The Brand New PIO Parents Visa thread

[Ferrets]

10 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Ive really debated whether to post this or not! 

I’ve spent a fair bit of time recently looking at reports, google etc. Yes I know the statement - that there are lies damned lies and statistics!

One of Australia’s great strengths is its multi culturism. 

However what is obvious is that the larger the applicant country is the more visa applicants(for any kind of visa)  there will be. That is a fact. 

Without meaning to be controversial in any way - as there is such a demand would it not be fairer to give each applicant country a certain percentage of the visa places available (whether skilled worker, parent, partner etc)  in order to give applicants from smaller countries an equal crack of the whip? 

We are all in the same boat waiting and wanting to be with our families so I hope no offence is taken as none was meant  - just trying to see if there was a fairer way for everybody. The only thing that seems set in stone is the current government dislike of parents and the slow down of visas granted to the extent that places still available out of the so-called “ceiling” are not being granted. 

Their main fear seems to be that as older people we will cost their taxpayers a lot of money. As always there’s an answer - check the applicants income, savings etc to ensure they are self sufficient, make it a rule they also take out private health care  - or is that too simple? 

I have one question that I don’t know the answer to - apologies if it’s too simple a question!  Is each application treated as  one visa grant off the amount available  no matter how many apply on that application or does the grant count depend on how many parents and also adult dependant children there are on that application ? 

 

 

The problem is they did try to make a change via the AoS...and there was uproar because this didn't look at the parent's ability to support themselves (and it was retrospective)

But If it had been a means testing of the applicants (i.e. must have AUD $2m in the bank)....there would have been uproar as it wouldn't look at the children's ability to support their parents.

The broader issue that is not being openly discussed is that Australia wants young migrants as a part of economic policy (note that the skilled visa is now virtually impossible to get after 45 vs. 50 a couple of years ago) but the availability of chain migration to these migrants (parent visa, last remaining relative, etc) means the number of people eligible for parent visas is ballooning by tens of thousands (if not more per year).

Realistically, either there is going to have to be a significant change to the AoS / Income requirements or waiting times will continue to increase for the CPV, as I cannot see any appetite here politically to increase the number of parent visas.

I know it's not nice for all those in limbo at the moment, especially when the government tries t make retrospective changes, but I don't think the reversal on the AoS is the end of the issue by any means and therefore parent groups need to seek a bigger voice.

Good luck to everyone. 

 

 

 

[Marisawright]

11 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Their main fear seems to be that as older people we will cost their taxpayers a lot of money. As always there’s an answer - check the applicants income, savings etc to ensure they are self sufficient, make it a rule they also take out private health care  - or is that too simple? 

 

Yes, it is too simple.   Private health care does not cover GP visits or prescriptions - the Australian taxpayer still has to subsidise those.    Even if you're healthy now, the average person in their seventies or eighties is visiting the doctor fairly frequently, and is often on a cocktail of several expensive drugs.  

Besides,  I don't think the Australian government could get away with forcing parents to maintain private health insurance or they'll be refused treatment even if they're dying.  Or perhaps the government should say, maintain your private health insurance or we'll deport you?   Circumstances change, people can make bad investments and end up in hardship, or outlive their savings. Can you imagine the outcry if the government turned an old granny away from the hospital or put her on a plane? 

I'm sure you have every intention of supporting yourself and doing the right thing, but you will still benefit from taxpayer support in lots of small ways.  And there will be plenty of other parents who will not scruple to take advantage of every benefit that's going. It's human nature.

[Kathss56]

6 hours ago, ant111 said:

Sorry perhaps I misread. Usually they issue the visa before these expire. Therefore if the issue is delayed they may delay this process. But I think your parents should not have to do them again anyway. 

I think also you have to enter Australia on the visa before these expire. Fingers crossed for them 

[Kathss56]

6 hours ago, Ferrets said:

The problem is they did try to make a change via the AoS...and there was uproar because this didn't look at the parent's ability to support themselves (and it was retrospective)

But If it had been a means testing of the applicants (i.e. must have AUD $2m in the bank)....there would have been uproar as it wouldn't look at the children's ability to support their parents.

The broader issue that is not being openly discussed is that Australia wants young migrants as a part of economic policy (note that the skilled visa is now virtually impossible to get after 45 vs. 50 a couple of years ago) but the availability of chain migration to these migrants (parent visa, last remaining relative, etc) means the number of people eligible for parent visas is ballooning by tens of thousands (if not more per year).

Realistically, either there is going to have to be a significant change to the AoS / Income requirements or waiting times will continue to increase for the CPV, as I cannot see any appetite here politically to increase the number of parent visas.

I know it's not nice for all those in limbo at the moment, especially when the government tries t make retrospective changes, but I don't think the reversal on the AoS is the end of the issue by any means and therefore parent groups need to seek a bigger voice.

Good luck to everyone. 

 

 

 

Would just be grateful if they did the full 7175 per year not less and less 

[sh aron]

Hello everyone 

Any news or updates ???  the immi mail shows assessing applications till 30th  April , I  applied 23 rd April  still waiting 

[Tidang]

Hi sh aron do you have mail invatation commence documents preparation ?

[Ray and Geri]

7 hours ago, Ferrets said:

The problem is they did try to make a change via the AoS...and there was uproar because this didn't look at the parent's ability to support themselves (and it was retrospective)

But If it had been a means testing of the applicants (i.e. must have AUD $2m in the bank)....there would have been uproar as it wouldn't look at the children's ability to support their parents.

The broader issue that is not being openly discussed is that Australia wants young migrants as a part of economic policy (note that the skilled visa is now virtually impossible to get after 45 vs. 50 a couple of years ago) but the availability of chain migration to these migrants (parent visa, last remaining relative, etc) means the number of people eligible for parent visas is ballooning by tens of thousands (if not more per year).

Realistically, either there is going to have to be a significant change to the AoS / Income requirements or waiting times will continue to increase for the CPV, as I cannot see any appetite here politically to increase the number of parent visas.

I know it's not nice for all those in limbo at the moment, especially when the government tries t make retrospective changes, but I don't think the reversal on the AoS is the end of the issue by any means and therefore parent groups need to seek a bigger voice.

Good luck to everyone. 

 

 

 

Seems Australia would prefer only highly skilled young orphaned immigrants.......Anybody read "Empty Cradles "........ 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Ray and Geri

[Ray and Geri]

41 minutes ago, sh aron said:

Hello everyone 

Any news or updates ???  the immi mail shows assessing applications till 30th  April , I  applied 23 rd April  still waiting 

Us too Sharon and other than the auto reply when we sent off the first of our forms 80 nothing..... but at least we have started the process after 3 years of waiting.

[Mrs Depp]

My frustration doesn't have anything to do with the issue that parent visas are costing the Government more money. My annoyance is based on the lack of communication to everyone who has paid the initial visa application fee based on the criteria that the Government set at the time of the application. For Immigration to continuously move the goal posts is disgusting. If the costs have risen dramatically then put the changes in place for those that have not yet applied and stop penalising those who have followed the criteria, regardless of Nationality or the number of people on the application form. 

 

I'm not great with politics but it's not rocket science to figure that older people might have to visit the doctor more frequently than a person much younger than them. This isn't a new thing so you can't tell me they have just come to that realisation. Jeez who are voting in these thick sh*ts!! 

[sh aron]

44 minutes ago, Tidang said:

Hi sh aron do you have mail invatation commence documents preparation ?

yes they all submitted on 23 March (visa 173)

[ant111]

13 minutes ago, Mrs Depp said:

My frustration doesn't have anything to do with the issue that parent visas are costing the Government more money. My annoyance is based on the lack of communication to everyone who has paid the initial visa application fee based on the criteria that the Government set at the time of the application. For Immigration to continuously move the goal posts is disgusting. If the costs have risen dramatically then put the changes in place for those that have not yet applied and stop penalising those who have followed the criteria, regardless of Nationality or the number of people on the application form. 

 

I'm not great with politics but it's not rocket science to figure that older people might have to visit the doctor more frequently than a person much younger than them. This isn't a new thing so you can't tell me they have just come to that realisation. Jeez who are voting in these thick sh*ts!! 

All Aussie governments seem ruthless  even to their own depts. - staffing levels. They also tend to blame immigrants for many things, eg their poor infrastructure investment. We are  easy prey, but who votes them in?

 

[Mrs Depp]

9 minutes ago, ant111 said:

All Aussie governments seem ruthless  even to their own depts. - staffing levels. They also tend to blame immigrants for many things, eg their poor infrastructure investment. We are  easy prey, but who votes them in?

 

Not me, I’m not a citizen...yet. That’s another queue that keeps on growing, despite us living here for the right amount of time that the criteria asked for when we applied.

You are right, they seem to have an issue with all us immigrants.   Why allow us in the country to then blame us when it things don’t add up,  surely the blame lies with those who agreed to let us in in the first place.

When I do get to vote though I will use my vote wisely.

[Ryanlee]

54 minutes ago, Mrs Depp said:

Not me, I’m not a citizen...yet. That’s another queue that keeps on growing, despite us living here for the right amount of time that the criteria asked for when we applied.

You are right, they seem to have an issue with all us immigrants.   Why allow us in the country to then blame us when it things don’t add up,  surely the blame lies with those who agreed to let us in in the first place.

When I do get to vote though I will use my vote wisely.

The government tend to blame none citizens because they don’t have votes right.

it looks like the current government is deliberately delaying grant 143 visa by technically reducing 143 visa places yearly and setup roadblocks to delay the whole process ( it takes about 14-18 weeks for AOS processing - unbelievable)

Any change shouldn’t affect the applicants that currently waiting on the queue as they met all the criteria set by the government at the time of submission.

It would be great if someone in this forum asks his/her sponsor to reach out to SBS or the Guardian to get media attention about contributory parent visa long delay processing, then hopefully some senators will step up to give some pressures to the current government  (we have been told that the processing time is 18-24 months by the time of application)

Kev 

Edited May 16, 2018 by Ryanlee

[Mrs Depp]

17 minutes ago, Ryanlee said:

The government tend to blame none citizens because they don’t have votes right.

it looks like the current government is deliberately delaying grant 143 visa by technically reducing 143 visa places yearly and setup roadblocks to delay the whole process ( it takes about 14-18 weeks for AOS processing - unbelievable)

Any change shouldn’t affect the applicants that currently waiting on the queue as they met all the criteria set by the government at the time of submission.

It would be great if someone in this forum asks his/her sponsor to reach out to SBS or the Guardian to get media attention about contributory parent visa long delay processing, then hopefully some senators will step up to give some pressures to the current government  (we have been told that the processing time is 18-24 months by the time of application)

Kev 

I’m looking forward to the day one of them knocks on my door canvassing for my vote. They won’t have a clue what’s hit them!

[ramot]

1 hour ago, Mrs Depp said:

I’m looking forward to the day one of them knocks on my door canvassing for my vote. They won’t have a clue what’s hit them!

Let's be honest Neither party cares, labour was in government when they screwed up thousands of  International students with several retrospective changes. My son was directly affected twice and then when everything was front loaded as required, visa lodged and paid for the labour government retrospectively changed the rules. He was one of the lucky ones, on a bridging visa for 3 years before being one of the very few who got PR. Most students had to leave after living here for years, as the route to PR was refused, many lost their money as the government made it very hard to reclaim it.

so don't hold your breath that Labour will be any more immigrant/parent friendly.

[Mrs Depp]

2 minutes ago, ramot said:

Let's be honest Neither party cares, labour was in government when they screwed up thousands of  International students with several retrospective changes. My son was directly affected twice and then when everything was front loaded as required, visa lodged and paid for the labour government retrospectively changed the rules. He was one of the lucky ones, on a bridging visa for 3 years before being one of the very few who got PR. Most students had to leave after living here for years, as the route to PR was refused, many lost their money as the government made it very hard to reclaim it.

so don't hold your breath that Labour will be any more immigrant/parent friendly.

I totally agree neither party cares, same in the UK. Doesn’t mean I can’t voice my opinion of them to them when I do become a citizen

[ramot]

1 minute ago, Mrs Depp said:

I totally agree neither party cares, same in the UK. Doesn’t mean I can’t voice my opinion of them to them when I do become a citizen

I agree we certainly made our opinions felt during the student fiasco and I sent emails to 6 senators plus our MP about the AOS increases. I think you have to be proactive if you have a chance of change.

[Ryanlee]

14 minutes ago, ramot said:

I agree we certainly made our opinions felt during the student fiasco and I sent emails to 6 senators plus our MP about the AOS increases. I think you have to be proactive if you have a chance of change.

I do believe if there are a lot of sponsors voice their concerns to senators and the media about deliberately visa processing delay,  the opposition party and crossbenchers  will do something.

Edited May 16, 2018 by Ryanlee

[SusieRoo]

3 hours ago, Ryanlee said:

(we have been told that the processing time is 18-24 months by the time of application)

When did you apply?

Also you can if you wish, add your timeline to the bottom of your posts via the signature settings.

[SusieRoo]

With an election coming round in the next 12 months, I can see why politicians would be sensitive to any news stories which make them look bad. But does being tough on immigration do that? I don't think regular Australians really care too much about parent visas, but they are upset with overcrowding in Sydney and Melbourne and the high cost of housing.

Unfortunately the existing parent visas system is just not working in today's world. It's always going to be a fine balance when looking after the needs of immigrant families while considering the broader needs of society. Sadly for us, we appear to have found ourselves in the middle changing situation and the visa process we entered is not going to stay the same for much longer.

I wouldn't mind the idea of applying for the new temp parent visa, except having a maximum stay of only ten years is not right for us. If this condition were removed, could this be a fairer solution for everyone? Very little cost to the taxpayer and families get to be reunited. And it also stops the parent visas system being abused for economic reasons. Maybe we would be better campaigning to make changes the new visa, so it becomes a viable opportunity for genuine parents.

What conditions would you need to see change, to make the new visa acceptable?

[Jellybean T]

1 hour ago, SusieRoo said:

With an election coming round in the next 12 months, I can see why politicians would be sensitive to any news stories which make them look bad. But does being tough on immigration do that? I don't think regular Australians really care too much about parent visas, but they are upset with overcrowding in Sydney and Melbourne and the high cost of housing.

Unfortunately the existing parent visas system is just not working in today's world. It's always going to be a fine balance when looking after the needs of immigrant families while considering the broader needs of society. Sadly for us, we appear to have found ourselves in the middle changing situation and the visa process we entered is not going to stay the same for much longer.

I wouldn't mind the idea of applying for the new temp parent visa, except having a maximum stay of only ten years is not right for us. If this condition were removed, could this be a fairer solution for everyone? Very little cost to the taxpayer and families get to be reunited. And it also stops the parent visas system being abused for economic reasons. Maybe we would be better campaigning to make changes the new visa, so it becomes a viable opportunity for genuine parents.

What conditions would you need to see change, to make the new visa acceptable?

We would also consider this if you could renew every 5 years but also we would need to be able to buy a house as renting would soon eat into the savings. 

[LindaH27]

Overcrowding in Sydney and Melbourne  and high house prices?? That’s only what happens world wide in big cities and it won’t stop happening in Australia as it’s call for only young migrants is only going lead  to them having children and grandchildren etc.

I renember the debate around this ”demographic time bomb” going on in the late eighties - politicians just turned a blind eye instead of looking at the infrastructure and future demands. 

[ant111]

10 hours ago, Ryanlee said:

I do believe if there are a lot of sponsors voice their concerns to senators and the media about deliberately visa processing delay,  the opposition party and crossbenchers  will do something.

Would hope so. But a lot of sponsors are not citizens, can't vote so can be ignored. 

[ant111]

8 hours ago, SusieRoo said:

With an election coming round in the next 12 months, I can see why politicians would be sensitive to any news stories which make them look bad. But does being tough on immigration do that? I don't think regular Australians really care too much about parent visas, but they are upset with overcrowding in Sydney and Melbourne and the high cost of housing.

Unfortunately the existing parent visas system is just not working in today's world. It's always going to be a fine balance when looking after the needs of immigrant families while considering the broader needs of society. Sadly for us, we appear to have found ourselves in the middle changing situation and the visa process we entered is not going to stay the same for much longer.

I wouldn't mind the idea of applying for the new temp parent visa, except having a maximum stay of only ten years is not right for us. If this condition were removed, could this be a fairer solution for everyone? Very little cost to the taxpayer and families get to be reunited. And it also stops the parent visas system being abused for economic reasons. Maybe we would be better campaigning to make changes the new visa, so it becomes a viable opportunity for genuine parents.

What conditions would you need to see change, to make the new visa acceptable?

Better some certainty than 10 yrs and none.

[SusieRoo]

6 hours ago, LindaH27 said:

Overcrowding in Sydney and Melbourne  and high house prices?? That’s only what happens world wide in big cities and it won’t stop happening in Australia as it’s call for only young migrants is only going lead  to them having children and grandchildren etc.

I renember the debate around this ”demographic time bomb” going on in the late eighties - politicians just turned a blind eye instead of looking at the infrastructure and future demands. 

The problem in Australia is nearly all immigration is centred on these two places. And if you’ve lived there for years and believe it’s now too crowded, it’s not unreasonable to vote for the politicians who are sympathetic.

 

.