grainne73 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 But would it not be the case that for those who make an application now, and have been given State Sponsorship now (that is after 8th Feb and before April/July 2010), this application should be honoured by the DIAC and the respective state. Carlos I hope so Carlos, we are in the same boat as yourself, so heres hoping! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rhubarb Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Hi guys I'd like to do a news item on how people have been affected by these changes. So if you've been affected please do drop me a line. I think it's good to actually have people's perspective on this instead of just reporting statements from DIAC and going through what migration agents think. You are the people involved and it's good to hear your voice. You can send me a message but I cannot quote anything from this site without permission first, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welshtone Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Hi Welshtone, I was slightly confused by your opening paragraph, especially this bit: "but only certain applicants, who apply after 07th February 2010, can now score the extra 15 points. The CSL has not changed and if you apply on or after 08 February 2010 and nominate an IT specialisation on MODL, you will get Priority processing for being on the CSL, eventhough you no longer score the 15 points for MODL" So if I'm applying with the specialisation of Internet/Network/Firewall security which is on the MODL and linked off the CLS, does this mean I get the 15 points if I apply within the next month? You're saying I can get the 15 points and then say that the 15 points are no longer valid? Have I misunderstood your information? Hi Alixir Sorry for any confusion - I am saying, and always was, that you do not get 15 points for MODL if your visa application is lodged after 07 February 2010. But you will get Priority CSL processing IF you attain the required passmark without the 15 MODL points. Regards Tony Coates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I contacted the journalist that wrote the article in the SMH, http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...0208-nnbr.html Nick O'Malley is his name, sounds foreign, yeah? Here is his reply: Dear Mr Smith, Thanks for contacting me in regards to that comment piece. I'm sorry you thought it was sensationalist. I think we agree on a lot - mainly that many students and VET providers were simply following the regulations - regulations that were not achieving the policy aims. If you'd like to see your point published I reckon you should forward a short version of your letter to letters@smh.com.au<mailto:letters@smh.com.au> Regards Nick. I'd like to extend his invitation to write in, to anyone affected by the Skilled migration changes and student migration changes, to write to the newsdesk at SMH newsdesk@smh.com.au, letters@smh.com.au and also to Mr O'Malley nomalley@smh.com.au Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mcl07 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Hi everyone, I find this a useful site which searches for all news articles related to immigration in Australia (newspapers, news websites etc): NewsNow: Australian Immigration I would like to point out that I have no affiliation to the site. I merely use it myself. Not only does it have the majority of press coverage from yesterday, but today there is a direct link to an article from The Age relating to future migration in Queensland and the skills they require. I thought that it may be a useful resource for people on this site in the coming months. I myself am currently waiting my ACS skills assessment to be processed. Unfortunately I am a category 7. Not sure what to do for the best (looking at PR 175 - Computing NEC - Test Analyst). Should I apply under the current SOL or wait to see if the new skills list will benefit me or not. Decisions, decisions...much like everyone else I'm afraid. Mark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cazhoney Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 To Cazhoney,Are you really in Brazil? What's wrong there? Hi Paul, yes, I am in Brazil, really. What do you mean by "what´s wrong there?"? :spinny: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fat Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I read the other day in an Aussie paper that some of the Sri Lankan boat-people who effectively hi-jacked the Aussie Customs boat in 2009 now have Permanent Residency in Oz as Refugees and that the others are not far from getting PR. SO - did the Aussie embassy in Colombo plus the local Sri Lankan authorities work with lightning speed for these boat-people when apparently nobody can do that for a regular migrant from an HR country? I don't think so. this might be of interest ASIO rushed Oceanic Viking asylum checks | The Australian cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewebweazel Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Looking at it from an Australian point of view, the changes and and the changes in the pipe line seem to make sense, but does it really? Chris Evans Expects migrants to get jobs before arriving in the country, but how are we supposed to do that when "You have to be able to work in Australia to apply for this job." is printed under each Job advert on the internet? How is this going to affect Australia's Skill shortages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKlaut Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 this might be of interest ASIO rushed Oceanic Viking asylum checks | The Australian cheers "ASIO's rapid assessment time for the four Tamils - less than one month - was well short of the 90-day target the agency normally allows itself." Sometimes it has some benifits to be a refugee. In comparison, my ASIO assessment isn't complete yet after 6 month of waiting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Looking at it from an Australian point of view, the changes and and the changes in the pipe line seem to make sense, but does it really? Chris Evans Expects migrants to get jobs before arriving in the country, but how are we supposed to do that when "You have to be able to work in Australia to apply for this job." is printed under each Job advert on the internet? How is this going to affect Australia's Skill shortages? Hello WW Only 1/4 jobs are advertised through the online portals or recruitment agents, I would only spend 1/4 of my time in that channel, and 3/4 of time making direct contact with employers to find the 3/4 of jobs that are placed privately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Migration policy will always be flawed... ...because the Minister doesn't consult with employers or the migration industry before launching his academic and union-friendly policies on the market place. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry is urging the government to consult employers when considering the changes, to ensure a balance between developing Australia's skilled workforce and allowing flexibility in importing skilled labour. "As the economy returns to better growth, the (proposed changes) will be tested,'' ACCI director of employment, education and training Mary Hicks said in a statement. "The inability of employers to successfully recruit labour could mean that less work can be entered into and in some cases turned away. "ACCI urges the government to work closely with the employer community to ensure there is sufficient flexibility in the labour market to support our economic recovery.'' Source: brisbanetimes.com.au I mean, heavens above, how obvious does he have to be that he doesn't trust employers? I'd trust one more than I would a politician! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Big Difference between two statements...... Here is the Minister's statement-----------) All offshore General Skilled Migration applications lodged before 1 September 2007 will have their applications withdrawn. These are people who applied overseas under easier standards, including lower English language skills and a less rigorous work experience requirement. It is expected about 20 000 people fall into this category. The department will refund their visa application charge at an estimated cost of $14 million. Average applications cost between $1500 and $2000 and most contain more than one person.(Well, Can somebody tell me where he used CAP AND CEASE?) This is the statement on DIAC website--------) offshore GSM visas made before 1 September 2007 would be capped and ceased Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jamie Smith Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Here is the Senate Hearing Hansard for the session about Immigration 09/02/2010. I haven't read it through yet. ParlInfo - Title Details Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest recherche Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Here is the Senate Hearing Hansard for the session about Immigration 09/02/2010. I haven't read it through yet. ParlInfo - Title Details from my quick glimpse, it focused largely on subclass 457.. and the removal of MODL.. and this is probably of interest to those who applied prior to sep 1 2007: Senator Chris Evans: 'they are offshore general skilled migration applications which were lodged pre-September 2007, when the previous government changed the rules and increased some of the requirements. Because of this government’s attitude to priority processing, we formed the view that those applications were unlikely to ever be processed and be successful in their migration outcome because of the qualifications the applicants held at the time and where they were. Mr Kukoc can take you through the detail. We decided to introduce—and I got some criticism after it was done—the critical skills list and the priority processing, which effectively said that we were going to take doctors, nurses and other professionals in need first and then employer nominations, state nominations and independent skilled nominations last or lower down the list. Effectively, they were going miss out. The criticism I got said: ‘You really should treat them more fairly. If you are not going to give them a visa, you ought to refund them and cancel them.’ So we have said: ‘You’re not going make it. There are 20,000 of you who have been there since the previous government’s changes under an old visa class. You’re not going get there. It’s better that we are frank with you and say, “You’re not got going to get there. We’ll pay you back your visa application charge and end your application rather than leave you hanging there.”‘ They are not students. That is a separate argument. They are 20,000 or so offshore applications that have been in the pipeline for at least 2½ years and many of them longer who are not going to get there. So we have effectively ended those.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jains005 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Yes, Good bye for me and thousands like me who applied before the Sept 2007. as long as minister knows 1,2,3... he can make 2007 anytime 2009. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jains005 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 minister is too megalomanic and feels intensely grandiose thinking that he is doing something extraordingary bringing out complications. even i can suggest much more complicated options... hi hi... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matjones Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 According to the Press Release, Minister Evans has taken this step because he does not agree with the alleged laxity shown by Parliament under a Liberal Government. So - he is using 20,000 applications - which he admits is more than 20,000 applicants - as nothing but political pawns, for a start. I think it is pretty clear that the Minister has seen a simple, expedient way of reducing the GSM backlog by 20,000 applications. During his committee grilling yesterday, Minister Evans used the argument that 'most of these 20,000' would not have been granted the visa anyway, and that he was basically 'putting them out of their misery' (my words, not his) He saw himself as being quite a humanitarian, by finally giving these people an answer on their visa application. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clickettuk Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Has anyone heard whether the ACT is already putting its State Migration Plan together and when its likely to be reviewed by the minister? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capetosydney Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 During his committee grilling yesterday, Minister Evans used the argument that 'most of these 20,000' would not have been granted the visa anyway, and that he was basically 'putting them out of their misery' (my words, not his) He saw himself as being quite a humanitarian, by finally giving these people an answer on their visa application. I have few choice words for 'Honourable' Minister :mad::arghh::realmad:, but admin would probably delete my post.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matjones Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Has anyone heard whether the ACT is already putting its State Migration Plan together and when its likely to be reviewed by the minister? I contacted ACT as soon as the changes were announced, and the announcement was news to them too. They said just wait, and they will let us know. I think it will take a awhile for them to get this together. I know that Julianne, the Client Manager, is away from the office until the end of Feb. Not sure what her role would be in this, but could delay things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clickettuk Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I contacted ACT as soon as the changes were announced, and the announcement was news to them too. They said just wait, and they will let us know. I think it will take a awhile for them to get this together. I know that Julianne, the Client Manager, is away from the office until the end of Feb. Not sure what her role would be in this, but could delay things. Thanks for that! If the State Migration Plans end up being a subset of the state's existing occupation in demand list, then at least ACT may have a head start since they've already differentiated between occupations: some are classified as 'Open' which means an unlimited number of available sponsorships and 'Limited' which means a limited number available. Maybe their State Migration Plan will only include 'Open' occupations who will go to Category 2. All speculation of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matjones Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Thanks for that! If the State Migration Plans end up being a subset of the state's existing occupation in demand list, then at least ACT may have a head start since they've already differentiated between occupations: some are classified as 'Open' which means an unlimited number of available sponsorships and 'Limited' which means a limited number available. Maybe their State Migration Plan will only include 'Open' occupations who will go to Category 2. All speculation of course. Speculate away..... my speculation is that most states would just submit their current list in its entirety, as they have already identified those as in demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clickettuk Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Speculate away..... my speculation is that most states would just submit their current list in its entirety, as they have already identified those as in demand. Hi, If all states simply submitted their existing lists, wouldn't that mean that everyone in Cat 5 would automatically become Cat 2. I thought that the idea of the State Migration Plan was to prioritize state sponsored applicants so only the most 'in demand' occupations went to Cat 2 and the rest stayed in Cat 5. :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wannabeoz Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 I think it would be great if they cleared the backlog of all the existing cat 5s who already have state sponsorship before they bring the new cat 2 in! But that's wishful thinking I think... And I guess it depends how many visas are left in the quota for this year, which of course they won't tell us! I just wish the uncertainty could end, starting to regret starting this whole process... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lavender776 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 Thanks for that! If the State Migration Plans end up being a subset of the state's existing occupation in demand list, then at least ACT may have a head start since they've already differentiated between occupations: some are classified as 'Open' which means an unlimited number of available sponsorships and 'Limited' which means a limited number available. Maybe their State Migration Plan will only include 'Open' occupations who will go to Category 2. All speculation of course. Weren't some of the ones that now say 'limited' once saying 'open'? I'm not 100% sure but my occupation now says 'limited' but I think it said 'open'. I could be wrong though as it seems a million years ago since I applied. So much has changed since then! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.