Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 I cannot find it on the LEGEND.COM Directions 42 Certain skilled migration visas (1) Th The following processing priorities (with highest priority listed first) should be applied to applications under the skilled migration program as specified in Item (2)(a) – (t) of Schedule A and Item (1) and (2) of Schedule B: (a) applications from persons who are employer sponsored under the Employer Nomination Scheme and the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme; (b)applications from persons who are nominated by a State/Territory government and have nominated an occupation on the CSL; © applications from persons who are sponsored by a person other than a person mentioned in 8(1)(a) or (b) and whose occupations is listed on the CSL; (d) applications from persons who are neither nominated nor sponsored but who have nominated an occupation on the CSL; (e) applications from persons who are nominated by a State/Territory government and have not nominated an occupation on the CSL; (f) (i) applications from persons whose occupations are listed on the MODL; and (ii) applications from persons who are sponsored by a person other than a person mentioned in 8(1)(a) or (b) and have not nominated an occupation on the CSL; (g) all other applications are to be processed in the order in which they are received. Hi Glenn I have the presentation from the "OET Conference 2009" up on my screen. The link to it is here: http://www.occupationalenglishtest.org/Documents/ViewDocument.aspx?club=oet&DocumentID=896ea706-9671-4fb0-9dd7-8920d3d720db It doesn't say who the presenter was but it says "People our business" on every page so tcillc is right. DIAC must have made this presentation to the OET Conference. One slide is headed "Reforms to General Skilled Migration" and lists the following items: Further reviews of the Critical Skills List to give priority to the skills most in need Review of the points test Review of the MODL Review of Business Skills category Review of ENS/RSMS They may not have mentioned the points test in a Ministerial Direction as yet but a review of it has definitely been/is being considered, I think. I suspect that part of their "New Option" will be a raised points mark and they could then invite appliicants who can meet it to join a new, fast track queue for visa processing priority, perhaps? This could be coupled with an option of a free transfer to the new option, I suspect. It could be worse though. They could simply raise the pass mark across the board and offer a refund of the VAC to anyone who no longer qualifies for a GSM visa, doesn't want to try for employer sponsorship and simply wants to forget about Australia's existence instead? Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Wanderer Please do NOT add another word to this thread. You have given us the benefit of yet another of your rambling sermons, most of which is nothing more than idle speculation and wishful thinking on your own part. ONE example is sufficient. If DIAC had clued up investigators of their own it would not have taken them as long as it did to spot that Pathway D was being abused in the clearest, clumsiest, crudest manner imaginable. It would also not have taken them as long as it did to wake up to the fact that their staff were approving bogus 900 hours documents. As George says, DIAC were asleep at the wheel and the rest of your theory about their supposed brilliance is nothing more than an expression of what you want to believe. I will NOT have this thread de-railed and confused by endless homilies from you. You have already wrecked two earlier threads with excessive verbosity and lack of clarity. Just stay OUT of this thread completely from now on. You have made your feelings known and you do NOT need to labour your points. Anybody who is interested in your opinion will read your single contribution to this thread and that will be enough for us all. If you defy me about this - or you try to bicker with me about it - your posts will be deleted each time I log on and catch up with you. This thread is devoted to the topic of the best way to lobby the Minister. That is the project, that is what will happen and it will happen without reference to your opinions. I trust I have made myself 100% clear. Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcillc Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 I have the presentation from the "OET Conference 2009" up on my screen. The link to it is here: http://www.occupationalenglishtest.org/Documents/ViewDocument.aspx?club=oet&DocumentID=896ea706-9671-4fb0-9dd7-8920d3d720db It doesn't say who the presenter was but it says "People our business" on every page so tcillc is right. DIAC must have made this presentation to the OET Conference. Sorry, missed the presenter: Ms. Elizabeth Carter Acting Director Independent Skilled Migration Policy Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) Ms Elizabeth Carter is the Acting Director, Independent Skilled Migration Policy at the Department of Immigration & Citizenship. She is a member of the OET Stakeholder Group and provided attendees with an update from DIAC and Skilled Migration. OET - CARS : News and Research Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mach Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Amid the seventeen-odd pages of hyperbole, at least one point of interest was raised. That was the suggestion that current 175 and 176 applicants should be focusing their attention on getting ENS. As I live with a recruitment specialist and we both know the Australian market very well, I can only conclude from our conversations on the subject that it is borderline impossible to conduct normal recruitment processes between Australia and Europe. Firstly, European applicants are placed at an immediate disadvantage because of their inability to simply just turn up to an interview at 9 am next Tuesday. And secondly, applicants are almost always not eligible to work in Australia until after the position has been offered to them, paperwork has been filed, more fees have been paid to DIAC, and then the whole thing must be approved. This invariably takes months and relies on the prerequisite that the candidate is ready to move as soon as they get the visa (i.e., notice has already been handed in on current jobs, the period of notice served, house sold, pets on passports, kids out of schools, furniture crated, flights booked, etc.) Considering the normal termination period in Europe for a management position is between one and three months, it means the earliest start time for a European applicant is realistically a minimum of six months from the actual job offer. As an Australian employer weighing up the advantages between two candidates, the above would seriously count against anyone in the first round of any recruitment. Not only is the ENS process considered to be extra paperwork, time consuming and a hassle, there are no guarantees that the candidate would even pass medicals were it to get all the way to that stage. In short, choosing this person over an Australian or someone else onshore who is already eligible to work in Australia, would be an expensive gamble of gargantuan proportions. It is little wonder, therefore, that sites like seek.com.au and others almost always have "Must be eligible to work in Australia" posted in big, bold red letters at the bottom of every job ad. The Australian employers I have talked to know little to nothing about ENS. And want even less to do with it once they know the nuts and bolts. They understand 457 and consider that to be the limit to which they will go for exceptional candidates from abroad. Aside from the medical professions, some areas of IT and engineering, where the demand is chronic (hence them being on the CSL to start with, negating the need for ENS), 457 visas are often awarded to employees who already work at sister offices of the Australian employer. Indeed, I would be very interested to see a statistical breakdown of 457 visas awarded to multinational transfers to Australia (e.g., London office to Sydney office) compared to those awarded to external candidates. Again, I would expect the first group would dwarf the latter. One final problem is occupations on the SOL and MODL where you are a consultant or work as your own boss. Like many others, I would happily sponsor myself for ENS, but sadly DIAC are unlikely to go for it. A great deal needs to be done to overhaul the ENS system before Chris Evans can realise his dream of every migrant stepping off flight QF1 directly into a waiting job. While it is a good idea in principle, and is awarded much faster than other visas at the moment, it requires a massive number of ducks to be in a row for a migrant to be able to take that job in a viable timeframe for an Australian employer. A good start towards fixing this impossible situation is Glenn's suggestion of some kind of bridging or TR visa while the 175 or 176 application is in its final stages of processing (e.g., DIAC has ticked all its boxes, performed its checks and accepted that person). By taking away the time consuming red tape, you at least put applicants at the same level going into the interview stage. While location is a problem, it is also a choice. If the candidate shows willingness to commit to being in Sydney during November for interviews, for example, it goes a long way towards leveling the playing field even further. However, without that all important "Must be eligible to work in Australia", the only thing you will be taking home from that trip is a nice tan and a bad case of typer's cramp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKlaut Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Hi Glenn It could be worse though. They could simply raise the pass mark across the board and offer a refund of the VAC to anyone who no longer qualifies for a GSM visa, doesn't want to try for employer sponsorship and simply wants to forget about Australia's existence instead? Cheers Gill Did they do that, I hope, it would be the final point in their way of making career in migration policy. There is nothing more devastating can be devised than raising the pass mark with retroactive effect, for people who have been already waiting in the queue for one, two or three years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Lombard Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Hi Gill, This agenda is a bit old hat - Peter Speldewinde seems to trot it out every time he talks and I think the salient part is the failure to acknowledge, whenever it's presented, that they had an oversupply of applicants, which makes it all a bit shallow, don't you think? As for the TRA and pathway D, it's convenient to blame TRA, particularly because of the new ground in customer relations which they broke when implementing it, but DIAC knew very well what was going on and has never been averse to checking the veracity of documents provided to the skills assessing bodies, whether those bodies only undertake rudimentary checking or are known for their rigor. Glenn and other Melbourne-based agents were warning for a long time that there was a scam underway but DIAC variously imitated an ostrich, a turtle, Lord Nelson and sometimes all three at once in heroically avoiding knowledge of the actual situation, just not clear if they thought it would evaporate by itself or if Australia really did need all those cooks and hairdressers from particular regions. Cheers, George Lombard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Firstly, European applicants are placed at an immediate disadvantage because of their inability to simply just turn up to an interview at 9 am next Tuesday. And secondly, applicants are almost always not eligible to work in Australia until after the position has been offered to them, paperwork has been filed, more fees have been paid to DIAC, and then the whole thing must be approved. This invariably takes months and relies on the prerequisite that the candidate is ready to move as soon as they get the visa (i.e., notice has already been handed in on current jobs, the period of notice served, house sold, pets on passports, kids out of schools, furniture crated, flights booked, etc.) Gday Mach This is not helped by recruiters not deploying webcam/teleconference technology and failing to brief employers on visa options to widen the list of candidates - after all the biggest gripe in recruitment is "not enough good candidates". Under Aussie laws, recruiters need to either become RMAs or work alongside one to educate sponsors about visas, and I don't think they can really be bothered. A rethink of the recruitment agency / employer communication system would go along way to easing the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 A good start towards fixing this impossible situation is Glenn's suggestion of some kind of bridging or TR visa while the 175 or 176 application is in its final stages of processing (e.g., DIAC has ticked all its boxes, performed its checks and accepted that person). NZ used to have a JSV, 6 month(?) Job Search Visa,a nd withion ayear it had been swamped with applicants from India, more than 40,000 from one country for a 24,000 seat programme to take people from all over the world. The then Minsiter Dalziel canned it and said only 11,000 peoiple were affected (but these were the ones eneterd in the system properly. NZIS New Delhi had 30,000 more files in boxes, unopened and uncounted and stacked upo to the ceilings (I saw them), and therefore quite deniable to the Minister despite their being received onto NZ territory. There's no easy way out of this other than to finalise the ones nearest the exit, offer refunds to new arrivals and disaffected individuals and GET IT RIGHT THE NEXT TIME! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Hi Gill, This agenda is a bit old hat - Peter Speldewinde seems to trot it out every time he talks and I think the salient part is the failure to acknowledge, whenever it's presented, that they had an oversupply of applicants, which makes it all a bit shallow, don't you think? As for the TRA and pathway D, it's convenient to blame TRA, particularly because of the new ground in customer relations which they broke when implementing it, but DIAC knew very well what was going on and has never been averse to checking the veracity of documents provided to the skills assessing bodies, whether those bodies only undertake rudimentary checking or are known for their rigor. Glenn and other Melbourne-based agents were warning for a long time that there was a scam underway but DIAC variously imitated an ostrich, a turtle, Lord Nelson and sometimes all three at once in heroically avoiding knowledge of the actual situation, just not clear if they thought it would evaporate by itself or if Australia really did need all those cooks and hairdressers from particular regions. Cheers, George Lombard Yes, but did they keep the Minister informed and/or did the Minster just ignore the advice? :goofy: I tend to think that it's a bit of lack of forward planning inside DIAC (added to a lack of consultation with the industry) and lack of early action by the Minister(s) (which means DIAC were not forceful enough in their presentations. All of that ties back to Mr Metcalf, he who also oversaw the DIAC failure to implement the Minister's earlier processing priorities. :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 The "7 Ps of Success" must be unknown inside DIAC Proper Prior Preparation Prevents P*ss Poor Performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jackster Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Future of migration for existing applicants Whats the future of migration for australia?? how are they going to get the tradespeople ENS is not the way forward, theres to many unknowns for both parties, i reckon one year from now, when the recession is well and truly over, all trades will be on senetor Evans new S.C.S.L (seriously critical skills list. thats if he is still there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OZSEEKER Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Hi Glenn, The online tracker is not having sub class 136, 137 and other pre september 2007 visa classes to track existing/pooled applications. No one have raised concerns on these pre sep 2007's many many pending applications. Will DIAC starts act on such applications if they start getting nominated by states with CSL occupations. Should they wait till they enter into new SCSL( seriously critical skills list) under new coming rules? Future of Migration It is important that we take stock of what has happened and look forward to the future. DIAC has a sophisticated computer system that can prepare reports Under individual headings or combination of headings. FOR EXAMPLE • By agents • By sub-class • By occupations • By Country Hence DIAC officer at all times had access to various models. The Minister has made a determination indicating that a new on-shore GSM and off-shore GSM will be announced shortly. The 23 rd Sept announcement and the MODL review gives a clear indication that DIAC has a number of models in mind and was seeking input from the public including registered Migration Agents. It is a fact based on statistical data that the Independent off-shore GSM and Off-shore GSM did not target labour shortage. It is a fact that there was a lack of “checks & balances” of the State sponsorship. It is a fact that both off-shore and on-shore GSM was scammed. In my opinion Timelines for both on-shore and offshore announcements has been finalised. In my opinion there will be two queues • Old policy • New Policy I am sure DIAC will give an applicant an opportunity to move to the new policy if it is advantageous without payment of fee. They have used it in the past with Reg 2.11. I think the time to change the Minister’s mind to revoke his decision has past. I think it is time to make a submission to the Minister on behalf of POMSINOZ how to manage the old policy applicants rather than keep them in a queue for an unspecified period. REGARDS GLENN PEREIRA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pom64 Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 2 November 2009 Dear Sir/Madam General Skilled Migration (GSM) Priority Processing Arrangements The Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, Senator Chris Evans, has, in accordance with Section 499 of the Migration Act 1958, given a Direction setting processing priorities for certain skilled migration visa applications. This Direction applies from 23 September 2009 to all skilled migration applications, including those in the final stages of processing. The Direction gives priority to employer sponsored applicants and to applicants who have a nominated occupation which is in critical need, and are either sponsored by a State/Territory government or by a family member. Section 51 of the Migration Act 1958 contains powers by which the Minister can consider and finalise visa applications in an order of priority that the Minister considers appropriate. Officers of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship are bound to follow this Ministerial Direction which applies to every stage of visa processing. All General Skilled Migration (GSM) visas are subject to the processing priorities set out in Direction 42 Order of consideration – certain Skilled Migration visas, except for: · Skilled – Recognised Graduate Subclass 476; · Skilled – Designated Area – Sponsored Subclass 883; · Skilled – Regional Subclass 887. These applications will continue to be processed in the order in which they were received by the Department. The Direction gives the following processing priorities (with highest priority listed first): 1) applications from persons who are employer sponsored under the Employer Nomination Scheme and the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme; 2) applications from persons who are nominated by a State/Territory government and have nominated an occupation on the Critical Skills List (CSL); 3) applications from persons who are sponsored by family and who have nominated an occupation on the CSL; 4) applications from persons who are neither nominated nor sponsored but who have nominated an occupation on the CSL; 5) applications from persons who are nominated by a State/Territory government and have not nominated an occupation on the CSL; 6) (i) applications from persons who have nominated an occupation that is listed on the Migration Occupations in Demand List (MODL); and (ii) applications from persons who are sponsored by family and have not nominated an occupation on the CSL; 7) all other applications are to be processed in the order in which they are received. The CSL is a list of occupations developed in response to the changing critical skills needs of Australia. The CSL can be found on the Department’s website at: http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/critical-skills-list.pdf This new Processing Priority Direction replaces the previous Processing Priority Direction which commenced on 1 January 2009. The processing priority arrangements change the order in which applications are processed and the length of time it will take to finalise applications. However, these changes have not affected the requirements to be satisfied for the grant of a visa. As the economic situation changes, the Government will review its measures to ensure that the program target and objectives are achieved. How are you affected? As your nominated occupation is not on the CSL and you have applied for an offshore GSM visa it is unlikely that your visa will be finalised before the end of 2012. Your ‘nominated occupation’ is the occupation you nominated at the time you lodged your application and can not be changed. The priority processing arrangements apply to all applications, irrespective of the date your application was lodged; whether health and character clearances have been provided or your application is in the final stages of processing or your nominated occupation was previously on the CSL. Please note that these application processing times are based on the current visa application rate, the Processing Priority Direction (in effect from 23 September 2009), and the availability of places in the Migration Program. You will be contacted when your visa application is re-allocated to a case officer. Please do not contact the Department to request your application be exempt from the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship’s Priority Processing Direction as case officers must adhere to the Minister’s Direction. Processing priorities are subject to change. Any changes to these priorities or processing times will be updated on the Department’s website. See: http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/whats-new.htm Providing outstanding documents If you were previously requested to undergo further health and character checks but have not yet initiated these, you should not proceed until a further request is made by the Department. If you have already undergone your health and character checks, these should be forwarded to the Department. However, processing of your application will not be finalised until further notice. Unless you are advising the Department of a change in your personal circumstances (for example, changes to address, contact details or family composition) no further documentation should be provided by you until your case officer contacts you. Your visa status For Offshore GSM applicants (subclasses 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 175, 176, 475, 495 (offshore), and 496) who are in Australia, bridging visas are not applicable to your application. To remain lawfully in Australia you will need to ensure you continue to hold a visa (such as a Tourist or Student visa). Can I provide a new skills assessment? If you obtain a new skills assessment for an occupation included on the CSL, this can only be considered with a new application. You must ensure you meet the legislative criteria in place at the time of lodgement. Any new application will require a new Visa Application Charge (VAC). Can I withdraw my application and get a refund of my Visa Application Charge (VAC)? If you wish to withdraw your application, you must advise the department in writing. This advice can include any number of applicants but must be signed by each person aged 18 years and over. You may seek a refund of the VAC; however legislation provides only limited circumstances in which refunds may be given. A VAC is usually only refunded when an application is deemed unnecessary or was made as a result of a mistake by either the applicant or the Department. A refund will not be given in circumstances where an applicant considers a ‘mistake’ was made because they: · changed their mind; · do not satisfy a criterion for visa grant; or · do not wish to proceed with their application because it will take longer to process than expected. Where can I get further information? The case officer previously assigned to your application will no longer be able to assist with enquiries about your application. Information on skilled visa processing is updated regularly and can be obtained by sending a blank email to: aspc.processing@immi.gov.au (for applications being processed in Adelaide) or gsmb.information@immi.gov.au (for applications being processed in Brisbane). This is an automated email service. Further advice and information concerning priority processing arrangements and other changes to General Skilled Migration visas is available on the Department’s website at: http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/whats-new.htm Yours sincerely Nancy Agostinetto General Skilled Migration GSM Adelaide Phone: +61 1300 364 613 Have a lok at this guys got this from our agent today Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mach Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 Future of migration for existing applicants Whats the future of migration for australia?? how are they going to get the tradespeople ENS is not the way forward, theres to many unknowns for both parties, i reckon one year from now, when the recession is well and truly over, all trades will be on senetor Evans new S.C.S.L (seriously critical skills list. thats if he is still there. Haha, by then all those occupations and trades will be on Chris Evans' panic ONATRTHGTNZIL* *Oh No All The Real Talent Has Gone To New Zealand Instead List Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Lombard Posted November 2, 2009 Share Posted November 2, 2009 The text of the 9 November legislation amendments has just been released, and although it certainly now would allow DIAC to refund visa application charges paid by any applicant, most of the changes on refunds seem to be about the death of an applicant, and I certainly hope they're not relying on that as a solution. See ComLaw Legislative Instruments - Migration Amendment Regulations 2009 (No. 13) (SLI 2009 No. 289) . Cheers, George Lombard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sydbing Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 (NB: Only the main applicant is counted in the 108,100. Partmers & children are not counted for the purpose of this set of stats.) Quite sure this is NOT true. All applicants including dependents are counted. Confirmed by both ASPC and GSMB Manager. 08-09 Program Report also reflected this as the by principal (main applicant) bar graph showed a total of only about 51K skilled-stream applications approved for last program year, where as 114,777 skilled-stream applicants were approved (quota was 115,000). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Quite sure this is NOT true. All applicants including dependents are counted. Confirmed by both ASPC and GSMB Manager. 08-09 Program Report also reflected this as the by principal (main applicant) bar graph showed a total of only about 51K skilled-stream applications approved for last program year, where as 114,777 skilled-stream applicants were approved (quota was 115,000). Hello sydbing Welcome to Poms in Oz. I am right as a matter of fact. DIAC do not count any member of a family apart from the main visa holder in the stats which you describe. For every 100,000 skilled visas granted, about 300,000 to 400,000 people actually move to Australia when you add in their partners and children as well. No doubt the agents will confirm this to you later. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Lombard Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 Hi Gill, Not sure I can back you up on that. DIAC gets very rubbery with those sets of figures. Cheers, George Lombard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Freaks Posted November 3, 2009 Share Posted November 3, 2009 most of the changes on refunds seem to be about the death of an applicant, and I certainly hope they're not relying on that as a solution.Cheers, George Lombard As an applicant I too hope this is not the solution!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sydbing Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 Hello sydbing Welcome to Poms in Oz. I am right as a matter of fact. DIAC do not count any member of a family apart from the main visa holder in the stats which you describe. For every 100,000 skilled visas granted, about 300,000 to 400,000 people actually move to Australia when you add in their partners and children as well. No doubt the agents will confirm this to you later. Cheers Gill Unfortunately this is not true. I called GSMB (DIAC GSM Brisbane) Manager Ms Kerrish yesterday and she confirmed the quota counts every VISA (not application) granted. This was also confirmed by ASPC (DIAC Adelaide Skilled Processing Centre) Assistant Director Mr Lorenzi last year. Program year 2008-09, only about 51,000 skilled applications were approved with 114,777 visas granted. ps. My boss is MARA registered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Justin JIANG Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 That's a horrible thing if it's true. If someone as a main applicant has ten dependants and get his/her visa approved, it would indicate 11 visa quota being deducted for the current year. Awesome!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest eurosyl Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Unfortunately this is not true. I called GSMB (DIAC GSM Brisbane) Manager Ms Kerrish yesterday and she confirmed the quota counts every VISA (not application) granted. This was also confirmed by ASPC (DIAC Adelaide Skilled Processing Centre) Assistant Director Mr Lorenzi last year. Program year 2008-09, only about 51,000 skilled applications were approved with 114,777 visas granted. ps. My boss is MARA registered. I have to agree with this post in full as the reported numbers are supported by the figures in the budget. Although it has not been reported (or better said I have not been able to find it in the published docs for the running year (hansard), I could find them for the previous terms: Have a look here: http://www.aph.gov.au/SENATE/committee/legcon_ctte/estimates/bud_0809/diac/94_attachment.pdf and compare these figures with the reported migration outcome here: Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics There is a 100% match for the 2006-2007 outcome, and a close to matching match (104634 vs 108540, but with one month less reported for the first value as that runs to May31st and not to June30th) for the 2007-2008 financial year. From the first document it can clearly be read that the grants consist of both primary and secondary applicants and the breakdown between those is given. The number of principal appliants in this stream for 2006-2007 was 48997, for the 2007-2008 financial year it was 50646 up to May31st (these totals are given under the breakdown tables on ASCO code as these are Principals only). Which makes the 51,000 as put forward by sydbing quite believable. I think there is a confusion to what DIAC considers an application and a clear definition from their side should be available. If one visa application form is lodged and it includes 2 applicants, does this statistically count as 2 applications? Considering the outcome: it results (hopefully) in 2 grants, so the answer should be yes to make things comparable (or list more details). And another thought: the way the figures are presented suggests that there are a lot of people with a skill under their belt and ready to join the workforce enter Australia. Clearly this is only a percentage of the outcome, as not all partners and certainly not the dependent kids will be able to perform at that level. How would the Oz gov feel about that when figures are presented as is? "Actually.. we granted 114,777 skilled visas in 2008-2009, but of those only 51,000 applicants will be able to do skilled work". ------Start Edit Further interesting read: Skilled Migration as part of the 3416.0 - Perspectives on Migrants, 2009 series as published by the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Note: these statistics have to do with recent arrivals in Australia, and cannot directly be translated to granted visas for a specific year (as we all know that not all people make the move the same year). The document is valueable for its comments and the trending of arrivals with certain types of visas, as well as its breakdown of primary vs secondary applicants. It should also be noted, when considering skilled visa counts, that approximately half of all skilled visas are issued to dependents and persons accompanying the primary applicant of the skilled visa. Dependent outcomes are addressed later in this article, as well as in Migrant Characteristics and Settlement Outcomes of Secondary Applicants, a related article in this series. ------End Edit Cheers, Sylvia *considering services to Ozzie gov as data analyst* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dolores Posted November 6, 2009 Share Posted November 6, 2009 Hi I am not conversant with the finer points of immigration but I would like to see a percentage allocation of each sub class of visa given every year- at least then you know your visa will be moving up in the queue even it is slowly. Also as mentioned in previous threads there can be no guarantees that CSL applicants take up the occupations they applied for so surely this makes the exclusion of other skilled, educated applicants keen to enter Australia pointless, especially sponsored ones with financial and emotional support waiting for them. I really hope through campaigning we can make a change- my husband and I wish to join his family in Oz and applied in good faith that our application would be treated fairly, it is not a lottery ticket when your numbers might come up when your 50, we all want to live our lives. Thanks Dolores Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher McGrath Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 What DIAC has done is disgraceful, but unfortunately, it’s not new. In my 27 years advising I have seen retrospective law and/or policy changes that affected applications already lodged many times. The DIAC current motto "PEOPLE OUR BUSINESS" is a joke. Remember the Minister is just the face at the front, no experience in this field, but heavily influenced by the old guard leader of DIAC Andrew Metcalf who is way past his use by date. No new ideas. Australia will continue to rely on migration, always has, always will. The Minister increased the numbers of skilled visas twice in late 2008. Seemingly not "knowing" then the world was close to a financial meltdown. When he became aware, the new policies were swift. He will all of a sudden see the writing on the wall, that industry is reliant on workers, skilled and semi-skilled and suddenly take the brakes off, spin doctoring that he has managed the department wisely. Folks, it’s a numbers game, DIAC does not care about YOU, it’s just numbers and who gets the visas does not concern them. So you have waited as long as you have, bad luck, but remember above all "People are our business"". It’s sick. Good on you Glenn, a man I know professionally who is always on the front foot, looking for ways to do something. Gill, were you at the MIA conference, was it last month's or in a previous year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 Hello Chris The relevant MIA Conference was the one in Melbourne in October 2009. No, I did not attend! I live in the UK. At the MIA Conference Jamie Smith and several others were told that there are about 160,000 skilled visa applications in the pipeline. In the recent ABC radio interview Mark Webster said about 140,000 GSM applications, divided about 50/50 between onshore and offshore visas, and that about 65,000 GSM visas should be granted during the 2009/10 program year. In view of the posts by Eurosyl and others above, though, there seems to be some doubt about how many primary visa applicants are involved. Whoever allowed this mess to develop deserves to be shot in my view. Alan Collett has remarked elsewhere on Poms in Oz that in any sort of business other than Government, this sort of debacle would cause departures from the Board. He is absolutely right. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.