Jump to content

You're currently viewing the forum as a Guest
register-now-button_orig.png
and join in with discussions   
ask migration questions
message other members

..and much much more!

electrical guy

final count down for capped and ceased

Recommended Posts

here is a sign of some movements this is what i read on comlaw page recently

 

Migration Regulations 1994 - Determination under paragraphs 134.228(b), 136.231(b), 137.230(b), 138.233(b) and 139.234(b) of Schedule 2 - Maximum Number of Certain Skilled Visas That May Be Granted In The 2009-10 Financial Year - June 2010

 

Legislative Instrument - F2010L01599

 

 

Number: IMMI 10/023

Brief Description: This Determination provides the maximum number of visas that may be granted in the financial year 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 for applicants for Skilled - Independent (Migrant) (Class BN) and Skilled - Australian-sponsored (Migrant) (Class BQ).

 

Classification: Determination

Date Registered:06/24/2010

Date of Making:06/23/2010

Tabled HR:09/28/2010

Tabled Senate:09/28/2010

Administering Department:DIA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler

Hi Electrical Guy

 

Very many thanks for this information. Maybe Parliament needs to ratify the whole thing? If so, it might explain why no refunds have been forthcoming as yet.

 

Poms in Oz will be taken off line about an hour from now and it will then be off line for several hours. Apparently the forum is going to be moved to a new, bigger server because it has outgrown the one that it was on. If the forum is off line whilst they do these moves and then test the whole thing, there is no danger of last minute contributions being lost, I gather.

 

Whilst the forum is off line I will try to do some digging in the APH website and see whether I can find out why the Ministerial Determination or whatever it is called has to go before Parliament.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Electrical Guy

 

Very many thanks for this information. Maybe Parliament needs to ratify the whole thing? If so, it might explain why no refunds have been forthcoming as yet.

 

Poms in Oz will be taken off line about an hour from now and it will then be off line for several hours. Apparently the forum is going to be moved to a new, bigger server because it has outgrown the one that it was on. If the forum is off line whilst they do these moves and then test the whole thing, there is no danger of last minute contributions being lost, I gather.

 

Whilst the forum is off line I will try to do some digging in the APH website and see whether I can find out why the Ministerial Determination or whatever it is called has to go before Parliament.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

hi gill

now whole process of unlawful acts is in front of parliament ,so it could be asked why he the previous immi minister wants to fulfill his thirst of handling of powers alone by his way rather than managing other tools to rectify problems like this.classification this law as determination is another mysterious tech word nobody could under stand in first attempt without going deep into oz laws .next sitting is 25th to 28th oct ,3 weeks still to watch.so gill, we all now are waiting for your output

:hug:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
hi gill

now whole process of unlawful acts is in front of parliament ,so it could be asked why he the previous immi minister wants to fulfill his thirst of handling of powers alone by his way rather than managing other tools to rectify problems like this.classification this law as determination is another mysterious tech word nobody could under stand in first attempt without going deep into oz laws .next sitting is 25th to 28th oct ,3 weeks still to watch.so gill, we all now are waiting for your output

:hug:

 

Hi Electrical Guy

Tabled HR:09/28/2010

Tabled Senate:09/28/2010

 

I don't understand exactly what this means. Where did you get the information from, please? Please could you copy and paste the relevant link into your reply?

 

I know that you have said that you got the information from ComLaw. I am none too clever about searching that.

 

I've been doing battle with the APH website, which is silent about everything except the fact that the Cap & Kill Bill 2010 lapsed when the last Parliament was prorogued.

 

Parliament of Australia: Home

 

However you are not talking about the 2010 Bill. You are talking about the legislative Instrument of 24th June 2010, purportedly made in pursuance of S39 of the Migration Act 1958.

 

I'm trying to work out why that Instrument seems to have been referred to both Houses of Parliament on 28th September 2010. Yesterday, I asked on a couple of other forums about why this is so but nobody has responded to me as yet.

 

Have you been able to find out why the Instrument has been tabled in both Houses of Parliament suddenly? I could be completely wrong but I was under the vague impression that creating legislative Instruments is a delegated power and that there is no need for Parliament to get involved with the details, so I am now thoroughly puzzled!

 

It might be that an Instrument has to be "tabled" before Parliament for purely administrative law reasons, not because there is to be any debate by the MPs. It could be that an administrative step of this sort is necessary before DIAC can start paying refunds to those who have requested them, but I don't know.

 

Hence I want to try to get to the source of your information in the hope that we might, between us, be able to work out what all this is about.

 

Any clues, please?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Jamie Smith

So a criteria for the grant of the visa is that it doesn't make the annual numbers go over the top, and if it did, that application is deemed not to have been made. This avoids a backlog building up. I wonder if they're going to tell people before the application is made, or receipted. That would help people avoid paying for skills assessments etc and wasting the money.

 

It would be far better that DIAC post the number of applications to be approved per year, the number decided already, and the number on hand, so that people can see if they are going to be too late for that year. All posted by visa subclass.

 

(PARAGRAPHS 134.228(b), 136.231(b), 137.230(b), 138.233(b), AND

139.234(b) OF SCHEDULE 2)

 

 

I, CHRIS EVANS, Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, acting under paragraphs 134.228(b), 136.231(b), 137.230(b), 138.233(b), and 139.234(b) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations):

 

1. DETERMINE for the purposes of paragraph 134.228(b) of the Regulations that the maximum number of Skill Matching (Migrant) (Class BR) visas that may be granted in the financial year 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 is 245; AND

 

2. DETERMINE for the purposes of paragraphs 136.231(b) and 137.230(b) of the Regulations that the maximum number of Skilled – Independent (Migrant) (Class BN)visas that may be granted in the financial year 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 is 2,506; AND

 

3. DETERMINE for the purposes of paragraphs 138.233(b) and 139.234(b) of the Regulations that the maximum number of Skilled – Australian-sponsored (Migrant) (Class BQ) visas that may be granted in the financial year 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2010 is 546.

 

This Instrument, IMMI 10/023, commences on the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments.

This Instrument, IMMI 10/023, commences on the day after registration on the Federal Register of Legislative Instruments.

 

Dated 23rd June 2010

 

CHRIS EVANS

 

Minister for Immigration and Citizenship

 

[NOTE: 1 Subsection 39(1) of the Migration Act 1958 provides that, in spite of section 14 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003, a prescribed criterion for visas of a class, other than protection visas, may be the criterion that the grant of the visa would not cause the number of visas of that class granted in a particular financial year to exceed whatever number is fixed by the Minister, by legislative instrument, as the maximum number of such visas that may be granted in that year (however the criterion is expressed).

NOTE 2: Subsection 39(2) provides that, for the purposes of the Act, when a criterion allowed by subsection (1) prevents the grant in a financial year of any more visas of a particular class, any outstanding applications for the grant in that year of visas of that class are taken not to have been made.

NOTE 3: Paragraphs 134.228(b), 136.231(b), 137.230(b), 138.233(b) and 139.234(b) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (‘the Regulations’) respectively provide that the approval of the application must not result in the number of visas of particular classes (including the relevant subclass) granted in a financial year exceeding the maximum number of visas of those classes, as determined by an instrument in writing for the relevant paragraph, that may be granted in that financial year.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler

Hi Jamie

 

Thanks very much for your link and your post.

 

However the question I am trying to find out about is "Why has this Instrument been tabled in Parliament?" Is that purely something to do with administrative law procedures?

 

I was under the vague impression that statutory Instruments come under delegated powers and that there is no need for Parliament to be involved with them?

 

I am trying to work out whether there is any significance in the fact that the Instrument has been tabled in both Houses of Parliament?

 

It would be far better that DIAC post the number of applications to be approved per year, the number decided already, and the number on hand, so that people can see if they are going to be too late for that year. All posted by visa subclass.

 

 

I could not agree with you more. Legislation that has a retrospective effect is the real culprit in all this, though. Having let the problem develop in the first place (not Evans' fault) and then doing nothing about it except letting the problem increase (all Evans' fault) it seems that Evans wanted to use retrospective legislation to clear out the backlog instead of doing anything about preventing the backlog from arising in the first place.

 

That said, S39 is so widely-drawn that it could really only be used to get rid of all a minority of GSM visa applications. That minority is so small that it does not make any major difference to the on-going backlog. Hence the Cap & Kill Bill 2010, which would enable the Minister to micro-manage the entire Immigration programme as much as he likes.

 

However, Evans' philosophy has been dissected at length elsewhere.

 

My question today is why has the S39 Instrument been tabled in Parliament?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gill, the Minister's determination is a disallowable instrument - each House has 15 sitting days to throw it out. Parliament mustn't have sat since June.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard


George Lombard LLB(Hons) Fellow of the Migration Institute of Australia

MARN 9601056 george[at]austimmigration[dot]com[dot]au

www.austimmigration.com.au

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
Gill, the Minister's determination is a disallowable instrument - each House has 15 sitting days to throw it out. Parliament mustn't have sat since June.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

 

Hi George

 

Thank you very much indeed for solving the riddle for me!

 

I assume that the fact that Parliament could (in theory at least) still reject the Instrument probably explains why the payment of the promised refunds has not happened as yet.

 

I guess that we just have to wait to see whether the Instrument will wobble once Parliament has a look at it. I suspect that it will not wobble but I tend to be an incorrigible optimist as well!

 

Very many thanks indeed :notworthy:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi George

 

Thank you very much indeed for solving the riddle for me!

 

I assume that the fact that Parliament could (in theory at least) still reject the Instrument probably explains why the payment of the promised refunds has not happened as yet.

 

I guess that we just have to wait to see whether the Instrument will wobble once Parliament has a look at it. I suspect that it will not wobble but I tend to be an incorrigible optimist as well!

 

Very many thanks indeed :notworthy:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

gill sorry for not responding you timely,but i was little busy that day and now u have got the link by g.smith so whats the next in both houses sitting on 25th of oct.is there any sign of rejecting it on ground basis or there will be a voting procedure .when i read about how bills are passed and processed in both houses ,it seems a lengthy and time consuming and finally it should be approved by the gov-general to in exitence.here is the link http://www.aph.gov.au/house/info/infosheets/is07.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi George

 

Thank you very much indeed for solving the riddle for me!

 

I assume that the fact that Parliament could (in theory at least) still reject the Instrument probably explains why the payment of the promised refunds has not happened as yet.

 

I guess that we just have to wait to see whether the Instrument will wobble once Parliament has a look at it. I suspect that it will not wobble but I tend to be an incorrigible optimist as well!

 

Very many thanks indeed :notworthy:

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Gill

 

Is all this applicable to Australian sponsored 496 visa. Will we be subject to cap and cease.

 

Hoping for a quick reply.


496 APPLIED September 2007, CO Assigned 24 November 2014, VISA grant December 23, 2014:biglaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
gill sorry for not responding you timely,but i was little busy that day and now u have got the link by g.smith so whats the next in both houses sitting on 25th of oct.is there any sign of rejecting it on ground basis or there will be a voting procedure .when i read about how bills are passed and processed in both houses ,it seems a lengthy and time consuming and finally it should be approved by the gov-general to in exitence.here is the link http://www.aph.gov.au/house/info/infosheets/is07.pdf

 

Hi Electrical Guy

 

The issue here is the legislative Instrument issued by the Minister on 24th June 2010. It is not a Bill - it is only a legislative Instrument.

 

The only Aussie politician whom I can think of who might make a fuss about the Instrument is Senator Nick Xenophon. However I gather that loads of people have approached him in recent weeks and that nobody has even had the courtesy of a reply from him, so I am not holding my breath about Senator Xenophon.

 

Parliament of Australia:Senate:Senators:Senator Nicholas Xenophon

 

Campaigns - Nick Xenophon - Independent Senator for South Australia

 

Reading his website about his various campaigns, I'm not convinced that Immigration is an issue close to Mr Xenophon's heart but he is an Independent, which might help.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
Gill

 

Is all this applicable to Australian sponsored 496 visa. Will we be subject to cap and cease.

 

Hoping for a quick reply.

 

Hi Rahulpatel

 

The issue with the sc 496 visa is that Minister Evans would undoubtedly have used S39 to kill off all the outstanding applications for sc 496 visas if he could have done.

 

However the legislation about the sc 496 visa is such that it is not legally possible to use S39 in relation to sc 496 applications, which prevented Evans from dumping you and Virtual Bajwa.

 

In order to dump either of you (or probably both of you) Evans needed to get the Migration Amendment (Visa Capping) Bill 2010 passed by Parliament. When that Bill was presented to the Senate in May 2010, they referred it to the Legal & Constitutional Affairs Committee, who set up a Public Hearing. The Bill then lapsed automatically as soon as Parliament was prorogued prior to the recent General Election so the Public Inquiry was scrapped.

 

The new Gillard Government has not tried to revive the Visa Capping Bill as yet. I suspect that it will be up to Minister Bowen to revive it if he decides to do so. However the political hot potato that has upset the Aussie Voters considerably is the issue of the Boat People. Bowen says that he plans to tackle that issue before he worries about any other aspects of the Immigration portfolio.

 

I don't think it is possible to say how long it might be before he leaves the Boat People aside and turns his attention to skilled immigration instead.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mum46
Hi Electrical Guy

 

The issue here is the legislative Instrument issued by the Minister on 24th June 2010. It is not a Bill - it is only a legislative Instrument.

 

The only Aussie politician whom I can think of who might make a fuss about the Instrument is Senator Nick Xenophon. However I gather that loads of people have approached him in recent weeks and that nobody has even had the courtesy of a reply from him, so I am not holding my breath about Senator Xenophon.

 

Parliament of Australia:Senate:Senators:Senator*Nicholas*Xenophon

 

Campaigns - Nick Xenophon - Independent Senator for South Australia

 

Reading his website about his various campaigns, I'm not convinced that Immigration is an issue close to Mr Xenophon's heart but he is an Independent, which might help.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Gill

 

I sent Nick an email in August and received a reply last week. According to his assistant he is aware of all the objections raised and has heard from lots of effected people and will bear that in mind when he votes!!!

 

Lets all hope he does...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Really some movement...

But it's nothing more than that it was tabled for Senate on 28 september 2010. Now it's on new senate to decide to go ahead with this bill. I want to know one thing here is that whether the decision can come before next sitting of parliament or it will be after 28 October 2010?


HRC|496|30.08.07|Occup-Public Relations Profess|Ack -24.1.08|C.O.-20.10.09,11-05-2012|Med-09.09,06.12|PCC-09.09,15.05|Job veri-3.09.09|Grant-Got it Finally... on 18-June-2012:biglaugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
Really some movement...

But it's nothing more than that it was tabled for Senate on 28 september 2010. Now it's on new senate to decide to go ahead with this bill. I want to know one thing here is that whether the decision can come before next sitting of parliament or it will be after 28 October 2010?

 

Hi VB

 

The thing that Electrical Guy is asking about is NOT the Cap & Kill Bill 2010.

 

He is asking about the S39 Instrument that gets rid of many of the GSM visa applications made before 1st September 2007.

 

It is very important not to confuse these two things in your own mind, hon.

 

The S39 Instrument does affect Electrical Guy but it does NOT affect you or Rahulpatel because both of you have applied for subclass 496 visas, the applications for which cannot be killed off by S39.

 

Your own visa application cannot be killed off by the S39 Instrument. It could be killed off by the Cap & Kill Bill 2010 but as far as I know, that Bill has not come back to life as yet?

 

Do you have reason to believe that the Bill might have been revived?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Electrical Guy

 

The issue here is the legislative Instrument issued by the Minister on 24th June 2010. It is not a Bill - it is only a legislative Instrument.

 

The only Aussie politician whom I can think of who might make a fuss about the Instrument is Senator Nick Xenophon. However I gather that loads of people have approached him in recent weeks and that nobody has even had the courtesy of a reply from him, so I am not holding my breath about Senator Xenophon.

 

Parliament of Australia:Senate:Senators:Senator*Nicholas*Xenophon

 

Campaigns - Nick Xenophon - Independent Senator for South Australia

 

Reading his website about his various campaigns, I'm not convinced that Immigration is an issue close to Mr Xenophon's heart but he is an Independent, which might help.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

thanks gill for rectifying , but what is the next scene of hr/senate in coming days ,will there be voting or other procedure to validate sc39

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this is what we could expect ...

..if either house of the parliament in pursuance of a motion of which notice have been given within 15 sitting days after any legislative instruments have been laid before that house,passes a resolution to disallowing any of those legislative instrument s, any legislative instrument so disallowed thereupon ceases to have effect

legislative act 2003 provide a provision which i assume directly relate to all pre sept applicants...

instrument that operate retrospectively to disadvantage any person other than the commonwealth are of no effect

 

correct me gill if i am wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
this is what we could expect ...

..if either house of the parliament in pursuance of a motion of which notice have been given within 15 sitting days after any legislative instruments have been laid before that house,passes a resolution to disallowing any of those legislative instrument s, any legislative instrument so disallowed thereupon ceases to have effect

 

legislative act 2003 provide a provision which i assume directly relate to all pre sept applicants...

instrument that operate retrospectively to disadvantage any person other than the commonwealth are of no effect

 

 

correct me gill if i am wrong

 

Hi Electrical Guy

 

Parliament of Australia: Senate Estimates

 

The Senate Estimates Committee will have a day-long meeting with the new Minister for Immi on Tuesday 19th October 2010. The agenda has not been published as yet but there will be a live TV link to the Hearing.

 

The Hearing is in Canberra. That is about 10 hours ahead of the UK at the moment. How many hours is Canberra ahead of you, please?

 

For me to watch the first part - the important part for thee & me - involves sitting up nearly all night because kick off is at 9am, Canberra time. Will it be possible for you to watch any of it? If not, the whole thing will be recorded in Hansard a few days later.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest celalit

Just a question. Is all these hearing on 19th October is for 2007 cap & cease ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Electrical Guy

 

Parliament of Australia: Senate Estimates

 

The Senate Estimates Committee will have a day-long meeting with the new Minister for Immi on Tuesday 19th October 2010. The agenda has not been published as yet but there will be a live TV link to the Hearing.

 

The Hearing is in Canberra. That is about 10 hours ahead of the UK at the moment. How many hours is Canberra ahead of you, please?

 

For me to watch the first part - the important part for thee & me - involves sitting up nearly all night because kick off is at 9am, Canberra time. Will it be possible for you to watch any of it? If not, the whole thing will be recorded in Hansard a few days later.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

hi gill

its 4.30+ ahead from our country .what is starting time of this meeting in day or night

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler
hi gill

its 4.30+ ahead from our country .what is starting time of this meeting in day or night

 

Hi Electrical Guy

 

It starts at 9am sharp, Canberra time. My guess is that the Minister probably goes to Canberra a day or two before the Hearing so that he and DIAC's Top Brass can crunch through the proposed agenda together plus work out what other googlies the other Senators might suddenly bowl at the Minister. Because these proceedings take place under the rules about proceedings in Parliament, it is vital that the Minister must not say something inadvertently that might mislead Parliament in any way. Consequently the relevant Department's Top Brass civil servants always turn out in force etc.

 

I think these Hearings are quite interesting when you watch them on telly. For a start, it is a chance to put some faces to names. It is interesting to watch how the Minister performs when he is put under some pressure by the other Senators. The proceedings often drag on from 9am till 11pm. I've always found that the items before lunch are the issues that interest me.

 

Then the session after supper is usually interesting as well. By then, Minister Evans always started to get tired and when he is tired he is very ratty and easily flustered, I noticed. Instead of deflecting hostile questions, Evans tended to argue with the person asking the question once he got tired. I wouldn't have been convinced by him if I had been a Cabinet member.

 

Andrew Metcalfe is the boss of DIAC - who spends most of his own time sitting next to the Minister and almost cuddling the guy. Mr Metcalfe is a very smooth talker, who does not crack under pressure, never gets flustered or ratty and he seems to have far more stamina than Evans had. It interests me to watch how they all perform.

 

They do more or less stick to the agenda, so if you skim through the Hansards from earlier Hearings, you will soon work out what sort of time-slots are likely to need your own attention. I reckon that the Committee is bound to ask about S39 and about the Cap & Kill Bill 2010. I suspect that they are likely to deal with both of these issues before the lunch break or maybe start before lunch and carry over immediately after lunch.

 

They then drone on about Boat People for hours - which is very boring unless the topic is of particular interest to oneself. They liven up a bit after supper - those who are not getting tired and sleepy by about 9pm, that is.

 

If you can arrange to take the day off, you might find it all quite interesting and you can catch up on sleep during the boring bits.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gill, the Minister's determination is a disallowable instrument - each House has 15 sitting days to throw it out. Parliament mustn't have sat since June.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

 

Dear George,

I have viewed both dis allowable instrument list by senate and HR but i can't found legislative instrument F2010L01599 anywhere. So how you described it a disallowable instrument.Please clarify my doubt,,,,,,,,,,,

Regards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DAVID DONOVON is a another holy soul who stepped forward to help all poor and helpless pre-sept2k7 applicants by putting a article regarding Australia's disputed immigration policies on INDEPENDENT AUSTRALIA sent by me & my friend bhupinder powar. here's the link http://www.independentaustralia.net/2010/new-australians/are-changes-to-australias-skilled-migration-policy-fair/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Gollywobbler

Hi Electrical Guy

 

I had completely forgotten about the Senate Estimates Committee meeting in a few hours time until you revived this thread.

 

Currently it is about 22:30 in the UK. It is 08:30 in Canberra. Kick off at the Estimates is 09:00 sharp, Canberra time.

 

I plan to stay up for a while and watch the first part.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×