Guest proud2beaussie Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 I have one question who is this Mr Robert? Mr Stuart Robert MP is a Liberal Party member who represents the seat of Fadden in Queensland.http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/member.asp?id=HWT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
virtual_bajwa Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Mr Stuart Robert MP is a Liberal Party member who represents the seat of Fadden in Queensland.Parliament of Australia: House of Representatives Thanks matey , He needs to be buck up. He is our voice in Australia. In fact all the opposition leaders are our voice. Please write on his website.Here is the link... http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/memfeedback.asp?id=HWT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Name Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 When I applied in Dec 08 applications were taking 6 months, there was no sniff of priority processing and the study to PR route was openly promoted. x Thats what annoyed me. They held these "open days" or "info sessions' in various countries trying to get people to sign up to hairdressing and cookery courses and promoted it as pathway to PR. Most of those were organised by Federal Government. And now they are showing a different face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Name Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Some of you guys are praying that if opposition comes to power, we are all in safe territory. I dont think so. Mr. Abbott I believe has a more radical views when it comes to immigration. At least these guys have a vision as to where they want Australia to go in relations to immigration as flawed it may be, Abbott doesnt and all he knows is "population cap". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHANO7 Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Treating applicants retrospectively is so wrong. 17000 applicants for Hairdressing & Cookery in the pipeline.... so bloody what. We all applied when your rules said you wanted us and we have all paid in good faith for a fair shot. Give us all Visas and make your new rules apply from now. People who have missed the boat because they havent lodged are just unlucky but to treat those that have the same is pure evil. I think this is all going to get messy. Shane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Name Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Treating applicants retrospectively is so wrong. 17000 applicants for Hairdressing & Cookery in the pipeline.... so bloody what. We all applied when your rules said you wanted us and we have all paid in good faith for a fair shot. Give us all Visas and make your new rules apply from now. People who have missed the boat because they havent lodged are just unlucky but to treat those that have the same is pure evil. I think this is all going to get messy. Shane You see Shane, we dont vote. Politicians (not just in Australia) everwhere only answer (or pretends to care about) their electorate. They dont have to answer to these 17000 people, hence they are expendable. Don't know what to say. Its sad if anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jools123 Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 can not believe it just got home from work to this....... is there someone we can all write to ....... it cant be right treating us all like this, like shane i can undertstand them changing things to the need of australia (to a point) but the people who have allready applied deserve a fighting chance at least:arghh: jools x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Wannabeoz Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Treating applicants retrospectively is so wrong. 17000 applicants for Hairdressing & Cookery in the pipeline.... so bloody what. We all applied when your rules said you wanted us and we have all paid in good faith for a fair shot. Give us all Visas and make your new rules apply from now. People who have missed the boat because they havent lodged are just unlucky but to treat those that have the same is pure evil. I think this is all going to get messy. Shane I totally agree. We all applied with a certain expectation, and they were happy to take our money. Even if they cap and refund, that doesn't cover agents' fees, IELTS tests, Vetassess applications, state sponsorship fees, nothing. It wouldn't even take into account any change in exchange rates. It's an utter disgrace. They knew the situation when we applied, they just wanted to feather their nests with our application fees. I hope Australia struggles in the future because people have been put off moving there and getting involved in this farce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libbysmum Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 I totally agree. We all applied with a certain expectation, and they were happy to take our money. Even if they cap and refund, that doesn't cover agents' fees, IELTS tests, Vetassess applications, state sponsorship fees, nothing. It wouldn't even take into account any change in exchange rates. It's an utter disgrace. They knew the situation when we applied, they just wanted to feather their nests with our application fees. I hope Australia struggles in the future because people have been put off moving there and getting involved in this farce. Not forgetting the interest accumulating from all these visa applications, are we entitled to any of this? I do doubt it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
libbysmum Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 So, other than capping and killing by occupation / time of application could other factors be used to decide whether to cap and kill, for example, number of years experience, english language ability, or is this just me clutching at straws?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rachbarlow Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 Not meaning to sound cocky......................but what did I say! Those who were pleased that they had their application in before the doors were shut for a bit, and got the MODL points were thankful they had not missed the boat, and most were saying that their application was now safe! As I said nothing is safe until you have that stamp in your passport and have arrived at Oz's pearly gates! They will change the rules as they seem fit and basically not give a toss about the rest of us! Even if we fitted their rules when we applied, which is totally unfair! All those $$$$$$ sitting in the system gaining interest funding these people who make these decisions makes me sick. Night after night I and all of you, sit here scouring the internet, PIO and other places for a shred of hope that there may be some sort of positive news................ well I think that we are the fools! Then again on the other hand, at least they have the balls to implement actions unlike the UK. I just wish that these people who constantly change the goal posts were in our shoes for a fraction of the time that we have spent messing about with this process...... and maybe then they will begin to realise what really goes on and that we are people NOT a TRA number! I bet that they would not be able to cope unlike the rest of us!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest spurious Posted May 27, 2010 Share Posted May 27, 2010 nothing is safe until you have that stamp in your passport They will change the rules as they seem fit I agree, although it should be noted that everyone who puts in an application does so in knowledge of these points. 'Fairness' is a concept that goes both ways - I can certainly understand how unfair it feels to apply under one set of rules, only to be treated under a second. But at the same time, fairness for Australians also needs to be considered - if it's not in the economic interest of the country to keep on bringing in applicants with occupations that aren't in demand, then putting aside the applicant's self-interest and given your point above, is it fair on Australia and it's residents to continue to grant visas to these applicants? There's a reasonable argument that it is not. at least they have the balls to implement actions unlike the UK.Just out of interest, how do you feel about the current UK government's imminent cap on non-EU migrants, in as far as fairness towards those applicants goes? If I'm correct in inferring from your comment that you'd like the UK government to implement some kind of restrictive action, do you think that all pending applications to the UK ought to be honoured? Or if the UK decides that their economy doesn't need, let's say, plumbers, would you prefer that pending applications in that occupation ought to be rejected? I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm genuinely curious at how you'd reconcile those points of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuantitySurveyor Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 "Then again on the other hand, at least they have the balls to implement actions unlike the UK" Double standards ? :dull: Keep taking the pills xx. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
User Name Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 As I said nothing is safe until you have that stamp in your passport and have arrived at Oz's pearly gates! Couldn't have said it better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest tomtom Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 I reckon that they must be sitiing on close to half a billion dollars in application fees imagine the interest on that. I agree with rachbarlow they really do not give a toss about those who are waiting a long time. I myself would like to see a large number of applicants take things further by starting a campaign against the right not so hon kevin rudd and his partners in crime, after all action is louder than words. Like shan07 has said things are going to get very messy, i think applicants will be just capped and ceased and they will just cherry pick who they want, and just keep you waiting forever and a day until they decide they do not require you. At the end of the day can you really expect someone to wait 3 years for a visa which you may/may not get. Tony abbott wants to deal with asylum seekers applications offshore and turn the boats back, his policy has been called inhumane and he has been heavily criticized by his opponents. So what about the treatment of those going through the front door then not much said about that. Not looking foward to the next few months i think there is going to be lots of pi$$$d of people. good luck all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stillwaiting79 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 anyone read this or knows more? i'm confused and worried and sick with dread :arghh: Link; ParlInfo - Title Details= Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest proud2beaussie Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 stillwaiting79, I can understand totally how you feel,but please try not to worry,(I can understand that is easier said than done)there simply is no point in worrying yourself sick about this,there are many good people watching the internet for any new announcements about this topic,and I am sure they will post something as soon as they know about anything. Just try to stay calm and remember that all of us here on PIO are your friends and ready to help you if we can. Kind regards Nigel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stillwaiting79 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 many thanks Nigel. its been such a long wait and seems like everytime a change(s) comes to play...applicants leap-frog me....and now i might be outta the game ... just needed to get this outta my system.... yes, so many of us in the same boat and we all are each-other's support system really. so thanks in advance to all.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Revival Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 I read and read like everyone here for any positive changes or hopes. I check my email tirelessly everyday. It is such a downer and takes so much energy and positivity. If i had known that i will be nearing 2 years by now. I would have definetly considered canada. I chose this process for this ease and speed(at least that what i thought). Now there is no guarrantees , stability or an organised process that promises anything. I keep trying to move on with my life, but can't get over the fact that an email changes everything ))the long awaited email. ------------------------------------------------------------- Sept 2008 VF 475 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest theluckyrocky Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 Have any one seen this, it was presented to the parliament on 26/5 , sounds like Evan is going to kid all of us ........ MIGRATION AMENDMENT (VISA CAPPING) BILL 2010 First Reading Bill and explanatory memorandum presented by MrLaurie Ferguson. Bill read a first time. Second Reading Mr LAURIE FERGUSON (Reid—Parliamentary Secretaryfor Multicultural Affairs and Settlement Services) (10.55 am)—I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Migration Amendment (Visa Capping) Bill 2010amends the Migration Act 1958 (the Act) to give the Minister for Immigrationand Citizenship greater power to effectively manage the migration program. The number of places in the skilled migrationprogram available to applicants who are not sponsored by an employer continuesto decline, as the government’s priority is to support demand driven—that is,employer sponsored—migration. At the same time, the number of pendingapplications continues to grow as the demand for general skilled migrationvisas exceeds the number of places available in the program. The general skilled migration visa program has alsobecome dominated by applicants nominating a limited number of occupations eventhough there are some 400 occupations that are acceptable for general skilledmigration purposes. This has made it difficult for the program to deliver thebroad range of skills needed in the Australian economy and the Australianlabour market. In the 2007-08 program year, of the 41,000 general skilledmigration visas granted, more than 5,000 went to cooks and hairdressers.Further, there are currently 17,594 valid applications which have been made by peoplenominating their occupation as a cook or hairdresser which have not yet beenfinalised. This matter is currently being addressed through priorityprocessing arrangements. Under these arrangements, applicants that are sponsoredby an employer, nominated by a state or territory government authority, or havean occupation which is in critical demand in Australia have their applicationprocessed before other applications. However, these arrangements alone do not address theproblem of large numbers of valid applications that continue to be made byapplicants who are not spon sored and who are nominating occupations that arenot in demand. Currently there are 147,000 primary and secondary applicants forgeneral skilled migration visas waiting in the pipeline for a visa decision. Amendment to ‘cap and terminate’ measures To address these issues, the bill proposes tointroduce a power by which the minister may cap visas and terminate visaapplications on the basis of certain characteristics. Currently, the Act gives the minister the power to makea legislative instrument in a certain class or subclass to cap visas andterminate applications for that class or subclass. The proposed amendments willenable the minister to cap visa grants and terminate visa applications based onthe class or classes of applicant applying for the visa. In particular, the proposed amendments will allow theminister to make a legislative instrument to determine the maximum number ofvisas of a specified class or classes that can be granted in a financial yearto visa applicants with specified characteristics. Similar to the currentpower, the amendments will also allow the minister to treat outstandingapplications for the capped visa as never having been made. Characteristics that may be specified include theoccupation nominated by the applicant, or the time at which the applicant madetheir application. The characteristics will be objective, and relate toinformation that is provided to the department when an application for a visais made. The characteristics that will be specified willdepend on the purpose of the particular determination to cap and terminate visaapplications and will be consistent with Australia’s international obligations.For example, if the determination is made for the purpose of limiting thenumber of applicants in the skilled migration program with the same nominatedoccupation, then a cap would be placed on applications which nominate that particularoccupation. To terminate a visa application is different to adecision to refuse a visa application. When an application is terminated it istaken not to have been made. Applicants who are affected by a cap will havetheir visa application charge refunded to them. Further, a visa applicationwhich has been terminated is not subject to merits review. Application to the general skilled migration visa program The amendments proposed in this bill not onlyprovide a power to cap general skilled migration visas and terminate generalskilled migration visa applications but are broad enough to allow other classesof visas to be capped. This provides the government with a tool for thetargeted management of all aspects of the migration program which will beavailable as the need arises. The exception to this will be protection visas. Theminister cannot make a cap and terminate determination in relation toprotection visas. However, the primary policy imperative of theproposed amendments is to allow the minister to end the ongoing uncertaintyfaced by general skilled migration applicants whose applications are unlikelyto be finalised because their skills are not in demand in Australia. The proposed amendments will better addressAustralia’s skills shortages by limiting the number of general skilledmigration visas able to be granted to applicants whose occupations are inoversupply, thereby leaving more spaces in the program available to applicants whoseoccupation is in demand. This will allow the Australian government todeliver a skilled migration program that is more tightly focused on high-valueskills that will assist in meeting the medium- to long-term needs of theAustralian economy. The government’s intention is to establish arealistic balance between providing the skills Australian employers need andensuring the maximum opportunities for Australian citizens and permanentresidents in a changing employment market. This amendment is just one in a package of reforms thegovernment is currently making to the skilled migration program to ensure thatit is able to target skilled migrants with the high-value, nation-buildingskills that Australia needs. Conclusion This bill represents an important step in achievingthe government’s objectives of a flexible skilled migration program that can beadapted to the economic and business cycle and the needs of Australian businessand industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jools123 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 - if it's not in the economic interest of the country to keep on bringing in applicants with occupations that aren't in demand, then putting aside the applicant's self-interest and given your point above, is it fair on Australia and it's residents to continue to grant visas to these applicants? if hairdressing is not in demand why did wa give me sponsership less than a month ago, and why is there jobs still advertised Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Lombard Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 @Jools State sponsored applicants are highly unlikely to be capped and killed. It will be open season on some of the recent onshore graduates though, and it seems likely that one culling mechanism to be used will be the IELTS test. @Everyone. There are some indications in the Hansard from this week's Senate Estimates hearings as to how things might go on 1 July, in particular there will not be a new points test on that day and the current points allocation for relevant occupations will be maintained. However the Department now has a major roadshow explaining the changes, and this is scheduled for Monday, after which there will no doubt be sufficient information for people to start making plans again. Cheers, George Lombard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jools123 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 @Jools State sponsored applicants are highly unlikely to be capped and killed. It will be open season on some of the recent onshore graduates though, and it seems likely that one culling mechanism to be used will be the IELTS test. george as always i thank you:notworthy: nearly had a day of angry haircuts so that said my clients thank you too:twitcy: jools x ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHANO7 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 @Jools State sponsored applicants are highly unlikely to be capped and killed. It will be open season on some of the recent onshore graduates though, and it seems likely that one culling mechanism to be used will be the IELTS test. George I second what Jools has quoted . A little statement like the one above can bring a smile to all worried applicants faces. :notworthy: shane Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SHANO7 Posted May 28, 2010 Share Posted May 28, 2010 george as always i thank you:notworthy:nearly had a day of angry haircuts so that said my clients thank you too:twitcy: jools x Hey Jools Lets hopt that King George is absobloodylutely spot on with this x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.