Visa Capping - Senate Inquiry

[jack lemon]

so if i aplied as a hairdresser 4 months ago,am i still getting in?

[SHANO7]

so if i aplied as a hairdresser 4 months ago,am i still getting in?

 

Hi Jack ( Thats what the sinister is trying to do to our visa apps !!)

 

My wife is a Haidresser and we lodged in Nov 09. Who knows mate. Previously if you lodged you were fine. It all depends I suppose on if he gets the Visa Capping Bill passed .

 

We have to wait and see / Hopefully it will get chucked out but Im not to sure.

 

Good luck

Shane

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi all,

 

I received a response from Peter Mares saying that he will try to take a closer look at the planned new bill. GREAT to hear of course, but I suggest that those who haven't contacted him yet to please do so, as I'm sure he'll be interested in hearing your stories in case he does write an(other) article on this stressful matter..

 

You can contact him by clicking this link:

The National Interest - Contact Us

 

Thanks!

 

Hi Aussie2B

 

Thanks for the information above. I have just e-mailed Mr Mares myself. My e-mail reads as follows:

Hello Mr Mares

 

I am "Gollywobbler" on the Poms in Oz forum. The relevant thread about the new Visa Capping Bill is below and I would urge you to glance through it, please:

 

http://www.pomsinoz.com/forum/migration-issues/87060-visa-capping-senate-inquiry.html

 

If this Bill goes ahead, the powers given to the Minister for Immi would be both very draconian and virtually unlimited in scope. I am a fully qualified solicitor in the UK so I do know a bit about how to read a Bill, even though I have no specific qualifications in Aussie Law.

 

If the Bill goes ahead, we were all wasting our time in late 2009, fussing about the applicants for GSM visas being left in limbo indefinitely. The Minister's Latest Idea is that he would savage the backlog via the Cap & Terminate powers that he wants.

 

This would leave him with a small pool of GSM applicants to choose from, out of which he could pick only the migrants that he wants and all the rest could go forth and multiply elsewhere, with only their DIAC application fees being refunded to them, sans interest, eventually.

 

The Bill is drafted in such a way that an applicant whose application has been terminated would not be able to complain to the MRT. I don't know whether it would be possible to complain to the courts in Australia.

 

What is more, the Bill says that if the application for the main visa is terminated then any Bridging Visa held would automatically cease 28 days later, so onshore applicants who have been chopped off at the knees would then be required to leave Oz pretty promptly.

 

In addition, the Bill is not restricted to GSM applications or even to skilled visas. If the Minister gets the powers that he seeks then the powers could also be used to send Aged Parent Visa applicants out of Australia - some of whom are very elderly and who have no life left outside of the one that they have with their child or children in Oz. Because they would not be able to complain to the MRT, they would not be able to make a direct appeal to the Minister for Immi via the Ministerial Intervention process either.

 

Should Australia give one man so much power, to use in his sole discretion?

 

In my opinion, the answer must be no.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

 

I have not mentioned the pain of siblings and of the people outside Australia because the instructions for the e-mail were to keep it short. Peter Mares is easily bright enough to work out what the Minister wants and how much emotional and financial pain that would cause.

 

Hopefully he will read this thread.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Graemsay]

I agree with Alan Collett's point that the government needs to have the tools to manage the flow of migrants into Australia such that it suits the country rather than the migrants.

 

The fact is that the migration system is a mess is a testament of this.

 

There are 147,000 applicants in the queue, and 40,000 visas are issued per year. Depending on how the applicants are counted (one per visa or per person on one visa) that could mean anything up to a three and a half year wait.

 

Of these, roughly one in eight have nominated chef or hairdresser as an occupation. Very few of these actually work in these professions once they've arrived, leaving an ongoing skills shortage and the impression that they're abusing the system.

 

It's in Australia's interest to cherry pick who they want to come into the country, and so they need some sort of mechanism to do this, along with being able to correct distortions. Unfortunately this isn't going to be pleasant for those who end up on the wrong side of the policy.

 

Regarding the Minister's new powers, my guess is that part of the process of getting the Bill passed will mean it acquires various amendments, and that some sort of oversight will be part of this.

[Guest lost pom]

oh here we go again !!! i am sick of people slagging off hairdressers and cooks there are alot of people that came here to train to do the job and still doing it !! do you think that it is fair that the people that work in the profession noninated e.g. hairdressing since completing college then get a 28 day notice ??? i am a hairdresser and i feel very badly done to followed the rules and worked in my job and i could just get thown out. i am very annoyed as when i applied jan 09 my job was in demand so what i dont understand why should i not get my PR, immigration took my money, my application and now look where following the rules get you !! no-where

[ramot]

Hi all,

 

I received a response from Peter Mares saying that he will try to take a closer look at the planned new bill. GREAT to hear of course, but I suggest that those who haven't contacted him yet to please do so, as I'm sure he'll be interested in hearing your stories in case he does write an(other) article on this stressful matter..

 

You can contact him by clicking this link:

The National Interest - Contact Us

 

Thanks!

 

Also sent email to Peter Mares and heard the same. Urge everyone else to contact him. Also sent submission to Senate, and emailed almost everyone I know in Australia to ask for their support. Most are outraged at the proposed bill, and several have instantly lodged their protest and intend contacting their Federal MP's. Again suggest everyone tries to get as much support as possible, the more protests the better, especially from concerned Australians.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

I agree with Alan Collett's point that the government needs to have the tools to manage the flow of migrants into Australia such that it suits the country rather than the migrants.

 

The fact is that the migration system is a mess is a testament of this.

 

There are 147,000 applicants in the queue, and 40,000 visas are issued per year. Depending on how the applicants are counted (one per visa or per person on one visa) that could mean anything up to a three and a half year wait.

 

Of these, roughly one in eight have nominated chef or hairdresser as an occupation. Very few of these actually work in these professions once they've arrived, leaving an ongoing skills shortage and the impression that they're abusing the system.

 

It's in Australia's interest to cherry pick who they want to come into the country, and so they need some sort of mechanism to do this, along with being able to correct distortions. Unfortunately this isn't going to be pleasant for those who end up on the wrong side of the policy.

 

Regarding the Minister's new powers, my guess is that part of the process of getting the Bill passed will mean it acquires various amendments, and that some sort of oversight will be part of this.

 

 

Hi Graemsay

 

It is dreadfully easy to sound dreadfully smug once you already have your own visas for Oz, you know......

 

You have your own visa so you have not wasted any of your own money and you are not faced with appalling uncertainty either. Would you feel so philosophical if you were faced with the prospect of being chopped off at the knees with a lot of your own money down the drain? The average International Student has spent enough money in Oz to have been able to have bought a house in Australia with the money instead if s/he had had Permanent Residency in Oz from Day One.

 

Directly and indirectly Aussies have benefited from the Student's generosity with his/her money.

 

I agree with you that in an ideal world, instead of being 3 pages long as it is at present, the Capping Bill would be 350 pages long by the time everybody has curtailed it and introduced the oversight of its workings that you describe. However the Minister insists on a mad rush so that there simply won't be enough time for anyone to do the job properly. Additionally, it is an Election year and there has been a rumour around for several months now that Krudd is likely to call a snap Election for a date in August 2010.

 

I'm not sure how much notice Krudd has to give - I think it is only about 6 weeks. If he suddenly calls an Election, everybody will forget about amending this Bill. They'll immediately divert 100% of their attention to getting themselves re-elected instead.

 

I suspect that even a whisper of an Election in the first few days in August would get the Capping Bill into law, in its present state, with hardly a scratch on it, minus any of the oversights that you recommend.

 

Why is there so much unseemly haste about a hastily assembled Inquiry, with only 7 days in which to produce Submissions and a further 7 working days to produce its Report to Parliament? Nobody has a snowball's chance of doing the job properly in such a short time. The Inquiry on Disability and Migration has bimbled along for over a year with no sign of a Report as yet.

 

That is why I would chuck this Capping Bill out, lock, stock and barrel at this stage. I would tell Krudd to wait until (if) he gets another mandate for another 3 years. If he does, he can come back with this Bill in the next Parliament, when there would be plenty of time for careful reflection and for a proper job to be done. If he does not get re-elected then it is a good thing that his Bill did not get slammed onto the statute book in a hurry either, it seems to me.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Alan Collett]

The Bill can be blocked in the Senate by the Opposition and the cross benchers - Senators Xenophon and Fielding.

 

Webpages are here: http://www.nickxenophon.com.au/page.php?id=63 and Contact Steve :: Senator Steve Fielding

 

Names of all Senators and weblinks are here: Parliament of Australia:Senate:Senators:Homepages by Political Party

 

Best regards.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi All

 

Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Migration Amendment (Visa Capping) Bill 2010: Submissions Received

 

The Inquiry Committee has published the first 25 Submissions received. To read them. please click on the link above.

 

I've only read the first 3 or 4 so far. What comes across is how hard the applicants have tried (and have succeeded) in making their lives in Australia work out in the way that the Government demands.

 

Yet the Minister wants the power to terminate their applications and send them packing out of Australia, not because he says so but because some horrible little Jobsworth working for DIAC would have the power to make that determination on the Minister's behalf.

 

I am sad.

 

Gill

[ranjith47]

Hi All

 

Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Migration Amendment (Visa Capping) Bill 2010: Submissions Received

 

The Inquiry Committee has published the firt 25 Submissions received. To read them. please click on the link above.

 

I've only read the first 3 or 4 so far. What comes across is how hard the applicants have tried (and have succeeded) in making their lives in Australia work out in the way that the Government demands.

 

Yet the Minister wants the power to terminate their applications and send them packing out of Australia, not because he says so but because some horrible little Jobsworth working for DIAC would have the power to make that determination on the Minister's behalf.

 

I am sad.

 

Gill

 

 

Wow. My mail is displayed in the Parliament of Australia's Website . Pretty Cool.

But the job is not done yet. I mean, Now what Gill? Are they going to consider those mails for action or is it just there for display.

I focused my application on Genuine International Students as I am an Onshore Student and I could voice our opinions much better than for others. I have given the overall situation of Offshore Migrants too. But , How are they going to consider these concerns in our mails.!? :unsure:

[Jeffster]

Can we please lay off the "boatpeople" They are a minuscule percentage of total migration

 

These asylum seekers come seeking refuge and apply under the international obligations of Australia. Its not the only country in the world that takes in refugees ... India US UK EU

 

Secondly, while we may have the luxury of sitting in our homes with family to whine about unfairness of having lost a few thousand dollars in fees and tax .... most of these asylum seekers have lost family and home ... and all they had ... lets not deprive them of humanity and dignity.

 

Yes they deserve to be resettled far ahead of skilled independent migrants because they do not have options. And I would rather live next to someone who doesn't speak English well or understand much of my culture than be neighbors to a person who can turn his or her back on desperate people.

 

Hope over constant fear of death ... thats what these people choose. And sail over oceans in rickety boats in hope of gaining what they have lost.

 

 

I think you'll find most people aren't "anti-boatpeople", it's the fact that if a boatload arrives today they will likely have their visas processed long before I or many others on here will get theirs.

[Guest Jane1991]

I think you'll find most people aren't "anti-boatpeople", it's the fact that if a boatload arrives today they will likely have their visas processed long before I or many others on here will get theirs.

 

I don't resent the priority treatment .... Its like arguing a doctor must treat a common cold patient before one having a cardiac arrest ...

 

They are asylum seekers, not cashed up migrants who have the luxury of waiting in their big houses in Belgravia

[ranjith47]

Well said jane

[alex2010]

Good day to all members!

 

I just would like to say as much as I understand the Minister's concerns regarding GSM program distortion, this proposed bill shows some signs of retroactivity. If this becomes the law what can we expect next time when the Minister finds out that Australia has too many migrants that have already been granted skilled PR visa e.g. in IT industry? Is he going to propose the law that gives him a power to cancel PR visa of unemployed IT specialists and send them home?

 

I know it is a bit extreme situation, however, I see an anology with this bill - applicants or approved applicants that comply with the valid law at the time of making application will not be seen as wanted and retroactivity will be used to get rid of them...

 

Good luck to all non-citizens! :sad:

[rahulpatel1969]

Alex

 

Some signs of retroactivity. I think the whole goddamn bill is a way of taking care of a mess created because of inactivity on the part of DIAC. The whole bill is totally retrospective. Not only that it has no moral standing.

[ranjith47]

I think we are all going a little too far on this problem.

I am sure there are going to be changes or there may not be much changes but all we are doing is speculating. And wr are speculating negatively to things which have not been confirmed of being performed.

Let us really WAIT for the new rules, but at the same time, Let us encourage ppl to write mails and messages to the relevant Senates who can BLOCK the Cap and Cease Bill 2010 from being passed. That should be our focus and not to be negative of the outcome.

I do request everyone to be a sport and take whatever comes along their way with Strength and Sturdiness. All we are in Control of is the NOW part of our life, not the past, nor the future.

So lets keep the Sending mails and spreading awareness of giving in our submissions by the 4th June be spread to as many ppl as possible.

[Jeffster]

I don't resent the priority treatment .... Its like arguing a doctor must treat a common cold patient before one having a cardiac arrest ...

 

They are asylum seekers, not cashed up migrants who have the luxury of waiting in their big houses in Belgravia

 

If the common cold patient has PAID for Private Health Insurance they're not even in the same boat (no pun intended). Refugees get "treated" eventually but why should they be processed before the people who have been waiting for 2-3 years? Are you saying they should process visas in priority of economic circumstances then?

 

Will you be giving up your Visa for any eligible refugee who applies AFTER you?

[rahulpatel1969]

Hi All

 

Parliament of Australia: Senate: Committees: Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee: Migration Amendment (Visa Capping) Bill 2010: Submissions Received

 

The Inquiry Committee has published the first 25 Submissions received. To read them. please click on the link above.

 

I've only read the first 3 or 4 so far. What comes across is how hard the applicants have tried (and have succeeded) in making their lives in Australia work out in the way that the Government demands.

 

Yet the Minister wants the power to terminate their applications and send them packing out of Australia, not because he says so but because some horrible little Jobsworth working for DIAC would have the power to make that determination on the Minister's behalf.

 

I am sad.

 

Gill

 

Gill

 

Was busy the last few days with some social work. Where do I post my complaint.

 

Rahul

[Guest Alucard]

I'm with Jeffster on this one - there are millions and millions of asylum seekers out there. Should they all be given priority?

[ranjith47]

Im sure Asylum seekers' migration are not mixed with other Migrants. or are they? Asylum seekers are a separate program directed by the United Nations isnt it? It does not have any influence on the Skilled Migration program. Then why is there a concern over this may i know!?

[taniaholmes]

If the common cold patient has PAID for Private Health Insurance they're not even in the same boat (no pun intended). Refugees get "treated" eventually but why should they be processed before the people who have been waiting for 2-3 years? Are you saying they should process visas in priority of economic circumstances then?

 

Will you be giving up your Visa for any eligible refugee who applies AFTER you?

 

I would if their life!!! was in danger because isn't that why they go to Australia i would defiantly do that.

[Alan Collett]

ABC The Drum Unleashed - Chris Berg

 

Someone else concerned persons might contact in an effort to raise the profile of the Bill ...

 

Best regards.

[Guest June Pixie]

I and all the other people that are going through the whole visa process have followed every rule layed down in order to progress with our applications. We have broken the news to family, friends and sometimes employers. We have tunneled our lives into an existence, reined in our spending, put our lives on hold, all because we were told that if we followed the rules our dreams could become reality.

Very recently we were reasurred that as long as our applications were in the system we would have every chance of securing a visa. ( Yet again this was as long as we followed the rules layed down to us).

Now not only are our lives are on hold they are in turmoil too.

Every waking moment I wonder what will be happening next, I wake on a morning and go straight to the computer to see if anything has changed to alter our lives overnight. I believe this could be seen as mental torture.

We are human beings, not just numbers or figures on a spreadsheet, and I wish the decision makers in government would not forget this when messing callously with our lives.

 

Seems this kind of behaviour has been going on since The First Fleet sailed 1,400 convicts to Botany Bay. Mateship and a fair go??? That's a bloody laugh. Soon enough they'll have to be introducing the £10 Pom again, that's if anyone can be bothered to schlepp half way round and under the World.

[Graemsay]

Gill, I agree that it's easy to be smug and philosophical about things now I've got my visa, and particularly when the infamous September 23rd changes were of massive benefit.

 

But (and this is a big but), there are more people wanting to move to Australia than there are visas. And the government will put the country's economic self-interest ahead of the feelings of would-be migrants.

 

I'll stick my neck out and make a few predictions:

 

 

• A large percentage of outstanding applications will get capped and ceased over the next year or two. Probably more than most people will expect, as the backlog represents 3 1/2 years of visas.
  
• That said, I suspect that the culls will focus on the less skilled applicants. Someone who's been to a visa mill college to study hairdressing is more likely to be rejected than someone with twenty years experience.
  
• Skilled independent migration will (virtually) cease, and migrants will require state or employer sponsorship.
  
• The standards for skilled migration in terms of education, experience and language skills will probably rise.
  
• The numbers of dependent, parent and other similar visas will fall.
  
• There will be a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth on Poms in Oz. :arghh:
  

 

Making legal challenges against the new legislation is likely to be an expensive exercise, and the very emotive appeals in this thread are likely to be ignored.

 

So my suggestion is to be proactive:

 

 

• Try to get enough points together to meet the requirements for a current 176 visa.
  
• If you don't already have state or employer sponsorship then try to secure this.
  
• If you have a poor IELTS score then study for the exam, and try to get a decent pass.
  

 

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi All

 

There is no correlation between visas granted to refugees and asylum seekers in the Humanitarian Stream and those granted to skilled applicants in the Skilled Stream or those granted to family members in the Family Stream (eg Parents, Partners, Children, Remiaining Rellies etc.)

 

If an "irregular maritime arrival" (or whatever they are called) gets a visa for Oz, he does NOT take a visa away from anyone else.

 

The Capping Bill specifically excludes and protects people who apply for Protection Visas. I don't know what those are but they are Humanitarian Stream visas. I assume that the Bill protects everyone who seeks a visa in the Humanitarian Stream nut since I haven't got a clue about Humanitarian Stream visas, it could be that they have to apply for a Protection Visa first or something.

 

Whatever the details, the people involved are irrelevant to the Capping Bill so I feel that we should leave those people out of any discussions in this thread.

 

Cheers

 

Gill