State Migration Plans and State Sponsorship

[Alan Collett 3,446]

State Migration Plans and State Sponsorship

My present understanding based on conversations I have had is that:

 

* Those with "old style" subclass 176 visa sponsorship will not automatically transition to the higher priority SMP sponsorship.

 

* As such those who wish to be pushed up the processing pecking order will be required to seek sponsorship again, once the SMPs are published.

 

* It remains to be seen whether DIAC will allow sponsorship under a SMP to replace "old style" sponsorship on subclass 176 visa applications that are already lodged.

 

* It appears that subclass 176 visa applications supported by "old style" sponsorship will not be possible once the SMPs are in issue. Hence the SA Government's communication of earlier today requiring all visa applications with old style sponsorship to be submitted before 07/07/2010 (I will write an article for Go Matilda News discussing this later today).

 

This appears to stem from the Department of Immigration's use of quotas within the SMP sponsorship regime to control the number of applications under this higher priority category.

 

I hasten to add that in the absence of published material from DIAC I can only interpret what I am hearing, but I hope the above gives some direction in the fog of confusion that currently exists.

 

Best regards.

[George Lombard 1,738]

It strikes me that there are two possible reasons why existing state nominations won't automatically be upgraded to being on the SMP.

 

1. The states might have additional criteria for SMP places, such as IELTS scores, age, funds and so on.

2. There might be a limited number of places available.

 

 

 

I understand that there are states which are very keen to use the SMP to clear their backlogs, particularly the tradespersons as well as those who have been waiting a long time, and they might not share the Minister's ideological fervour about being able to micromanage who comes into the country and in which order.

 

Therefore I would expect the SMPs to be capable of including existing sponsored applicants, and if a state does not take that opportunity then that state could be held responsible for postponing the lives of thousands of existing applicants.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

[Alan Collett 3,446]

We had an internal (within Go Matilda, incorporating OE Visas and Tony Coates) discussion about this issue earlier in the week.

 

We presently believe (based on DIAC practice in the past) that a s/c 175 application will be processed to a decision as a 175, even if State sponsorship eventuates - in other words the application won't transition to a s/c 176 following State sponsorship, and will be finalised under the original 175 subclass.

 

Remember that a s/c 175 application can be lodged with 100 points:

Skilled – Independent (Migrant) Visa (Subclass 175)

 

I again say that TinaG should discuss this issue - and consider engaging - a RMA if she wants to consider lodging an application now to get "ahead of the pack." She ought not proceed based solely on my comments on a discussion forum.

 

Best regards.

[Alan Collett 3,446]

A further comment: I have had another read of the Explanatory Memo to the relevant change to the Migration Regulations, and it appears relatively clear that if one is going to seek grant of a visa under subclass 176 a sponsorship must in place at the time the visa application is lodged.

 

In other words, what was a time of decision requirement is now a time of application requirement.

 

Best regards.

[George Lombard 1,738]

Thanks Alan for the reply. We made the decision a while ago to do the application ourselves, as we are a relatively straightforward case.

The fact that you were saying something different to George L. re. 175 switch to 176 was what caused me to ask the question.

I think we will call DIAC tomorrow night and see if we can get an answer from them directly. Will post response if we get any clarity!

Actually I think the important point is that new applicants wanting to use state sponsorship need the state sponsorship in place before they apply. This is one of the many changes to take place on 1 July, and unfortunately insufficiently advertised by DIAC. But if you go to Australian Immigration - Legislation Change Update you can see the details in the second dot point under "client summary":

 

"require applicants for certain General Skilled Migration visas to be nominated by a state or territory government agency or to be sponsored by an eligible person in order to make a valid application to align with the relevant changes to the definition of "skilled occupation" "

 

In effect this will give the Department a 1-4 month holiday from any "spike" caused by the announcement of SMPs. Existing visa applicants are not affected and can still switch between a 175, a 176 (state sponsored) and a 176 (family sponsored).

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

[Alan Collett 3,446]

I recommend that all affected hibernate for a couple of months and come back in September (by which time we should be a lot further forward in our understanding)!

 

Best wishes to all.

[George Lombard 1,738]

Just in from South Australia. Seems that an August start is most likely now.

 

I would like to acknowledge your emails expressing your concern and the anxiety of your clients of the uncertain situation of sponsorship applications at the moment. Immigration SA is making every effort to reinstate the facility to provide State Sponsorship for the new Program Year 2010-2011 as soon as possible.

I have been aware that in the meantime, DIAC will accept state sponsorships for occupations that are on the revised Skilled Occupations List. However, Immigration SA will not commence accepting new applications for State Sponsorship until the State Migration Plan (SMP) is implemented. Information about the SMP and the sponsorship eligibility list and any new criteria will be available on the Immigration SA website when they are finalised. While I am unable to provide you with a date when the SMP and the associated List of Occupations for Sponsorship will be published and/or implemented, I can advise that this is not likely to occur before August 2010. Every effort will also be made to advise you as soon as I can.

Monitor our website regularly at www.migration.sa.gov.au – for the release and implementation of the State Migration Plan and the List of Occupations for Sponsorship for the new Program Year. Any amendments to the criteria, process and processing times will also be published when the State Migration Plan is released and all current and new applicants must meet any new requirements.

Current complete applications for State Sponsorships for 176 Visas received by Immigration SA (and not yet processed) may be considered for Sponsorship when the new State Migration Plan/List of Occupations is released. Emails are being sent to current applicants/agents to advise them of the action they need to take.

Note that Sponsorship approvals provided prior to 15 May 2010 will only be valid until 5pm Adelaide time on 7 July 2010 (the 60 day validity will not apply). If your client has not lodged their visa application with DIAC by that time, the sponsorship approval will expire.

Thank you for your support for South Australia. Please monitor our website regularly for updates.

 

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

[Guest Migration Help]

The WA State Priority Occupation list was unveiled last night (with the State Migration Plan still being developed):

State govt releases job hit list - WA Business News

 

State govt releases job hit list

 

 

The state government has released a list of nearly 350 occupations it believes are priorities for Western Australia for future workforce planning.

 

The list covers all workforce sectors from farming, to retail and further afield to arts, health and resources.

 

Training and Workforce Development Minister Peter Collier said the list would be a valuable tool in ensuring WA could attract and retain a skilled workforce.

 

"The State priority occupation list identifies jobs that are currently in strong demand in WA," Mr Collier said.

 

The occupations are given three possible ranking, top, high, or priority.

 

The criteria for the top priority jobs are very large levels of employment; high forecast growth and evident wage pressures; high levels of skill; longer education or training lead times; clear education and training pathways; and/or a clear and evident skills shortage.

 

166 occupations on the list fit the top priority criterion.

 

Professionals in the design, engineering, science, transport sectors and health sectors are the most sought after on the list.

 

Technicians and trade workers in engineering, ICT, science technologies and construction are also highly wanted.

 

The priority occupations are characterised by generally smaller employment sizes; low or negative employment growth; lower required levels of skill and training requirements; and/or evident non-training related industry issues which are contributing to labour shortages.

 

"The department will continue to review the status of occupations on the list based on evidence provided by training councils and industry," said Mr Collier.

 

In addition to the State priority occupation list, the department is developing a State Migration Plan, which will include a Skilled Migration Occupation List that identifies occupations recommended for general migration into WA.

 

Mr Collier said the State Government was planning for the future now, to ensure future skills shortages were minimised and employment and training opportunities maximised.

 

"With a number of projects planned or already under way in WA, it is important we develop a skilled workforce to support the State's economic growth," he said.

 

"The Government will continue to take a collaborative planning approach to ensure WA has the right people in the right place at the right time."

 

 

 

The WA State Migration Centre website is being updated at the moment.

 

Cheers

[George Lombard 1,738]

State Migration Plan

A Queensland State-sponsored and State regional-sponsored Migration Plan has been developed, and will be put in place subject to agreement with the Australian Government.

Despite some speculation and wishful thinking, there is, as yet, no Queensland State Migration Plan.

The rest of the information on the Queensland Government website refers to current situation:

Until the Plan is in place, Queensland may continue to nominate suitable applicants with an occupation on the current Queensland Eligible Skills Lists as long as the occupation is also on the Australian Government's Skilled Occupation List (SOL).

The Skilled Occupation List referred to here is the Schedule 3 list in Legislative Instrument IMMI 10/026.

Please note that the Queensland Government will only nominate occupation on its own skills lists, and then only if it is also on the Schedule 3 SOL.

The Queensland Government’s skills lists on its website have the ASCO codes. AS DIAC is now using ANZCSO codes, agents should check that any current Queensland occupations are on the DIAC’s correlated Schedule 3 list. In most cases for Queensland, this will probably not be a problem, as most of their occupations seem to have a direct correlation between ASCO and ANZSCO, but always double check.

The Queensland Government has advised the MIA that for their own processing purposes, they are prioritising applications for occupations such as doctors, nurses and engineers, as these seem to be subject to the fewest forthcoming changes.

The Queensland Government is currently not nominating occupations from [ASCO] Schedule 4, although when the Queensland State Migration Plan is developed and approved, it may have some occupations from [ASCO] Schedule 4.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

[Guest Susan Wareham McGrath]

With the Gillard government in election mode, it is expected that the Federal election will be called very soon.

 

As soon as that happens, the government will be in caretaker mode, which means it will not be able to make any significant decisions which will commit the incoming government.

 

So, unfortunately, unless SMPs are signed off before the election is called, there will be a delay until at least late August before they are implemented, regardless of which party wins the election.

 

And why did this whole matter of Evans signing off on SMPs, which could have been so simple, have to become so complicated? Who knows?

 

Yet another example of the fumbling bureaucratism that has become the DIAC brand and makes a joke of DIAC's position statement "People Our Business".

 

Best regards

Susan

[Alan Collett 3,446]

Hi Suzie,

 

Thanks for the help. The idea is to have one's visa processed as soon as is possible. Priority was introduced retrospectively by DIAC once the backlog became unmanageable. Applicants then starting queue jumping in a sense by trying to receive more priority.

 

DIAC then introduced a whole new ball game as from 1st July 2010. Nobody knows what the rules are or what is priority anymore.

 

From my understanding under the old rules they were processing the old state sponsored applicants ( catagory 5 ) and were close to starting on catagory 6. This backlog was supposed to be all cleared before the new system starts up again hence the restrictions and blocks on applications during the past few months.

 

I'm not saying that anyone should or should not be able to jump the queue anymore, it's just that I was under the impression that DIAC had put a stop to all that nonsense as from 1st July 2010?

 

Cheers,

 

Gary

 

Hello Gary.

 

Unfortunately you must either obtain State or Territory sponsorship or reconcile yourself to a longer wait than is necessary.

 

See also: Go Matilda - Your Gateway to Australia - News

 

Best regards.

[George Lombard 1,738]

Bad news for those waiting for their SMP to be finalised, the Prime Minister is said to be calling the election for 28 August - Gillard tipped to call election tomorrow - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) and http://www.smh.com.au/national/gillard-to-call-election-for-august-28-report-20100716-10d9j.html?autostart=1 . Starting dates may now be closer to 1 October unless some sort of State/Federal consensus emerges urgently.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard