Parent visa question - "settled" sponsor

[Qflyer]

Hello everyone

 

I just wanted to get some clarification on the point at which I am eligible to sponsor my parents to Australia on Parents' visas.

 

I am currently living here on a Provisional Resident (subclass 820 Partner) visa. Assuming all goes well *knocks on wood*, I will get my PR in approximately 2 years. I have always assumed that I would immediately be able to sponsor my parents over here on Parents' visas once I'm formally an Australian PR, however I have come across the requirement to be a "settled" resident of Australia. DIAC's policy dictates that one has been "settled" in Australia when one spends at least 2 years here as a PR.

 

Prior to getting my 820, I have also been going to uni here. I now have a full time job. I am in a committed relationship with my partner, an Australian citizen who's lived here all his life. We are living in an apartment we've rented for over a year. We have put a deposit on an off-the-plan apartment which we intend to move into when it's ready next year.

 

Now what exactly does "settled" mean? Does one literally have to be living in Australia for at least 2 years as a PR, or will time spent here prior to gaining PR count towards the requirement to be "settled"?

 

I have also read of people getting around the "settled" requirement well short of the mandatory 2 years by demonstrating that they've had a "settled" lifestyle despite not having spent the 2 years here as a PR (ie full time job, permanent address etc), however they all seem to have had to appeal to the MRT - which I'd rather not do.

 

I know it's a couple of years into the future, but I just want to be prepared to avoid any last minute surprises.

 

Ta!

[Guest guest36187]

I arrived here on a 457 in FEb 2005.

 

I got PR in Jan 2007.

 

Parents applied CPV Feb 2007.

 

The time I spent on a temp visa counted towards the `2 years`

[Qflyer]

Thanks for that! So it appears any temporary legal residence here counts towards being "settled."

[Guest guest36187]

Yep, did in my case anyway!

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Qflyer

 

Booklet 3 talks about 2 years in Oz in order for Policy to consider that the sponsor is "settled" in Oz. However Policy is not law, though in many cases there is a LOT of sense in this particular Policy in my opinion.

 

For example. Child goes to Oz and Child has PR from Day One. Child hates Australia and wants to go home is the truth of the matter. However by then Child has fired the Parents up and the Parents are now desperate to live in Australia themselves - even though the idea probably never even crossed their minds until the Child decided to move to Oz. Child gets the idea that "everything will be OK and life in Oz will become bearable" once the Parents have PR in Oz.

 

In that situation, everybody is tempted to rush into obtaining Contributory Parent or Contributory Aged Parent visas. or to make an application for the Aged Parent subclass 804 visa, as early as possible so that the family can be re-united in Oz. The Parents can spend a vast amount of money on one of the Contributory Parent options if one of those is chosen. Parents move to Oz and it rapidly becomes clear that their Child still hates Australia and that this is never going to change. What now? Several people's lives have been uprooted to no advantage at all and the Parents might have spent a huge amount of money as well.

 

Therefore DIAC are quite right to discourage people from rushing in with early Parent applications. If the Parents are British, say, DIAC have no wish to keep the family apart. They themselves encourage the Parents to make lengthy visits to Oz using the long-stay subclass 676 visa if the Parents can spare the time.

 

DIAC reckon that everybody needs time in which to think and in which to get used to Australia before anybody makes any plans to disrupt the family's lives even more than the Child already has. DIAC know from long experience that time actually flies by - regardless of what people imagine when they are emotionally upset about something. DIAC do not try to prevent family togetherness. They just point out that there are other, less expensive, "Try before you buy" visa options that leave Base Camp at home completely intact. If people are wavering about what to do, DIAC suggest that everyone should take their time and that the Parents should visit Oz at least once for the time being. See how the visit goes before making any firm decisions etc.

 

However as you have said, in many, many other cases there is no sense in waiting and no need to do so. Alan Collett of Go Matilda very kindly wrote an article about this a couple of years ago, which saves my fingers and keyboard!

 

Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Qflyer]

Hi Gill,

 

Thanks for your most thorough response!

 

Everything you've said makes sense - I agree with DIAC's "try before you buy" policy. This coming from a serial shopaholic who's made one too many questionable decision in his lifetime to fill the Titanic.

 

What I wasn't sure about is how clear cut said policy is, particularly in the case of someone who's had a lenghty period of legal temporary residence prior to actually obtaining PR. I have been here since 2002, and have since finished high school and two degrees here. I decided mid way through uni that Oz is home. I made every effort to integrate myself into the local community, such as participating in student politics, learning footy, and binge drinking, and eventually falling in love with my fella.

 

I think I have found my answer in the article by Alan Collett:

 

Note: Periods of residence in Australia as a lawful temporary residency visaholder can be included in a consideration of whether the sponsor is "settled". This allows the period of time an individual has been living in Australia as a holder of - say - a Skilled Independent Regional (Provisional) visa, or a 457 employer sponsored visa to be factored into the question of whether the individual is a "settled sponsor."

By the time I'm formally eligible for PR, I'd have been here for a decade. You'd hope that makes it clear cut and that DIAC's implementation of their own policy is "reasonably" well-developed in this instance. I wouldn't bear the stress of subjecting the old dears to an MRT appeal.

 

Now whether the goal posts will shift in 2012 and beyond is another story............

 

BTW I had a chat with Mum about moving here over dinner. And as it turns out they're simply "curious" about living in Australia. They intend to maintain their property in Malaysia. But still want their visas regardless so as to have the "option" of retiring here. Umm, you'd hope that with the costs involved in a CPV (which I was extremely clear about, that and the fact that PRs do expire after 5 years if they've been outside Oz for more than half that time) they'd be more than just "curious"! I might investigate those significantly cheaper "try before you buy" style visa options anyway lol, though they've been here heaps to visit me - on ETAs and never more than 2 weeks at a time.

 

Thanks yet again for your help!