Visa Capping - Senate Inquiry

[Guest Gollywobbler]

The trouble with the cap and cease bill is that it isn't transparent, and without any kind of oversight. So I think that any alternative mechanism has to be seen to be fair.

 

How about changing the system such that you're tested against the criteria at the time a CO is assigned, rather than at the time of application? OK, this would be retrospective, but:

 

• Some of the candidates being threatened with Cap and Cease are said to have weak English skills, or other factors that would fail the current test. This would weed them out, or give them an opportunity to (say) attempt to pass the IELTS test at the requisite score.

• Applicants would have to work in their nominated occupation up until a CO was assigned. That would prevent someone from doing the minimal required to apply as (say) a hairdresser, and then go off an do something else.

• DIAC could be far more open in their decision making process, and carry out more consultation as there wouldn't be a body of would-be migrants applying because the rules are changing on Friday at midnight.

 

OK, there would be losers in this, it would make the whole process much more stressful (goalposts moving more than they do right now), and it would mean continual, retrospective changes. But I think that it would be more open than an arbitrary decision to terminate particular groups of applicants.

 

Hi Graemsay

 

I hear you but my own vote to your ideas would be "Emphatically NOT." If you are going to take somebody's money then you have to explain the rules of the proposed game clearly and up-front before you let them apply and you help yourself to their money. You have to set the rules up-front and then you have to stick to them.

 

Australia has gotten itself into a god-awful mess with the GSM group of visas. However, Australia created the mess via the greed of its Government. A perfectly acceptable alternative solution to the backlog is an Amnesty. Amnesties have been used in Immigration before and there is no reason why the idea should not be used again.

 

My sister Elaine went to Australia on a Working Holiday visa in 1979. She went out there in about November 1979 so she was due to return to the UK in November 1980. I pinned her down recently to find out how she got Permanent Residency in the place. Elaine said that whilst she was in Australia during that year, the Government at the time declared an Amnesty with Immigration. Anybody who was in Australia on any sort of a temporary visa could apply for Permanent Residency and would be certain to get it, apparently. Elaine decided to apply, was granted PR and so the immigration story ended as far as she was concerned.

 

I don't know why the Government decided to grant the Amnesty because Elaine didn't know why it happened and I didn't even know that it had happened until very recently.

 

There is no reason why Australia should not simply grant an Amnesty to everyone who is caught up in the GSM backlog and be done with it. That would get rid of the backlog in 12-24 months and it would do away with the Minister's beastly little proposals for his opaque and retroactive Visa Capping Bill as well.

 

The Aussie Government created the mess and an Amnesty would get them out of that mess without having to scrap perfectly valid visa applications instead.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Gollywobbler]

They don't get forwarded to the next year, applications for capped visa types (ie. professions) are not accepted, simple as. Each month the figure can be readjusted for the applications that were rejected. When the cap is removed people can then put their application in.

 

It would be a much fairer and less stressful system than taking applications and money from as many as possible then turfing those out that you don't want anymore several years later.

 

Hi Jeffster

 

I agree with you 100% in relation to visas that people have not yet applied for.

 

One of the reasons why DIAC are keen to attract applications that they will simply scrap later on is because of the way their budgeting works. As soon as they receive a visa application fee, they spend the money. The Aussie Government allows them to spend the money in any way that they like. So DIAC could apply your money towards meeting the payroll for its staff or it could use your money towards the cost of running the Christmas Island detention centre instead - as DIAC pleases.

 

One of their reasons for refusing to offer interest as well as their sordid little refunds is because the visa application fees have not been earning any interest for DIAC, on account of the fact that DIAC spent the money as soon as they got it.

 

The upshot is that the Australian taxpayer is the poor sod who will actually have to finance the proposed refunds, out of his own pocket. Something which Minister Evans does not care to admit because the Aussie Voters would become even more p*ssed off with the wasteful Krudd Government than they already are if the Government were to tell them the truth about this, obviously.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest choconick]

But this WONT work coz again there will be a problem of Huge applications forwarded for the next year and what abt the ppl applying the next year!?? This wont be a feasible solution mate,, Sorry, you wont be elected as the next Immigration Minister for sure,, 100% .:wink:

I may not have explained very well, my mechanism is:

Think of it like a "flight ticket booking system".

 

1.fix number of seats

2.booking available when seats available

3. no more seats-booking rejected

4. someone canceled their seats, limited seats available again.

 

there is no "queue" here, no one get forward or backlog or anything.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

I may not have explained very well, my mechanism is:

Think of it like a "flight ticket booking system".

 

1.fix number of seats

2.booking available when seats available

3. no more seats-booking rejected

4. someone canceled their seats, limited seats available again.

 

there is no "queue" here, no one get forward or backlog or anything.

 

Hi Choconick

 

I agree with your idea and I think it is probably the one that Australia will be likely to adopt in the future, once the present backlogs have been cleared up.

 

However, how would your idea solve the present backlog of having about 147,000 GSM visa applications in the pipeline and a wish to grant no more than about 36,500 such visas to the main applicants for them in the year commencing 1st July 2010, please?

 

I think that this problem is what Ranjith was getting at when Ranjith made a tongue-in-cheek joke to you earlier!

 

Would I have you as the Minister for Immi? :err:

 

Well...... Nobody can make a worse mess of the job than Minister Evans is making, so why not appoint you instead, hun? :wink:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[ranjith47]

Hi Graemsay

 

Australia has gotten itself into a god-awful mess with the GSM group of visas. However, Australia created the mess via the greed of its Government. A perfectly acceptable alternative solution to the backlog is an Amnesty. Amnesties have been used in Immigration before and there is no reason why the idea should not be used again.

 

My sister Elaine went to Australia on a Working Holiday visa in 1979. She went out there in about November 1979 so she was due to return to the UK in November 1980. I pinned her down recently to find out how she got Permanent Residency in the place. Elaine said that whilst she was in Australia during that year, the Government at the time declared an Amnesty with Immigration. Anybody who was in Australia on any sort of a temporary visa could apply for Permanent Residency and would be certain to get it, apparently. Elaine decided to apply, was granted PR and so the immigration story ended as far as she was concerned.

 

I don't know why the Government decided to grant the Amnesty because Elaine didn't know why it happened and I didn't even know that it had happened until very recently.

 

There is no reason why Australia should not simply grant an Amnesty to everyone who is caught up in the GSM backlog and be done with it. That would get rid of the backlog in 12-24 months and it would do away with the Minister's beastly little proposals for his opaque and retroactive Visa Capping Bill as well.

 

The Aussie Government created the mess and an Amnesty would get them out of that mess without having to scrap perfectly valid visa applications instead.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Sound Ideas like these and more should really be considered and formulated by those Advisors and the other personnel working for the Minister, but if only they had BRAINS and the HEARTS to do take actions like these.!! and If they still havent grown their Hearts and Brains for decisions like these,,, Then we direct them to, because The Government works for the people Anyways. Or do they?

[Purple Princess]

Hi Choconick

 

I agree with your idea and I think it is probably the one that Australia will be likely to adopt in the future, once the present backlogs have been cleared up.

 

However, how would your idea solve the present backlog of having about 147,000 GSM visa applications in the pipeline and a wish to grant no more than about 36,500 such visas to the main applicants for them in the year commencing 1st July 2010, please?

 

I think that this problem is what Ranjith was getting at when Ranjith made a tongue-in-cheek joke to you earlier!

 

Would I have you as the Minister for Immi? :err:

 

Well...... Nobody can make a worse mess of the job than Minister Evans is making, so why not appoint you instead, hun? :wink:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

 

I think the post you put on earlier would be an ideal solution. Just grant everyone who is in oz on a temporary visa a PR one :idea:. Process all the existing offshore one's and put a stop to any further applications until the backlog has gone!!! I'm sure they have millions of our $$$ to employ more people at DIAC to process the applications:biglaugh:

 

I also think that any government that gets in will be a bunch of muppets!!! A bit like what happened in the UK, they will be left clearing up the mess that the previous government made!!!!

 

Rant over....

 

Steph

xxxx

[Ozzieland]

Hi Choconick

 

I agree with your idea and I think it is probably the one that Australia will be likely to adopt in the future, once the present backlogs have been cleared up.

 

However, how would your idea solve the present backlog of having about 147,000 GSM visa applications in the pipeline and a wish to grant no more than about 36,500 such visas to the main applicants for them in the year commencing 1st July 2010, please?

 

I think that this problem is what Ranjith was getting at when Ranjith made a tongue-in-cheek joke to you earlier!

 

Would I have you as the Minister for Immi? :err:

 

Well...... Nobody can make a worse mess of the job than Minister Evans is making, so why not appoint you instead, hun? :wink:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

IMO, the Australian Government has no option but to process all the backlog as quickly as they can and close the issue. Why should applicants suffer for their disorganized ways. We cannot put the blame on to the previous Government because this Government has been in power for over 4 years now. What were they doing ??? IMO, this is an attempt to prove to Australia that they are doing something for them and to elect them back to office, nothing more. They don't care what the applicants and their families are going through not only financially but also emotionally. For instance, the pre 2007 applicants are having sleepless nights because of the money, time, effort that has gone in and now the wait of over 3 years not knowing what is going to happen !!! The Government was in power, even if just, when these applicants applied and what more important a job could the Immigration Minister have had than this but obviously did nothing about it. I hope that good sense prevails and they do what is right taking into consideration the entire situation.

[theandersons]

I agree, it seems to be really unfair that the rules are continually changed.

Especially when the costs of applying in terms of both emotional and financial are so high.

 

We are lucky in that our visa was approved, but still the cost has been measured in many thousands for us.

 

I really feel for the people that are impacted by this continual goal post shifting.

[User Name]

Just wondering, how much different is minister's current power with what he seeks to acquire with the new bill? He already ceased all pre-2007 application using some migration act. Can't he use the same to cease all based on certain occupation/subclasses?

[User Name]

 

However the Minister is describing his new Bill, which is all about Cap & Terminate. Cap & Terminate is not the same as Cap & Queue. They are different ideas, governed by different provisions in the existing legislation.

 

 

 

What worries me is that if this bill gets chucked in the bin, then he might get ****ty and use the "cap and queue" retrospectively. In other words, all cookery and hairdressers be severely capped and those onshore might face extreme delay like 10-20 years say. That's the worst case scenario.

 

While he is looking at ways to clear the backlog using some very questionable and immoral methods, alternatively he can simply keep the backlog and continue with business as usual attitude. After all no one is complaining about it aside from applicants who dont vote.

 

I believe the minister has the power to do so with that migration act. And that would be terrible if it does happen.

[Graemsay]

The Minister has two options when it comes to managing the backlog: Cap and cease a large proportion of applicants; or process every one in the queue and either accept that there will be a long wait for some due to the numbers involved, or boost the quota or declare an amnesty.

 

I think that boosting the annual quota is possible, and might happen if unemployment continues its downward trend. The rate has dropped from 5.4% to 5.2% in the last couple of months. (Adding every applicant in the queue would only push it up to around 6.5%.)

 

A general amnesty or effort by DIAC to grant visas to everyone in the queue in a relatively short period (say one to two years) would be politically difficult. Mass immigration isn't popular, and bringing in an extra hundred thousand people this year wouldn't go down well with the electorate.

 

Regardless of what happens, I think that there will be some groups that are capped and ceased. DIAC believes that those with poor English skills or who only qualify for migration due to family sponsorship don't settle successfully, though Carina Ford argues differently the latter group in her submission. So expect these to go.

 

If Evans gets his way with the cap and cease bill then I expect it to be used much more widely than he claims it will be. If a government grants itself powers then they tend to be applied in ways that were never envisaged when drafted. For example, anti-terrorism legislation in the UK was used to deal with protesters at the Labour party conference and freeze Iceland's assets during the banking crisis.

 

The problem with the cap and cease bill is that there aren't any oversights, transparency or safeguards built into it. I'm hoping that its passage through parliament will correct this.

 

Choconick's suggestion is similar to the US H-1B visa, and that has its own set of problems. What tended to happen was that three or four outsourcing companies apply for massive numbers (two or three times the total available each year for the programme), and the quota would be exhausted before the start of the financial year it was due to cover.

[User Name]

A general amnesty or effort by DIAC to grant visas to everyone in the queue in a relatively short period (say one to two years) would be politically difficult. Mass immigration isn't popular, and bringing in an extra hundred thousand people this year wouldn't go down well with the electorate.

 

 

If he does take the amnesty route, then he'll most likely grant it to onshore ones and selected few from offshore. Reason being they are fewer compared to offshore, already part of the population, and more likely to cause trouble for DIAC via media than offshore ones.

[yc1ten]

Article taken from the website of Australian Federation of International Students

 

Australian Federation of International Students - Student welfare at risk – Visa capping bill rumours

[Guest Gollywobbler]

If he does take the amnesty route, then he'll most likely grant it to onshore ones and selected few from offshore. Reason being they are fewer compared to offshore, already part of the population, and more likely to cause trouble for DIAC via media than offshore ones.

 

 

Hi User Name

 

I don't think there is any chance whatsoever that the Minister will propose an amnesty, Doing so would make a mockery of every other proposal and change that he has devised and implemented so far, with more to come.

 

Personally I think he is over-estimating the attractions of Australia. It only became seriousy popular once the Aussie Government linked studying in Oz with permanent migration to Oz and told the whole world what a brainy notion it was.

 

The rest of us thought that John Howard was barking but I thought that about him most of the time anyway.

 

By scrubbing that link out, I think that Minister Evans will cause a double-dip recessoon in VIC. It won't be felt in WA because WA depends so heavily on mining. I think scrapping International Education to the huge extent that he has done it will really cause problems in VIC but I am mot sure about any of the other States apart from WA.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Jeffster]

Hi Jeffster

 

I agree with you 100% in relation to visas that people have not yet applied for.

 

One of the reasons why DIAC are keen to attract applications that they will simply scrap later on is because of the way their budgeting works. As soon as they receive a visa application fee, they spend the money. The Aussie Government allows them to spend the money in any way that they like. So DIAC could apply your money towards meeting the payroll for its staff or it could use your money towards the cost of running the Christmas Island detention centre instead - as DIAC pleases.

 

One of their reasons for refusing to offer interest as well as their sordid little refunds is because the visa application fees have not been earning any interest for DIAC, on account of the fact that DIAC spent the money as soon as they got it.

 

The upshot is that the Australian taxpayer is the poor sod who will actually have to finance the proposed refunds, out of his own pocket. Something which Minister Evans does not care to admit because the Aussie Voters would become even more p*ssed off with the wasteful Krudd Government than they already are if the Government were to tell them the truth about this, obviously.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

 

 

That, quite frankly, amazes me Gill, but at the same time am not surprised (if that makes sense!)

 

I would love to know where they have spent the odd quarter of a billion dollars in fees they have taken for unprocessed visas. I wonder if it is publicly available information?

The fact they have also spent this money when they haven't actually done any work is seriously wrong.

 

As the refunds will be financed by the taxpayer (I wonder if I will end up financing my own refund?) this is a great bit of PR to get Aussies onside and against the Bill. There is already major discontent with Krudd and Labour here so they will be trying to avoid every bit of negative publicity until the election.

 

On a different note, last nights 'Today Tonight', a current affairs program on Channel 7, featured a report on one of the "dodgy" colleges that may have it's licence suspended. Here's a link to the story:

 

College claims fraud by former employee - ABC Adelaide - Australian Broadcasting Corporation

 

There are two things I find aggravating about this:

 

1. The College has a CRICOS number, so at some point the College was "approved" by the Govt. and then suddenly they fail to comply - go figure...

 

2. The owner of the College is Indian and looks like an utter scoundrel. For all the bleating of the Indian "community" sticking together and looking out for each other it doesn't exactly look good when one of their own is rorting the system and treating his countrymen like utter crap.

 

If there were any justice he should meet the same fate as many of his students - cancel his PR / citizenship and send him home penniless, but he will probably get away with it. The College will probably get shut down but hey, he's made enough money to comfortably retire, nothing will happen to him. Makes you sick.

[yc1ten]

That, quite frankly, amazes me Gill, but at the same time am not surprised (if that makes sense!)

 

I would love to know where they have spent the odd quarter of a billion dollars in fees they have taken for unprocessed visas. I wonder if it is publicly available information?

The fact they have also spent this money when they haven't actually done any work is seriously wrong.

 

This could be where they have spent the money:

 

VIP Christmas Island asylum seekers | Herald Sun

[Ozzieland]

That, quite frankly, amazes me Gill, but at the same time am not surprised (if that makes sense!)

 

I would love to know where they have spent the odd quarter of a billion dollars in fees they have taken for unprocessed visas. I wonder if it is publicly available information?

The fact they have also spent this money when they haven't actually done any work is seriously wrong.

 

As the refunds will be financed by the taxpayer (I wonder if I will end up financing my own refund?) this is a great bit of PR to get Aussies onside and against the Bill. There is already major discontent with Krudd and Labour here so they will be trying to avoid every bit of negative publicity until the election.

 

On a different note, last nights 'Today Tonight', a current affairs program on Channel 7, featured a report on one of the "dodgy" colleges that may have it's licence suspended. Here's a link to the story:

 

College claims fraud by former employee - ABC Adelaide - Australian Broadcasting Corporation

 

There are two things I find aggravating about this:

 

1. The College has a CRICOS number, so at some point the College was "approved" by the Govt. and then suddenly they fail to comply - go figure...

 

2. The owner of the College is Indian and looks like an utter scoundrel. For all the bleating of the Indian "community" sticking together and looking out for each other it doesn't exactly look good when one of their own is rorting the system and treating his countrymen like utter crap.

 

If there were any justice he should meet the same fate as many of his students - cancel his PR / citizenship and send him home penniless, but he will probably get away with it. The College will probably get shut down but hey, he's made enough money to comfortably retire, nothing will happen to him. Makes you sick.

 

 

I entirely agree you. Other than cancelling his license what action have they taken ? Has he been fined and / or a penalty awarded to him ? He has already made whatever money he had to for the next 20 years but who takes the onus of the students investing high fees in a Government recognized Institute and being cheated for no fault of theirs ? It is entirely the Government's fault if this 'Indian' person was awarded a Cricos number and was able to run an institute the way he did.

[Guest umairghias]

is there any update for the senate inquiry which was today 15th june . I know they said they were going to apply for extension but no news yet?

[ranjith47]

That, quite frankly, amazes me Gill, but at the same time am not surprised (if that makes sense!)

 

I would love to know where they have spent the odd quarter of a billion dollars in fees they have taken for unprocessed visas. I wonder if it is publicly available information?

The fact they have also spent this money when they haven't actually done any work is seriously wrong.

 

As the refunds will be financed by the taxpayer (I wonder if I will end up financing my own refund?) this is a great bit of PR to get Aussies onside and against the Bill. There is already major discontent with Krudd and Labour here so they will be trying to avoid every bit of negative publicity until the election.

 

On a different note, last nights 'Today Tonight', a current affairs program on Channel 7, featured a report on one of the "dodgy" colleges that may have it's licence suspended. Here's a link to the story:

 

College claims fraud by former employee - ABC Adelaide - Australian Broadcasting Corporation

 

There are two things I find aggravating about this:

 

1. The College has a CRICOS number, so at some point the College was "approved" by the Govt. and then suddenly they fail to comply - go figure...

 

2. The owner of the College is Indian and looks like an utter scoundrel. For all the bleating of the Indian "community" sticking together and looking out for each other it doesn't exactly look good when one of their own is rorting the system and treating his countrymen like utter crap.

 

If there were any justice he should meet the same fate as many of his students - cancel his PR / citizenship and send him home penniless, but he will probably get away with it. The College will probably get shut down but hey, he's made enough money to comfortably retire, nothing will happen to him. Makes you sick.

 

Some Indian assholes just screw it up for the other ppl...! They just spoil the whole country's name with such stupid acts.!!! Guys like these should pay for their wrong doings.!!!

 

I am an Indian , So I wouldnt hv to regret this post.!:mad:

[User Name]

2. The owner of the College is Indian and looks like an utter scoundrel. For all the bleating of the Indian "community" sticking together and looking out for each other it doesn't exactly look good when one of their own is rorting the system and treating his countrymen like utter crap.

 

 

The annoying fact is that when "dodgy colleges ripping off students" are reported in Indian media, they never make any mention of the "Indian" owner/operator behind it. While Australian Govt and police cops a fair share of thrashing, these silent scammers take the spotlight only for split seconds.

 

Now, a dodgy college is never complete without dodgy students. People who raised issues with this kind of shoddy colleges are not students, but universities who lose revenues and hotels who employ them but then realizes they know jack.

 

The colleges never ripped of dodgy students. Those students never wanted anything but PR. They had no intention to learn the trade. A very few did (about 2 or 3 out of the 100s that enrolled) and I feel sorry for those. What thrived this business is that they offer vocational courses at much much cheaper rate than doing a proper university course.

 

These students deserve some of the blame of this whole fiasco and because of their cheap mentality, thousands of university students who studied for 3 years, paid over 50k in uni fees, most of whom are already employed are copping it.

 

And its pathetic when a college like the one in jeffster's link only cops a caution when its so damn obvious that its nothing more than a PR factory.

[Guest Jamie Smith]

On a different note, last nights 'Today Tonight', a current affairs program on Channel 7, featured a report on one of the "dodgy" colleges that may have it's licence suspended. Here's a link to the story:

 

College claims fraud by former employee - ABC Adelaide - Australian Broadcasting Corporation

 

There are two things I find aggravating about this:

 

1. The College has a CRICOS number, so at some point the College was "approved" by the Govt. and then suddenly they fail to comply - go figure...

 

2. The owner of the College is Indian and looks like an utter scoundrel. For all the bleating of the Indian "community" sticking together and looking out for each other it doesn't exactly look good when one of their own is rorting the system and treating his countrymen like utter crap.

 

If there were any justice he should meet the same fate as many of his students - cancel his PR / citizenship and send him home penniless, but he will probably get away with it. The College will probably get shut down but hey, he's made enough money to comfortably retire, nothing will happen to him. Makes you sick.

 

I'm not so sure. The owner's accent sounds more Nepalese, but I'm no expert in languages. :cute:

 

Having just watched a few of their youtube posts that were uploaded 3 months ago, read some of their materials that I hoovered off the "inaccessible" and temporarily? defunct website, I would say they have tried to make a go of it but have been hampered by management inexperience.

 

The owner does NOT look like a scoundrel to me. he just looks and sounds keener than his skill set would support.

 

The staff in the videos who say they run the courses and various parts of the business are not very inspiring, sad to say.

 

They didn't give me confidence that they would run a tight ship/class and inspire the students to perform well, and neither did the ones in management positions. If the supervision of the staff was lacking and systems were not being enforced, well, there you go, a problem waiting to happen.

 

If the business has been hit by some poor staff hires and system weakness, and now a likely 40% drop in enrolments from India as a result of changes to the visa system, they'll be desperate to preserve cashflow and hold onto students who might be wanting to bail out.

 

And that would be the trigger for the problem waiting to happen. If staff were on incentives, that might be the incentive to agree to anything that the students asked to get them to stay, and then fudge the student perforanace figures.

 

It's possible the boss and deputy (in the TV news clip) were not the direct architects or perpetrators of the student fraud, just the ones who are responsible for it.

 

Don't forget a lot of the staff, inspiring or not, were genuinely employed and would have been trying their best. It only takes a few bad eggs...

 

If the college folds as a result of the drop in income, failed audit/fraud and now bad TV coverage, a few dozen people will be out of work and unable to find similar employment.

 

I'm not trying to apologise for the owner, I don't know him, and he might have aggravated the possible fraud through desperation or inexperience - or yes even perpetrated it - but I think you might be tarring everyone with the same brush.

 

The fault is not with the owners of the colleges, they just run a business within a system that someone else put together. Scammers are occasional opportunists and a separate problem and should be pursued and prosecuted. Legitimate operators should be given a fair hearing.

 

Heads should roll, but they won't because Federal Government department DEEWR messed it up by delegating college registration authority to the States and failing to oversee the delegated requirements for managing the colleges, and the States aggravated it by being very soft on the colleges and late to fix the problem. The Government is careful to point fingers at the operators and not at the architects of the flawed system.

 

Now with the visa changes collapsing the market overnight (ridiculous!), more colleges will go bust, which is a shame for everyone concerned especially for those who were honest in their work.

 

The overall fault is at high level of Government for encouraging the students and then being late to act and so stopping visa pathways overnight, and failing to administer a robust system that enhanced Australia's reputation. The Government has let easy money shape the market. Again.

 

It's the same weak policy design that also allowed unregistered installers to fit government subsidised insulation in ways that electrified the roofs of 100,000 houses and Government selected construction companies to inflate the price of new school buildings by 300%.

[ranjith47]

is there any update for the senate inquiry which was today 15th june . I know they said they were going to apply for extension but no news yet?

 

If you look deep into the aph website ( After several clicks),:yes:, you will be seeing that the Committee has postponed the outcome as revealed before to 25th August 2010.

[Guest jigish]

 

If you look deep into the aph website ( After several clicks),:yes:, you will be seeing that the Committee has postponed the outcome as revealed before to 25th August 2010.

So we have to wait for 25th August now?

[ranjith47]

@ Jigish . . . yes dude. They have received overwhelming submissions from different people and the 10 days they gave the committee to come to a decision was not enough, so hence it is now going to be decided in August.! And why do you want to wait!? It does not affect any decisions any of us make in relation to Permanent Residence Application does it !? We anyway go ahead with our application or whatever and if the Cap is implemented, then it is Implemented. If it is not , Then Great !.

[Guest gmac]

This to my knowledge is currently at the discussion stage. The final Act has not yet been crafted, nor is it legislation yet.

 

Firstly if one of DIAC's directions is " 1 job for each future visa applicant " then it makes good sense not to allow 25% of GSM applications to consist of chefs and hairdressers. Even allowing for seasonal and temporary forms of unemployment an occupational quota makes good sense.

 

Secondly it would be effective for DIAC to indicate what the occupational quota is and when it is likely to be reached. Unless this occurs it will continue to accept applications on an ad hoc basis, from uninformed applicants, only adding to their visa back log. As a number of posts have already indicated that DIAC's intentions seem to be intent on taking our lolly, rather than processing visa applications.

 

Finally I guess that the skill assessing bodies aren't bothered whether you apply for a visa or not. For me the skill assessments aren't worth the paper they are written on unless they make you eligible for an Austalian visa or not.

 

Cheers,

 

Gary