 

• Immediately restoring the assessment and decision making process for my visa subclass and ultimately granting my application within two months, or

• Agreeing to accept a claim from me for costs that I have incurred since the Minister instructed DIAC to restrict processing on my visa subclass in January PLUS restoring the visa decision making process for my visa subclass and ultimately granting my application within two to six months, or

• Cancelling my visa application without future prejudice to my making subsequent applications and offering me a full refund - including all third party costs incurred relevant to making my application and complying with DIAC requests for information and documentation, of course this claim will be backed by receipts. Costs will include police clearances, migration agent fees, medical checks, skills assessments, post and courier, visa application fees and anything else reasonably documented and related to my application.

 

The Minister mentioned to the Senate on 20 October that a number of Sri Lankan boat people just wanted to work in Australia - well so do we!

 

The Minister also mentioned on that same day that he insisted on doing the morally right thing by the family of the 5 people drowned on an unseaworthy vessel purchased as a result of DIAC cost cutting, regardless of legal technicalities.

 

We believe the Minister should show us that his moral character is not limited to a one off event where people had to die to get his attention. We are after all following the proper procedures and legal requirements, we are not trying to jump any queue or provide false information.

 

We believe that the Minister should take responsibility and demonstrate that his moral position is consistent, that it extends to cover the thousands of customers affected by your combined lack of earlier action in managing the inflow of MODL applications once the problem was brought to your attention.

 

Setting limits and shaping migration programme volumes was your job to do at the time you knew the inflow was changing, and you missed that opportunity.

 

DELETE AS NECESSARY – My family now suffers as a result of this lack of timely decision making.

The late response and subsequent over-reaction to the rising inflow of MODL based visas means we will now be ineligible to migrate as a family if we wait the two years advised to us. My son/daughter will then no longer be able to be included in our application and thus will not be able to migrate with us. We will migrate as a family and add to the Australian workforce for years to come, or we will not migrate at all.

It is your job to help lift the unfair and discriminatory suspension of processing of non-MODL cases.

We ask for nothing more than a) that our natural rights be accorded us and b) that our reasonable expectations be met - rights that were created in dealing with your Government and expectations that were formed as a result of information provided by DIAC on many occasions.

We trust that you will do the morally right thing, "regardless of the legal technicalities".

Yours sincerely

 

 

 

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

CONTACT DETAILS

Senator Chris Evans

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

Parliament House

Canberra ACT 2600

Telephone: +61 2 6277 7860

Fax: +61 2 6273 4144

Email: minister@immi.gov.au

 

 

 

 

Mr Andrew Metcalfe

Secretary, Department of Immigration and Citizenship

PO Box 25

Belconnen ACT 2616

Telephone: +61 2 6264 2560 / 2561

 

Fax: +61 2 6264 2670

 

Email: andrew.metcalfe@immi.gov.au

 

 

 

 

Mr Peter Vardos PSM

 

First Assistant Secretary

Migration and Visa Policy Division

 

Department of Immigration and Citizenship

PO Box 25

Belconnen ACT 2616

Telephone: +61 2 6264 1888

Fax: +61 2 6264 1887

Email: peter.vardos@immi.gov.au

 

 

 

 

Come on everybody! :Randy-git:

 

 

Nice one Jamie, your suggestions in bold are sharp and concise. Rock solid! Can we copy and paste accordingly?

 

But question is, would a) DIAC CEO, b) DIAC Manager or c) Minister give a crap?

[Guest renette]

Hi there,

 

Wow, guess that is exactly what everybody wants to say to the australian authorities!

question of thought..... if i am still hoping to get my visa granted some time in the future, i guess such strong statements will negatively influence my visa application or???

[Guest Jamie Smith]

Anybody can use that whereever and whenever you want, modified or not.

 

You won't know who gives a cr*p unless you push them off the potty first to see what they've achieved!

[Guest Jamie Smith]

Hi there,

 

Wow, guess that is exactly what everybody wants to say to the australian authorities!

question of thought..... if i am still hoping to get my visa granted some time in the future, i guess such strong statements will negatively influence my visa application or???

 

No it won't. DIAC cannot hold your desire to get a visa in timely manner against you. In fact, anything they say in reply might be able to be used against them if this suspension ever gets to the lawyers for class action.

 

The recipients should be made to see the people behind the thousands of visas that have been suspended.

 

You're part of a community Renette, it needs to stick together. Doing nothing will benefit nobody except the recipients of the letter.

[merlino]

Hi there,

 

Wow, guess that is exactly what everybody wants to say to the australian authorities!

question of thought..... if i am still hoping to get my visa granted some time in the future, i guess such strong statements will negatively influence my visa application or???

 

I thought about that for a second too... then I figured, what's there to lose? Either way, we're still getting our visas in 2013. :wink:

[Guest Jamie Smith]

That's it. Make your voice heard, you faceless visa applicant you !

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Wanderer

 

Off course the numbers need to be reined in now and possibly even more so depending on where the unfixed GFC decides to head, likely into a worse orbit unfortunately.

 

 

What are you talking about, please? The quota of 108,100 skilled migrant visas for the 2009/10 skilled migration program was set at 108,100 in May 2009 amd it has not been changed since then.

 

What has been happening since December 2008 is a clear demonstration by the Minister for Immigration that he is totally unable to decide which migrants to "spend" this 108,100 visas on.

 

In December 2008 the Minister decided that the State Migration Centres should be in charge of selecting GSM visa applicants via the skills listed in their State Sponsorship lists. He considered that applicants with skills on his CSL MK I were an urgent priority, and since they were in demand in all States (at any rate, so the Minister believed) there was no need to use the State selection mechanism in order to choose them.

 

In March 2009 the Minister apparently noticed a sudden fall in demand for Construction Tradespersons right across Australia. The Construction Industry fell off a cliff, it would seem, since they only took 12 weeks to go from being vitally needed in Oz asap to being not needed at all unless a State wanted the person concerned for some reason (presumably not necessarily for a reason involving Construction according to the Minister's analysis.)

 

Therefore he produced his CSL Mk II and out of Construction Tradies, only Wall & Floor Tilers survived that - for reasons which I am totally unable to fathom but I expect you can explain why this is so, please?

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/critical-skills-list.pdf

 

If you are not cconstructing the buildings in the first place, what do you need Tilers for?

 

On September 23rd 2009 the Minister changed his mind yet again. He has now decided that there is only a need for Health Professionals & Engineers, primarily. He is not bothered about where in Australia these Health people and Engineers settle. Indeed, he is not bothered about whether they continue to work as Health Professionals or Engineers in wherever they might decide to settle. That is entirely optional and will be left to the new migrants to decide for themselves.

 

I believe you live in QLD? I've never been there so please bear with me. I only know a small number of place names (and approx locatiions of them) in QLD.

 

Let us say that you are a well-trained, experienced GP headed for QLD thanks to the CSL. The GP is heading for QLD because he greatly anjoyed a visit to QLD a few years ago.

 

What would persuade him to move to a small town 300kms from Mt Isa instead of to a coastal location closer to the South of the State, please? There are already plenty of GPs in the popular locations but there isn't a single well-trained, experienced GP who speaks fluent English in the small town 300kms from Mt Isa. Nevertheless the small town has a population of 6,000 souls and that many people can definitely produce enough health problems between them for them to need a good doctor.

 

Isn't the Minister looking for a needle in a haystack in trying to find an ace GP who is also a social anthropologist and a philanthropist rolled into one?

 

Is this how you would "spend" your 108,100 visas if you were the Minister for Immi?

 

Gill

[Guest jason RM0107604]

Hi Jason

 

I did some sleuthing about the Engineers yesterday. Essentially the Aussie engineering companies who are short of engineers say as follows:

 

1. The Engineers trained in Australia are trained in the wrong way so they are no use to the engineering industries when they are recent graduates.

 

2. The Engineers trained offshore might have been very well trained but they don't have the right combinations of specific skills for Australia's needs.

 

The engineering companies are reluctant to sponsor migrant engineers because the migration process takes too long and then they have to be taught the missing skills when they arrive. The companies are reluctant to incur the costs involved when they can't force the Engineer in whom they have invested so much money and time to stay with them for long enough for the employers to get a return on their investments.

 

The companies also moan that there is a great lack of senior engineers with management experience and also the supply of engineers with 5 years or more of work experience has dried up.

 

Not to worry. The Minister for Immi is on the case and riding to the rescue. He is determined to offer them engineers who won't actually be of any use to the companies who need engineers. If of course the engineers who will soon be en route to Oz via the CSL have any intention of doing any sort of engineering once they reach Oz, bearing in mind that the CSL does not try to force them to seek work in their nominated occupations in Oz.

 

Once in Oz these Engineers will soon become a motley, scruffy rabble because the shortage of people to cut their hair will get worse......

 

Bizarre!

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

 

Gill i agree with you 150% percent. i dont want to lower standards for engineers - but rather would suggest that if they had implemented long term planning a long time ago - they wouldnt have this problem. you know i would think that someone studying engineering in aust would likely be on equal footing to an australian recent graduate of engineering. i think thats probably a good place for the minister to start developing his policies.

 

my point is that the minister should have seen that he was have 10,000 hairdressers and an undersupply of engineers above 6 years ago - blind freddy could have seen that. it is easier for hairdressers to quality - particularly offshore. the a last hairdresser case i did, someone from diac investigating the case went to my clients salon(not a case officer), basically asked for a free haircut and refused the case because she didnt like the style. this is despite my client winning 3 regional hairdressing awards. why i was dissapointed is if they dont want hairdressers - then say so at an early stage before people start applying.

[Guest stillwaiting79]

Suggestion to applicants.

 

Write to a) the CEO of DIAC, b) the DIAC manager for Migration and Visa Policy and c) the Minister of Immigration (their details later).

Something like this:

 

(drafted letter that was posted)

 

 

 

Jamie,

 

Dont/wouldnt we qualify for a Class Action thing? (blame my suggestion on too much of J.Grisham is you must :biggrin:)

 

I love the letter idea and will be sending 1 out to all three guys you mentioned.

 

However, I am just sick of waiting and the unsecurity is killing me .... wish I could do something to get things moving and not have to listen to a no-excuse of a minister/senator/whatever they're called all sitting down to waste an afternoon deliberating & talking big.... makes me sick and sounds soo damn 3rd world!

 

there I go venting again...

 

cheers...

[Guest Jamie Smith]

Good on you stillwaiting79

 

Make a noise. Bureaucrats love silent customers.

[Guest wanderer]

Wanderer

 

Quote:

Off course the numbers need to be reined in now and possibly even more so depending on where the unfixed GFC decides to head, likely into a worse orbit unfortunately.

 

What are you talking about, please? The quota of 108,100 skilled migrant visas for the 2009/10 skilled migration program was set at 108,100 in May 2009 amd it has not been changed since then.

 

What has been happening since December 2008 is a clear demonstration by the Minister for Immigration that he is totally unable to decide which migrants to "spend" this 108,100 visas on.

 

In December 2008 the Minister decided that the State Migration Centres should be in charge of selecting GSM visa applicants via the skills listed in their State Sponsorship lists. He considered that applicants with skills on his CSL MK I were an urgent priority, and since they were in demand in all States (at any rate, so the Minister believed) there was no need to use the State selection mechanism in order to choose them.

 

In March 2009 the Minister apparently noticed a sudden fall in demand for Construction Tradespersons right across Australia. The Construction Industry fell off a cliff, it would seem, since they only took 12 weeks to go from being vitally needed in Oz asap to being not needed at all unless a State wanted the person concerned for some reason (presumably not necessarily for a reason involving Construction according to the Minister's analysis.)

 

Therefore he produced his CSL Mk II and out of Construction Tradies, only Wall & Floor Tilers survived that - for reasons which I am totally unable to fathom but I expect you can explain why this is so, please?

 

http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/gener...kills-list.pdf

 

If you are not cconstructing the buildings in the first place, what do you need Tilers for?

 

On September 23rd 2009 the Minister changed his mind yet again. He has now decided that there is only a need for Health Professionals & Engineers, primarily. He is not bothered about where in Australia these Health people and Engineers settle. Indeed, he is not bothered about whether they continue to work as Health Professionals or Engineers in wherever they might decide to settle. That is entirely optional and will be left to the new migrants to decide for themselves.

 

I believe you live in QLD? I've never been there so please bear with me. I only know a small number of place names (and approx locatiions of them) in QLD.

 

Let us say that you are a well-trained, experienced GP headed for QLD thanks to the CSL. The GP is heading for QLD because he greatly anjoyed a visit to QLD a few years ago.

 

What would persuade him to move to a small town 300kms from Mt Isa instead of to a coastal location closer to the South of the State, please? There are already plenty of GPs in the popular locations but there isn't a single well-trained, experienced GP who speaks fluent English in the small town 300kms from Mt Isa. Nevertheless the small town has a population of 6,000 souls and that many people can definitely produce enough health problems between them for them to need a good doctor.

 

Isn't the Minister looking for a needle in a haystack in trying to find an ace GP who is also a social anthropologist and a philanthropist rolled into one?

 

Is this how you would "spend" your 108,100 visas if you were the Minister for Immi?

 

Gill

 

 

I have used the word dynamic in previous posts Gill, in the sense that the GFC/Australian ecomomics/employment are not a set condition at all as I would hope you would appreciate.

We all to one extent or another have been involved in the unfolding of the GFC, in the UK, property prices being down and the exchange rate with A$ having fallen.

Australian property prices have not fallen too dramatically as yet and the government has been flush with stimulus packages which have done some partial good as an interim measure but there have still been plenty of debt issues and a crash may well be around the corner.

The government has put the country heavily into debt but we're told no worse so and reportedly better than most developed countries, time will tell.

 

I just posted on your Boat Peoples thread aboyt US Toxic Assets still existing and a report on the second tsunami/quake.

So with Australia not really having felt the affect of the first shock as much as we could have, the increased debt, the eventual shockwave and the second could see some much more dramatic changes.

 

So of course there have been progressive changes for the worse in the past year and to say a government should be able to make just one policy adjustment and sit back and let the storm roll would be just plainly rediculous.

I do not know about you but I would rather have a government be in the business of reviewing what is happening as some measure of predicting what could happen and making changes, any number of them to have the country best placed to handle what may arise.

 

Jaimie actually believes the government could have acted earlier re modelling by the immigration department.

 

I'm not sure what State Migration Centres you refer to but States do have their nomination procedure and they can elect to have particular skills on their list and in some instances they defer to the SOL, but immigration is still federally controlled hence the policies you see, state nomination being just one part of a particular process people can follow with applications and state nomination just like being a student does not guarantee an application will be successful.

 

What has been happening since December 2008 is a clear demonstration by the Minister for Immigration that he is totally unable to decide which migrants to "spend" this 108,100 visas on

I fail to comprehend the logic behind that statement when a priority process has been developed.

 

And with

In March 2009 the Minister apparently noticed a sudden fall in demand for Construction Tradespersons right across Australia. The Construction Industry fell off a cliff, it would seem, since they only took 12 weeks to go from being vitally needed in Oz asap to being not needed at all unless a State wanted the person concerned for some reason (presumably not necessarily for a reason involving Construction according to the Minister's analysis.)

 

Therefore he produced his CSL Mk II and out of Construction Tradies, only Wall & Floor Tilers survived that - for reasons which I am totally unable to fathom but I expect you can explain why this is so, please?

 

There has not so much been a sudden fall over a cliff either.

Yes, there have been building projects all around the country that slowed/stalled, had planning stopped etc., but still building work has gone on courtesy of home grants and government funds allocation to schools in particular.

 

DEEWR is the department that does the surveys of industry/employer groups etc. and determines what skills are predicted to be in demand.

 

If you know any tilers, you'll know that there are not quite so many older ones - it's work that is tough on the knees and backs, not to mention the rest of the bod.

A lot of tiling can go into some school building programs I imagine and I do have first hand experience of people struggling to get a tiler to complete a house, and sono, I'm not surprised that it is on the CSL.

 

On September 23rd 2009 the Minister changed his mind yet again. He has now decided that there is only a need for Health Professionals & Engineers, primarily. He is not bothered about where in Australia these Health people and Engineers settle. Indeed, he is not bothered about whether they continue to work as Health Professionals or Engineers in wherever they might decide to settle. That is entirely optional and will be left to the new migrants to decide for themselves.

 

I believe you live in QLD? I've never been there so please bear with me. I only know a small number of place names (and approx locatiions of them) in QLD.

 

Let us say that you are a well-trained, experienced GP headed for QLD thanks to the CSL. The GP is heading for QLD because he greatly anjoyed a visit to QLD a few years ago.

 

What would persuade him to move to a small town 300kms from Mt Isa instead of to a coastal location closer to the South of the State, please? There are already plenty of GPs in the popular locations but there isn't a single well-trained, experienced GP who speaks fluent English in the small town 300kms from Mt Isa. Nevertheless the small town has a population of 6,000 souls and that many people can definitely produce enough health problems between them for them to need a good doctor.

 

 

Gill

You do know that ahead of the CSL nominated occupations, there are employer sponsored priorities and in fact in the recent papers produced to discuss the MODL/CSL/FSL etc. it has quite clearly been identified that thinking is employer sponsorship will always be a good tool to handle short term boom/bust cycle shortfalls, much of that being done with the 457 temporary visa.

 

But yes another change was made so as the country may be best placed to meet an unknown future.

That being so, medical professions, engineers and a few other occupations have always been in high demand and so it is completely acceptable to focus the CSL on them.

As to whether highly skilled professionals elect to continue in their profession or not, I think you will find most will if able to. Sure, there can always be the junior engineers who may struggle to find a job initially through lack of experience or whatever, perhaps even not wanting to go to a remote mining centre.

At the same time, I can tell you I would not expect there to be too many engineering positions advertised that draw no applicants, there being more competition for some than others.

For the employment market is also a dynamic place too Gill and people already in employ may be looking towards something different, promotion or to relocate etc.

 

And for sure, the government is not in the business of the detailed management of the work place to the extent of dictating to people where they have to work.

On the other hand you do find as far as the medical industry in particular goes, you'll have the state health department advertising positions for particular locations and so if they are struggling to fill posts in particular locations they may be prepared to sponsor and not just nominate people, employ them basically on contract for that location and it can initally be as TR.

So that is how that may be handled, the immigration department a federal responsibility re the management of borders working in conjunction with other departments and states looking at their placement needs as they run essential services.

 

Back to engineers and whilst they may be identified as in demand, their roles are not necessarily frontline critical as in needing to be there for an injured patient and so the supply/demand basis governs where they go.

I saw on another thread that you made comment on engineers not wanting to go to remoter places and not being paid for it, or words to that effect [do correct me if I am wrong] , but as to remuneration, nothing is further from the truth re salaries offered to head out into the sticks - one of the very reasons I lived in a mining city myself at one stage.

 

As to the GP going into the sticks, let me assure you there are not too many towns with a population of over a 1000 within 300 km. of Mt Isa but I acknowledge you have stated you do not know Queensland.

 

And there are many much smaller country communities getting by without a resident doctor, ther being what are called Bush Nurses or lets say Bush Hospitals mannned by perhaps just a nurse and then the Royal Flying Doctor Service, and a couple of other volunteer flight services.

It has always been a problem getting doctors for the bush, particularly with the much smaller communities for you may appreciate that you do need so many people in a community for a doctor to maintain a living.

 

But live goes on, the doctors come and go to different larger communities and people survive, the bushies perhaps being of tougher stock and living in a healthier unpolluted environment.

 

And it is not just the sticks out Mt Isa way where the medicos can be in demand either, many rural communities, be they inland or coastal do have shortages from time to time, always has been the situation and not even the GFC will change that.

 

So I hope that has given you a little insight into how Australia works Gill

and as for

Isn't the Minister looking for a needle in a haystack in trying to find an ace GP who is also a social anthropologist and a philanthropist rolled into one?

 

Is this how you would "spend" your 108,100 visas if you were the Minister for Immi?

 

There's no needles, haystacks or aces that the minister is looking for.

He is obviously in a portfolio that impacts negatively on may aspiring migrants and that is no easy task but do think for a moment of how people are to be placed with the falling UK house prices and exchange rate and in years to come there could be many that are happy their aspiration was stalled and in fact even quite a few more who regret having made the move.

[merlino]

Good on you stillwaiting79

 

Make a noise. Bureaucrats love silent customers.

 

Anyone sent the letter to the triplets yet?

[Kazzarazza]

He is obviously in a portfolio that impacts negatively on may aspiring migrants and that is no easy task but do think for a moment of how people are to be placed with the falling UK house prices and exchange rate and in years to come there could be many that are happy their aspiration was stalled and in fact even quite a few more who regret having made the move.

 

Stop generalising Wanderer. There are many applicants also ready to move right now. No house to sell (not everybody owns a house overseas you know) and due to the REAL GFC (the one that the average Australian has been spared and really have no clue about) some people have no job either. Been unemployed for 12 months or more and renting or living with rellies/friends etc. They can get jobs in Australia but can't get ENS/RSMS sponsorship to hurry it along. There are more jobs advertised in one weeks Advertiser than some areas of the UK have had in 3 months. And, YES, many are re-advertised because the local labour is not there. Many of these applicants also have somewhere to come to and some one to live with here.

 

This whole thread is supposed to be about the ridiculous, incompetent, knee-jerk changes and the massive effect it is having on prospective migrants. Just for once, why don't you try and put yourself in their shoes. They have paid a lot of hard-earned money on the expectation that they would receive a visa within a certain time frame - as quoted AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION.

 

Kazza

[Guest Jamie Smith]

Anyone sent the letter to the triplets yet?

 

I've already had 6 pms and emails from various sources with news to that effect. We need a few hundred...

[Kazzarazza]

I've already had 6 pms and emails from various sources with news to that effect. We need a few hundred...

Hi Jamie. We are in the process of writing, as a prospective family sponsor, and explain what a massive effect this is also having on many Australian citizens. Mr Evans is tearing some families apart. Our daughter came over on a 12 month tourist visa to wait here (expected timeframe 7 months) and shipped her dog out too. She has now had to go back as it is now over 12 months since she applied and she was running out of money. Her dog is still here with us. You can imagine the traumas of the past few months. My OH also recently had his 70th birthday, so you can also imagine that the prospect of another 3 years waiting (and as a 475 Provisional applicant a further 3 years before she can get PR) is not a very pleasant one, when you get into that age range!!!

 

We have said many times, if it was only as simple as having a few jabs and spending a month in Eastern Creek quarantine station with the dog, our girl would have done it.

 

Keep up the good work, Kazza. :notworthy: