virtual_bajwa Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 News from the Seminar................ 1. There is no hope that the government will reconsider the cap and cease decision for the applications lodged prior to 1 September 2007. If there are still some such people in Australia or who have paid the second instalment of their Visa Application Charge in lieu of a secondary applicant meeting English requirements, then those people should contact the Department - either the ASPC or Canberra - immediately, since the mechanics of the cap and cease decision are about to be implemented. All affected applicants overseas ought to confirm their current address to the Department, since the fear is that a lot of offshore "agents" will be trying to intercept these fees. One of the Departmental staff made the following statement "the Minister and the Department recognise that there will be applicants who are not happy with the cap and cease provisions". For those of you who have never been to Canberra, this translates as "let them eat cake". One very interesting outcome is that the Department is now saying that there were fewer than 20,000 applicants affected, and suggested, or allowed the implication, that it might only be 6,000 applications. The explanation given was that the proposal to cap and kill was first raised in September last year and the numbers had been reduced by the date of decision. My guess is, if that is true, that there must have been an orgy of last minute refusals to minimise the problem. Sadly, the Department is now suggesting informally that the cap and kill caseload are all tradespeople with credibility problems. This is disingenuous. Yes there would be bad apples but there are a lot of people whose applications were perfectly valid. Integrity issues become a bit self-fulfilling after a while, it would be nice if the Auditor-General or Ombudsman were to work through the "6,000" and give an independent summary. Now this news is coming up that they are planing to cap and cease Trades and it's related workers. What about these people......... • Managers and Administrators; • Professionals; • Associate Professionals Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gilfillan Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Now this news is coming up that they are planing to cap and cease Trades and it's related workers. What about these people.........• Managers and Administrators; • Professionals; • Associate Professionals If you read it carefully, it is only a suggestion and it is only for occupations with credibility issues. Dont read too much into this or anything else that is going about at the moment as it is only rumors. I suggest that we all wait until someone in authority issues an official statement. People are worrying about things that haven't even happened yet. John Gilfillan:hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 Sadly, the Department is now suggesting informally that the cap and kill caseload are all tradespeople with credibility problems.[/Quote]Yes matey, I can understand this. This has not been posted by me. This has been posted by one of very experienced agent. And these speculations are given by the officials who were present in the seminars held in Sydney and Melbourne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gilfillan Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Yes matey, I can understand this. This has not been posted by me. This has been posted by one of very experienced agent. And these speculations are given by the officials who were present in the seminars held in Sydney and Melbourne. [/color] You hit the nail on the head when you wrote the word " Speculations " and I understand your frustrations. Also these very experienced agents dont make the decisions about what is going to happen, that is left to the people who tell them what to do. Regards, John Gilfillan:hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 I suggest that we all wait until someone in authority issues an official statement. People are worrying about things that haven't even happened yet.John Gilfillan:hug: Answer to your query.... The MIA will I'm sure be working on a summary paper so there will be more to come. Cheers' date='[/i'] George Lombard __________________ Migration Agent Registration Number 9601056 george[at]austimmigration[dot]com[dot]au http://www.austimmigration.com.au [/Quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VickyMel Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Yes matey, I can understand this. This has not been posted by me. This has been posted by one of very experienced agent. And these speculations are given by the officials who were present in the seminars held in Sydney and Melbourne. [/color] Maybe start a new thread discussing this - I imagine someone will when they read Georges post http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/78424-thread-agents-only-re-new-gsm-changes-4.html#post701466 you may not get much response on here as it is mainly to discus the SMPs and the people who may be impacted by this may not bother to read this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 You hit the nail on the head when you wrote the word " Speculations " and I understand your frustrations. Also these very experienced agents dont make the decisions about what is going to happen, that is left to the people who tell them what to do. Regards, John Gilfillan:hug: Yes I agree that this has been all speculations...But the people who arranged these seminars are the people who will finally make the decisions. There might be some fact behind these SPECULATIONS... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gilfillan Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Answer to your query.... Quote: Originally Posted by John Gilfillan;701599. I suggest that we all wait until someone in authority issues an official statement. People are worrying about things that haven't even happened yet. John Gilfillan:hug: As I said above......... I meant someone in authority being someone who is not an agent as they are pretty much in the dark as we are. Kindest Regards, John Gilfillan:hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gilfillan Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Yes I agree that this has been all speculations...But the people who arranged these seminars are the people who will finally make the decisions. There might be some fact behind these SPECULATIONS... I thought that the people who finally make these decisions are the states and the government and not the agents? John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted March 5, 2010 Author Share Posted March 5, 2010 Quote: Originally Posted by John Gilfillan;701599. I suggest that we all wait until someone in authority issues an official statement. People are worrying about things that haven't even happened yet. John Gilfillan:hug: As I said above......... I meant someone in authority being someone who is not an agent as they are pretty much in the dark as we are. Kindest Regards, John Gilfillan:hug: Ny dear friend agents donot arrange this seminar. MIA arrange this seminar and only MIA reply to the questions by the agents. This is not the speculation of agents. This is reply from the officials of MIA who arrange this seminar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gilfillan Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Ny dear friend agents donot arrange this seminar. MIA arrange this seminar and only MIA reply to the questions by the agents. This is not the speculation of agents. This is reply from the officials of MIA who arrange this seminar. Thats exactly what I was saying John:hug: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Hi All What Virtual Bajwa says is NOT rumour. The Aussie Minister for Immigration announced, on 8th Feb 2010, that he intends to "cap & cease" all of the applications for offshore GSM visas which were lodged on or before 1st September 2007 and which have not yet been finalised. http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/faq-offshore-preseptember.pdf Migration reforms to deliver Australia's skills needs Originally the Minister said that about 20,000 applications would be scrapped and the application fees returned to the applicants and that the total refunds would amount to about $14 million AUD. McKlaut is a regular on Poms in Oz and he is also an accountant. He promptly looked at the old tariffs and did the sums. According to McKlaut, returning $14 million AUD would mean scrapping about 8,300 visa applications. McKlaut was obviously correct. Although the Minister said "applications" I think he probably meant to say, "Around 8,300 applications, which will affect about 20,000 people since most of the applications include partners, dependent children and other dependants as well as the main visa applicants." Everybody was and remains absolutely stunned by this announcement. According to the Minister's press release (above) he has decided to take this step because the people who applied before 1st September 2007 were required to prove a lower standard of English than at present and the Minister says that the work experience requirements were less stringent before 1st September 2007 as well. I'm not a migration agent and I have never known what the requirements for GSM visas were before 1st September 2007. What I do know for sure is that the Ist September 2007 change was announced some time in advance of it happening and that the range of GSM visas which is available today took effect on 1st September 2007, which is why the date is significant: Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News (My thanks to Alan Collett of Go Matilda for his news articles at the time.) A couple of weeks after the Minister's original announcement on 8th Feb 2010, it was then announced that the Minister had realised that a number of the people who would be affected by the "cap & cease" provisions have applied for offshore visas but they are actually people who live in Australia. Many of the people in this second group, are either living in Australia because they hold the temporary, employer-sponsored sc 457 visas or they are living in Australia because they are International Students at the various universities and colleges in Australia, where they have been studying a range of courses so as to keep themselves busy and in Australia until their GSM visas are eventually granted. Many in this second group have partners and children who have become settled into Australia and into the Aussie way of life. Their children have settled into Aussie schools and so forth. To scrap these people's GSM applications would be a disaster for the families concerned and it would also get Australia a simply appalling international name, as a bunch of total turncoats who will grab the fees from International Student indefinitely but then the Aussie Government will suddenly tell them to go home because it no longer suits the Aussie Minister for Immi to continue to have these people spending a fortune in Australia. So there was a climbdown about this second group. The second group were still treated appallingly badly in my opinion. They were told to contact "DIAC" urgently, either by contacting the ASPC or by contacting DIAC in Canberra. They were not given the name of a specific DIAC officer to contact, so the only inference to be drawn is that nobody is actually looking after this second group of applicants and that treating the poor sods as if they were cattle on a farm will do perfectly well. The Australian Government - and the Aussie Minister for Immigration - should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for allowing DIAC (whose lying logo is "People Our Business" ) to treat this group of People in a way which proves that DIAC has zero interest in treating anybody properly, least of all the People whose Business DIAC are supposed to be looking out for and looking after via making those People's Business DIAC's own Business as well. DIAC cannot even be bothered to provide a Liaison Officer and a name for the Officer for this group of People to contact about their Business, so dishonest are DIAC about living up to their dishonest logo in reality. Meanwhile, the Migration Institute of Australia looks after the interests of about 50% of Australia's Registered Migration Agents. I don't understand many of the Minister for Immi's 8th Feb 2010 announcements, despite 2 Law degrees and a British legal professional qualification to my name. RMAs do not require anything like as much training as I have, so I would readily believe that many of them are even more confused than I am by the 2010 changes. According to the MIA in 2009, many RMAs have a very poor command of English - when all the relevant announcements etc are in English - which certainly can't be helping matters one whit. To counteract this confusion, the MIA has arranged a series of roadshows around Australia: GSM Changes: Free National Seminar Series It seems that the first of these roadshows was held in Sydney on Thursday 4th March 2009. George Lombard is a top notcb RMA who lives and works in Sydney, so he went to the first of the roadshows: Profile | George Lombard Consultancy Pty. Ltd. George is a regular contributor to Poms in Oz. When the 8th Feb 2010 announcements were made, George asked me to set up a special thread for RMAs and Jamie Smith to tell us more about what all the new changes either do mean or will mean as and when new information is available. So I set up the thread, which is here: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/78424-thread-agents-only-re-new-gsm-changes-4.html Having attended the recent roadshow, George has very kindly posted a report about it on the agents only thread. That is the background to the whole thing, for anybody who was unaware of what Virtual Bajwa was on about. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Gilfillan Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Hi All What Virtual Bajwa says is NOT rumour. The Aussie Minister for Immigration announced, on 8th Feb 2010, that he intends to "cap & cease" all of the applications for offshore GSM visas which were lodged on or before 1st September 2007 and which have not yet been finalised. http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/faq-offshore-preseptember.pdf Migration reforms to deliver Australia's skills needs Originally the Minister said that about 20,000 applications would be scrapped and the application fees returned to the applicants and that the total refunds would amount to about $14 million AUD. McKlaut is a regular on Poms in Oz and he is also an accountant. He promptly looked at the old tariffs and did the sums. According to McKlaut, returning $14 million AUD would mean scrapping about 8,300 visa applications. McKlaut was obviously correct. Although the Minister said "applications" I think he probably meant to say, "Around 8,300 applications, which will affect about 20,000 people since most of the applications include partners, dependent children and other dependants as well as the main visa applicants." Everybody was and remains absolutely stunned by this announcement. According to the Minister's press release (above) he has decided to take this step because the people who applied before 1st September 2007 were required to prove a lower standard of English than at present and the Minister says that the work experience requirements were less stringent before 1st September 2007 as well. I'm not a migration agent and I have never known what the requirements for GSM visas were before 1st September 2007. What I do know for sure is that the Ist September 2007 change was announced some time in advance of it happening and that the range of GSM visas which is available today took effect on 1st September 2007, which is why the date is significant: Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News (My thanks to Alan Collett of Go Matilda for his news articles at the time.) A couple of weeks after the Minister's original announcement on 8th Feb 2010, it was then announced that the Minister had realised that a number of the people who would be affected by the "cap & cease" provisions have applied for offshore visas but they are actually people who live in Australia. Many of the people in this second group, are either living in Australia because they hold the temporary, employer-sponsored sc 457 visas or they are living in Australia because they are International Students at the various universities and colleges in Australia, where they have been studying a range of courses so as to keep themselves busy and in Australia until their GSM visas are eventually granted. Many in this second group have partners and children who have become settled into Australia and into the Aussie way of life. Their children have settled into Aussie schools and so forth. To scrap these people's GSM applications would be a disaster for the families concerned and it would also get Australia a simply appalling international name, as a bunch of total turncoats who will grab the fees from International Student indefinitely but then the Aussie Government will suddenly tell them to go home because it no longer suits the Aussie Minister for Immi to continue to have these people spending a fortune in Australia. So there was a climbdown about this second group. The second group were still treated appallingly badly in my opinion. They were told to contact "DIAC" urgently, either by contacting the ASPC or by contacting DIAC in Canberra. They were not given the name of a specific DIAC officer to contact, so the only inference to be drawn is that nobody is actually looking after this second group of applicants and that treating the poor sods as if they were cattle on a farm will do perfectly well. The Australian Government - and the Aussie Minister for Immigration - should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for allowing DIAC (whose lying logo is "People Our Business" ) to treat this group of People in a way which proves that DIAC has zero interest in treating anybody properly, least of all the People whose Business DIAC are supposed to be looking out for and looking after via making those People's Business DIAC's own Business as well. DIAC cannot even be bothered to provide a Liaison Officer and a name for the Officer for this group of People to contact about their Business, so dishonest are DIAC about living up to their dishonest logo in reality. Meanwhile, the Migration Institute of Australia looks after the interests of about 50% of Australia's Registered Migration Agents. I don't understand many of the Minister for Immi's 8th Feb 2010 announcements, despite 2 Law degrees and a British legal professional qualification to my name. RMAs do not require anything like as much training as I have, so I would readily believe that many of them are even more confused than I am by the 2010 changes. According to the MIA in 2009, many RMAs have a very poor command of English - when all the relevant announcements etc are in English - which certainly can't be helping matters one whit. To counteract this confusion, the MIA has arranged a series of roadshows around Australia: GSM Changes: Free National Seminar Series It seems that the first of these roadshows was held in Sydney on Thursday 4th March 2009. George Lombard is a top notcb RMA who lives and works in Sydney, so he went to the first of the roadshows: Profile | George Lombard Consultancy Pty. Ltd. George is a regular contributor to Poms in Oz. When the 8th Feb 2010 announcements were made, George asked me to set up a special thread for RMAs and Jamie Smith to tell us more about what all the new changes either do mean or will mean as and when new information is available. So I set up the thread, which is here: http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/78424-thread-agents-only-re-new-gsm-changes-4.html Having attended the recent roadshow, George has very kindly posted a report about it on the agents only thread. That is the background to the whole thing, for anybody who was unaware of what Virtual Bajwa was on about. Cheers Gill Gill, just to set the record straight. this is not what virtual Bajwa told me today that led to our disagreement. If this had all been shown earlier today, we would have had a reasonable discussion. Rather than trying to point out the negatives all the time why dont people on here try finding positives in this unsure time. Many Thanks, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKlaut Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Looks like "cap and cease" is a new Aus migration reality. And it's rather vague process because the criteria unclear and shady. I think it's unfair first of all for those applicants who applied when there were no caps and ceases, no priorities etc. How will they define which application to cap and which to grant? I'm not talking about pre Sept. 2007 applicants now but I see the future reality for everybody. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Now this news is coming up that they are planing to cap and cease Trades and it's related workers. What about these people.........• Managers and Administrators; • Professionals; • Associate Professionals Hi Virtual Bajwa My advice is never mind everyone else mentioned by you above. If they need or want help, they will scream soon enough, never you fear. The important person is you for the moment since you are the thread starter. Others such as Babboo can join this thread and may well do so later. You are a Public Relations Officer 2221-11. Public Relations Officer 2221-11 - Australian Skills Recognition Information This occupation is worth 50 points on the current SOL. On another thread, you have told me this about yourself: Yes I have the assessment as Public Relation Officer - 2221-11 but it is 2 and half year old.I have 7, 6, 6, 5.5 bands. But what are chances of getting the processing will be quicker. There might be some more changes from DIAC and I might again be in to limbo.So I am afraid of going with it. What I want to know is whether you would be able to meet the current requirements for the current sc 176 visa, please, if you use your brother as the Sponsor for a new 176 application because Brother now would save lots of time and he can always be swapped for a State sponsor at a later date and with no further charges from DIAC with a subclass 176 visa. I want to find out where the escape routes for you are, please: The Points Test for the sc 176 visa is here: Skilled – Sponsored (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 176) The link above used to do all the arithmetic automatically but something went wrong with that bit when they removed the MODL (and therefore the MODL points) from it. Never mind about that. The sums are so easy that even I can do them on paper (which is saying a LOT since I am completely innumerate, I assure you.) You have to score a minimum of 100 points for the sc 176 visa if your brother is the sponsor and family sponsors give you NO points towards the sc 176 visa, but they can live anywhere they like in Australia, including in the State Capitals. Now then: ?? - Age? What will your age be on 31st May 2010, please? (I am failing safe because I don't trust some of DIAC's claims as reported by George Lombard.) ?? - Competent English: do you meet that requirement or not, please? The details are here: Skilled – Sponsored (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 176) I don't understand what a "band score" is. You say above that you got 5.5 for one of the four modules of the Test. So is your "band score" for that module less than 6.0, please? Also, what is the date on your IELTS Test certificate? If it is more than 2 years since that date, you would have to sit the Test again anyway and this time you would have to ensure that you meet the current requirements for Competent English at least. Competent English would get you 15 Points. If you do really well in all four modules of the General IELTS and score not less than 7.0 in each module (not overall) you could then claim 25 points for Proficient English instead of 15 points for Competent English. 50 - Nominated Occupation (as gleaned from the ASRI above.) 05 - Specific work experience. I assume that you can safely claim 5 points for this? Please could you do the figures and tell me what they would be if we use 31st May 2010 as the date for a new application? Many thanks. ******************************************************************* If the Family sponsored sc176 visa does not work on the points, then here is the points test for the current sc 475 visa: With the sc 475 visa, all the same points that I have made above apply again and the total but the attraction of the family sponsored sc 475 visa is that your brother would be worth an extra 25 points with the 475 visa, even if he lives slap in the midde of the Melbourne CBD. I know that he lives somewhere in Melbourne and it doesn't matter whereabouts for the sc 475 visa when the Family sponsor lives in VIC. The points test for the sc 475 visa is here: Skilled – Regional Sponsored (Provisional) Visa (Subclass 475) I am 99% sure that it does not matter if your skills assessment is 2.5 years old. (Check with your agent but I am pretty sure that this is OK.) However, I think that DIAC do now require that you have been working in your nominated occupation for at least 12 months out of the 24 months immediately before the submission of a new GSM visa application. Again, let us fail safe by assuming that I am right about this requirement, please. Will you have been working as a Public Relations Officer for a minimum of 12 months on 31st May 2010, please? *************************************************************** George Lombard has said: although the implementation date is not set, it cannot be earlier than 18 June due to DIAC operational constraints - their computers can't cope with anything earlier apparently, but I don't see any cause for complaining about that. I don't trust DIAC. Their new computer system is costing many millions of AUDs. If the Minister for Immi orders the IT people in DIAC to fix whatever these constraints are on or before 31st May 2010, I reckon that the IT boys will fix them. So as far as I am concerned, I intend to treat that assertion as yet another disingenuous assertion by DIAC unless and until they prove me wrong about the facts and the capabilities of IT experts working with a state-of-the-art commercial computer system nowadays. Minister Evans has no hestitation in ordering Andrew Metcalfe to jump around, so Minister Evans is not the type to put up with his IT department whining, "We can't..." He is the type to tell them, "Oh yes you can. I have ordered it so you guys had better get on and fix this system, so as to get it working as I want it to work, ready for a switch on 31st May 2010." Could you tell me where you stand on the points and the visas for the time being, please? Many thanks Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 Gill, just to set the record straight. this is not what virtual Bajwa told me today that led to our disagreement. If this had all been shown earlier today, we would have had a reasonable discussion. Rather than trying to point out the negatives all the time why dont people on here try finding positives in this unsure time. Many Thanks, John Hi John My post explaining the background to the whole thing was not aimed at you. If it had been aimed at you I would have addressed it to you. I am far too blunt about things to beat about the bush instead. Rather, it was obvious that most of the PiO readers would not have taken any notice of the cap & cease provisions when they came out because they only affect a small minority of PiO readers. Everyone else is too busy with trying to understand the changes that can - or might - directly affect themselves and their own applications. It is the way of the world. So I thought it would be useful if I wrote a background piece explaining how and why Virtual Bajwa's query has arisen. Without that, my reply to VB wouldn't make a word of sense to anyone except VB and so forth. As it is, we know that two groups of people are definitely affected so far: 1. The people whose applications will be capped and ceased according to DIAC; and 2. The people whose applications were going to be capped and ceased but who have been given a reprieve from execution because the applicants are onshore in Oz. There is another way to deal with this second group anyway. One is to refuse new 457 visas if that crops up. Or refuse new Student visas if those are demanded instead. Get rid of them out of Australia and then pull the plug on their GSM applications, perhaps.... People who are in Australia might well hold a demonstration on the steps of the Parliament building in Canberra. Mr Kiane set fire to himself on those very steps in 2001 because he was so frustrated and disheartened by DIAC's determination to be as obstructive as possible to him and his family at every conceivable turn, despite the Commonwealth Ombudsman having intervened at least twice and told DIAC to get on with it where Mr Kiane's family were concerned. Mr Kiane was so fed up that he doused himself with petrol on those steps and set fire to himself. He died from his burns in hospital about 10 days later. It made headline news all over the world. If demonstrators who have applied for GSM visas turn up on those steps, the Aussie Media Pack will turn up on those steps as well. The Aussie Voter would NOT approve of the idea that anybody who lives in Australia should be treated badly by the Minister for Immi. The Senators made that clear to the Minister at the Senate Estimates Committee hearing on 9th Feb 2010. So - find an excuse to send the second group home. Then kill off their applications once they are safely offshore with no rights to return to Oz because they have applied for offshore visas. I'm not saying that the Minister for Immi actually would or actually might do this. I am merely saying that I wouldn't put it past him to do so. According to George Lombard, the RMAs who attended the roadshow started speculating amongst themselves. These RMAs live in NSW. I live in the UK and I am not an RMA anyway. George says: 5. Some discussion among migration agents suggests that the cap and kill provisions might be used to knock off particular occupations or combinations of occupations and English skills. The suggestion is that the oversupply of cooks and hairdressers in the backlog, as well as accountants with less that 7.0x4 on their IELTS test, may be the next group to be capped and killed. Hmmmm. I would not put this past the Minister for Immi either. If he gets away with killing off Group 1, it will give him a taste for bloodthirsty tactics, I reckon. Factsheet 21 is below, last reviewed on 28th September 2009 - less than 6 months ago. Australian Immigration Fact Sheet 21. Managing the Migration Program I quote from the factsheet: Cap and terminate The Act also contains a ‘cap and terminate’ provision, though to date this provision has been used only in respect of some elements of the Humanitarian Program. The provision means that when a cap has been reached for a particular visa class, work on all applications which have not been processed to decision stops and the files are closed. These applications are treated as if not submitted. The minister has indicated that this provision would only be used in exceptional circumstances. Less than 6 months ago, the present Minister for Immi indicated that cap & kill would only be used in "exceptional" circumstances. VB, Babboo and I have been saying for almost 4 weeks now, "What is 'exceptional' about the Government's failure to deal with the GSM backlog ages ago? What has suddenly changed?" Minister Evans has already demonstrated that he is thoroughly inconsistent and keeps on changing his mind. Now he waits until the Aussie economy is improving and then claims that the current circumstances are "exceptional"???? I don't think so. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 Looks like "cap and cease" is a new Aus migration reality. And it's rather vague process because the criteria unclear and shady. I think it's unfair first of all for those applicants who applied when there were no caps and ceases, no priorities etc. How will they define which application to cap and which to grant? I'm not talking about pre Sept. 2007 applicants now but I see the future reality for everybody. Hi McKlaut I agree with your first paragraph completely. But it seems that the Minister might alter the migration legislation - retrospectively - to give himself the power to cap & cease the old sc 496 visa. Tony Coates is a migration agent. Weeks ago now, he said: For Virtual Bajwa All skilled visas are meant to have the criterion that " grant of the visa would not cause the number of visas of that class granted in a particular financial year to exceed whatever number is fixed by the Minister, by legislative instrument, as the maximum number of such visas that may be granted in that year", which then brings them under the Section 39 power for the Minister to "Cap and Kill". The 496 Designated area sponsored visa, used to be a permanent visa - subclass 139. For some reason, when the Subclass 496 replaced the 139 visa, the capping criterion was not carried forward by the drafter into the 496 regulations. Thus the 496 is the only skills visa that the Minister cannot cap under Section 39. I have read and re-read the legislation and I can't see it anywhere for the 496 visa. So good news for Virtual Bajwa, it would seem. However Tony then backtracked from the statement quoted above. He said that he had asked DIAC to confirm whether or not they think his understanding is correct and if it is, whether they intend to change the law so that cap & kill can be used with the sc 496 visa after all. There has been no further word from Tony, so I assume that DIAC have not answered his question. There has been no time to alter the legislation either, which is why I suspect that the Minister might have it in mind to use the principle of Estoppel. Most applicants will bank the money - especially if it is given directly to them - because most of them won't ever have heard of Estoppel. So if it does apply in this situation plus they are not aware of Estoppel, the Minister will get them by the short & curlies, as we say in the UK, I suspect. Turning to your second paragraph, you say: How will they define which application to cap and which to grant? I'm not talking about pre Sept. 2007 applicants now but I see the future reality for everybody. The Minister has already said that he intends to alter the legislation so as to give himself the power to do whatever he likes, in effect. The Aussie commentators have said for quite a few weeks that during the run up to a General Election in Australia, it is likely that Parliament would allow the Minister for Immi to have his own way..... Like you, I see future possibilities as well and I think those possibilities look sinister. Cheers Gill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest babboo Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 "The Australian Government has not yet set the maximum number of visas of a particular class that may be granted in this financial year. Until such time as this number is set and reached, applications will continue to be processed in accordance with the Ministerial Direction relating to the processing priorities or applications. Therefore you case is still active until otherwise notified. Thank you once again for taking the time to provide the Department feedback regarding XXX application. I understand that the changes have caused stress and apologise if the outcome has disappointed. Kind regards" XXX DIAC Wrote a mail to ASPC and here is the reply ... Well these are the kind words from ASPC ... Starting with all the blah blah and referening to the new legislation on 8th Feb. Kick us in the butt and then say SORRY !!!! Cheers .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted March 6, 2010 Author Share Posted March 6, 2010 Hi Virtual Bajwa My advice is never mind everyone else mentioned by you above. If they need or want help, they will scream soon enough, never you fear. The important person is you for the moment since you are the thread starter. Others such as Babboo can join this thread and may well do so later. You are a Public Relations Officer 2221-11. Public Relations Officer 2221-11 - Australian Skills Recognition Information This occupation is worth 50 points on the current SOL. On another thread, you have told me this about yourself: What I want to know is whether you would be able to meet the current requirements for the current sc 176 visa, please, if you use your brother as the Sponsor for a new 176 application because Brother now would save lots of time and he can always be swapped for a State sponsor at a later date and with no further charges from DIAC with a subclass 176 visa. I want to find out where the escape routes for you are, please: The Points Test for the sc 176 visa is here: Skilled – Sponsored (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 176) The link above used to do all the arithmetic automatically but something went wrong with that bit when they removed the MODL (and therefore the MODL points) from it. Never mind about that. The sums are so easy that even I can do them on paper (which is saying a LOT since I am completely innumerate, I assure you.) You have to score a minimum of 100 points for the sc 176 visa if your brother is the sponsor and family sponsors give you NO points towards the sc 176 visa, but they can live anywhere they like in Australia, including in the State Capitals. Now then: ?? - Age? What will your age be on 31st May 2010, please? (I am failing safe because I don't trust some of DIAC's claims as reported by George Lombard.) ?? - Competent English: do you meet that requirement or not, please? The details are here: Skilled – Sponsored (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 176) I don't understand what a "band score" is. You say above that you got 5.5 for one of the four modules of the Test. So is your "band score" for that module less than 6.0, please? Also, what is the date on your IELTS Test certificate? If it is more than 2 years since that date, you would have to sit the Test again anyway and this time you would have to ensure that you meet the current requirements for Competent English at least. Competent English would get you 15 Points. If you do really well in all four modules of the General IELTS and score not less than 7.0 in each module (not overall) you could then claim 25 points for Proficient English instead of 15 points for Competent English. 50 - Nominated Occupation (as gleaned from the ASRI above.) 05 - Specific work experience. I assume that you can safely claim 5 points for this? Please could you do the figures and tell me what they would be if we use 31st May 2010 as the date for a new application? Many thanks. ******************************************************************* If the Family sponsored sc176 visa does not work on the points, then here is the points test for the current sc 475 visa: With the sc 475 visa, all the same points that I have made above apply again and the total but the attraction of the family sponsored sc 475 visa is that your brother would be worth an extra 25 points with the 475 visa, even if he lives slap in the midde of the Melbourne CBD. I know that he lives somewhere in Melbourne and it doesn't matter whereabouts for the sc 475 visa when the Family sponsor lives in VIC. The points test for the sc 475 visa is here: Skilled – Regional Sponsored (Provisional) Visa (Subclass 475) I am 99% sure that it does not matter if your skills assessment is 2.5 years old. (Check with your agent but I am pretty sure that this is OK.) However, I think that DIAC do now require that you have been working in your nominated occupation for at least 12 months out of the 24 months immediately before the submission of a new GSM visa application. Again, let us fail safe by assuming that I am right about this requirement, please. Will you have been working as a Public Relations Officer for a minimum of 12 months on 31st May 2010, please? *************************************************************** George Lombard has said: I don't trust DIAC. Their new computer system is costing many millions of AUDs. If the Minister for Immi orders the IT people in DIAC to fix whatever these constraints are on or before 31st May 2010, I reckon that the IT boys will fix them. So as far as I am concerned, I intend to treat that assertion as yet another disingenuous assertion by DIAC unless and until they prove me wrong about the facts and the capabilities of IT experts working with a state-of-the-art commercial computer system nowadays. Minister Evans has no hestitation in ordering Andrew Metcalfe to jump around, so Minister Evans is not the type to put up with his IT department whining, "We can't..." He is the type to tell them, "Oh yes you can. I have ordered it so you guys had better get on and fix this system, so as to get it working as I want it to work, ready for a switch on 31st May 2010." Could you tell me where you stand on the points and the visas for the time being, please? Many thanks Gill Thank Gill for such a wonderful information. YEs, I did this calculation. And scored exactly 100 points without the point of my brother.This also includes my wives 5 points.I gave the IELTS on July 2009 again. And scored Listening -7.0, Reading - 6.0, Writing 5.5,Speaking - 6.0... My wife has the 5.5 overall band score. But her scores will expire on July 2010. Well I think it will cost me some money which is not good. I have to think this. But my agent is saying that I can wait for 496 visa and so do my family members are suggesting me to do so.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rahulpatel1969 Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 One question Virtual Bajwa, if they are going to cap and cease our 496 application what sense does it make in thinking about filing a new one. They might just cap and cease that new application stating now that u have applied for a class where u need less points. 496 that we applied for was not even point tested then. This guy (minister) seems to be getting into the habit of changing the goal post again and again. What makes u think that after applying for a new class he will not apply cap and cease after a year or so just because he now has applicants more suited according to the latest needs of Australia. Let us make our stand now and try our best legally or otherwise with our present applications. If this does not work out and still they manage to cap and cease lets forget about Australia and set our sites elsewhere. Man ours are sponsored applications. Let our sponsors raise a stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest babboo Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 One question Virtual Bajwa, if they are going to cap and cease our 496 application what sense does it make in thinking about filing a new one. They might just cap and cease that new application stating now that u have applied for a class where u need less points. 496 that we applied for was not even point tested then. This guy (minister) seems to be getting into the habit of changing the goal post again and again. What makes u think that after applying for a new class he will not apply cap and cease after a year or so just because he now has applicants more suited according to the latest needs of Australia. Let us make our stand now and try our best legally or otherwise with our present applications. If this does not work out and still they manage to cap and cease lets forget about Australia and set our sites elsewhere. Man ours are sponsored applications. Let our sponsors raise a stink. I agree with you dear friend, Why make a new application when this one is valid and done according to the law and the requirements ?????? Going through Mr. Lombard's post I still see some hope that good sense will prevail and professionals like us will get a chance... But then, still there are some 6000 of trade persons to think about( if this will be the case). Some of them I am sure are real trade persons who will contribute to the economy and will be an asset to the nation. The point is will he use the "Cap and Cease" again in the near future ?? Or worst of all he might not be there to use this power ...:wink: Lets wait and watch the final outcome. And I am sure this will come soon. So, keep your energy and wits together and sit tight. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted March 7, 2010 Author Share Posted March 7, 2010 Originally Posted by rahulpatel1969 One question Virtual Bajwa, if they are going to cap and cease our 496 application what sense does it make in thinking about filing a new one. They might just cap and cease that new application stating now that u have applied for a class where u need less points. 496 that we applied for was not even point tested then. This guy (minister) seems to be getting into the habit of changing the goal post again and again. What makes u think that after applying for a new class he will not apply cap and cease after a year or so just because he now has applicants more suited according to the latest needs of Australia. Let us make our stand now and try our best legally or otherwise with our present applications. If this does not work out and still they manage to cap and cease lets forget about Australia and set our sites elsewhere. Man ours are sponsored applications. Let our sponsors raise a stink.[/Quote] I agree with you dear friend,Why make a new application when this one is valid and done according to the law and the requirements ?????? Going through Mr. Lombard's post I still see some hope that good sense will prevail and professionals like us will get a chance... But then, still there are some 6000 of trade persons to think about( if this will be the case). Some of them I am sure are real trade persons who will contribute to the economy and will be an asset to the nation. The point is will he use the "Cap and Cease" again in the near future ?? Or worst of all he might not be there to use this power ...:wink: Lets wait and watch the final outcome. And I am sure this will come soon. So, keep your energy and wits together and sit tight. Cheers Yes Rahul and Babboo, I have the same opinion. We have thousands of applicants in Pre - September pool. Some of them are sitting on 120 scores. Some are near 100 point . But what is the fault of an applicant who applied on the bases of criteria set by Govt. at that time. Yes, If I apply with the 100 score band today what is the guaranty that DIAC will again disapprove my application after one year time. Yes these are very tricky and painful question in front of an applicant. We invested out value able money and most important out time............ So, please all the senior members take care of this and put up in the seminars across the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasalcedo Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Once more we can see the inefficiency of DIAC in these matters. I got a response from DIAC saying that my visa would be capped because I'm not in CSL or State Sponsored....lol, it is supposed that applications from pre-september 2007 that are on hold are the ones in Category 6. I forgot that when DIAC says that something is going to start soon, is because is going to take months.... New day, new dissapointment.... Daniel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rachbarlow Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Oh i'm sick of changes. I think we can speculate all we want the fact is we know NOTHING until the DIAC decide at the last minute to implement the change and then tell everyone the round about version which is not the whole truth anyway!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gollywobbler Posted March 24, 2010 Share Posted March 24, 2010 Once more we can see the inefficiency of DIAC in these matters. I got a response from DIAC saying that my visa would be capped because I'm not in CSL or State Sponsored....lol, it is supposed that applications from pre-september 2007 that are on hold are the ones in Category 6. I forgot that when DIAC says that something is going to start soon, is because is going to take months.... New day, new dissapointment.... Daniel Hi Daniel Originally, DIAC said that your own application would be Capped & Ceased. However later on DIAC back-tracked about you because you are in Australia. Because of your whereabouts, DIAC decided to leave your particular visa application up & running and to remove it from the ambit of Cap & Cease. So I don't understand your post above. Are you saying that DIAC have now changed their minds yet again and that they do intend to try to Cap & Cease your application after all? If so, where have you gleaned this information from, please? Many thanks:notworthy: 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.