State Migration Plans and planning levels...

[George Lombard]

Unfortunately the Minister did not use his opportunity on Friday to announce the SMPs at the MIA National Conference, but some information about developments is now available.

 

The starting point is the table of planning levels at Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics . There will be 61,700 general skilled migration visa grants in 2010/11. Of these, 23,000 are allocated to state sponsored migration and 35,200 to skilled independent applicants. A further 3,500 people are anticipated under the family sponsored stream.

 

Talking to states and DIAC people at the conference it seems that the 23,000 planning level on state sponsorship is effectively a cap, ie if they can't reach you in the current program year then it will need to be the next one, or the one after that. This will be made more complex by planning levels for particular occupations in particular state migration plans.

 

Anecdotally, some states are already highly oversubscribed even though the number of state sponsored visas available has increased dramatically. This may mean that a longer wait is involved for most of those seeking state sponsorship. There are of course already longer waits for everyone else and this form of management may at least allow some sort of orderly progression for all those who fit within DIAC priority groups 1, 2 and 3. Priority groups are explained at http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/priority-processing-14-july-2010.pdf . For priority group 4, although there is an allocation under the GSM program for family sponsored cases, it's hard to see that the specified allocation will make much of an impact as there are as many as 40,000 applicants in this group.

 

On the timing of the GSMs it seems that 1 November is a popular choice but there are still those who expect it earlier. DIAC of course can't say anything on this.

 

More to come I hope.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

[matjones]

The starting point is the table of planning levels at Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics . There will be 61,700 general skilled migration visa grants in 2010/11. Of these, 23,000 are allocated to state sponsored migration and 35,200 to skilled independent applicants. A further 3,500 people are anticipated under the family sponsored stream.

 

Talking to states and DIAC people at the conference it seems that the 23,000 planning level on state sponsorship is effectively a cap, ie if they can't reach you in the current program year then it will need to be the next one, or the one after that. This will be made more complex by planning levels for particular occupations in particular state migration plans.

 

Anecdotally, some states are already highly oversubscribed even though the number of state sponsored visas available has increased dramatically. This may mean that a longer wait is involved for most of those seeking state sponsorship. There are of course already longer waits for everyone else and this form of management may at least allow some sort of orderly progression for all those who fit within DIAC priority groups 1, 2 and 3. Priority groups are explained at http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/priority-processing-14-july-2010.pdf . For priority group 4, although there is an allocation under the GSM program for family sponsored cases, it's hard to see that the specified allocation will make much of an impact as there are as many as 40,000 applicants in this group.

 

 

So do you think they will basically continue to process apps in date order as they are doing now for both 175 & 176 applicants (cat2/cat3), and issuing both visas simultaneously, instead of doing all 176 (SMP) first, followed by 175's once the quota is reached?

[George Lombard]

Hi MT,

 

No I think the clear indication is that they'll now start allocating SMPs casesin bulk and with priority - when there are SMP cases - until that capacity is exhausted and then go back to Schedule 3 (ie Priority group 3 cases). Some overlap between Schedule 3 and the SMPs so some state sponsored cases would already have been granted this program year and will come off the totals but overall there will be another complete change of direction.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi George

 

Thank you very much indeed for this information.

 

Did anyone say anything about S39 or about the Cap & Kill Bill 2010, please? Senator Evans' own plan was clearly to decimate the backlog of GSM applications via the Cap & Kill Bill and he was in a heck of a hurry to slam it through Parliament until the Senate stepped in and blocked that idea temporarily.

 

I'm wondering whether Mr Bowen is similarly keen to brush the Australian Government's money-spinning "mistakes" under the carpet in the same way?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[reza]

As I checked the table, number of skilled state territory grant visa will double in 2010 ( from 11000 to 23000) which could be a good news for those 176 applicants

Regards

[matjones]

Hi MT,

 

No I think the clear indication is that they'll now start allocating SMPs casesin bulk and with priority - when there are SMP cases - until that capacity is exhausted and then go back to Schedule 3 (ie Priority group 3 cases). Some overlap between Schedule 3 and the SMPs so some state sponsored cases would already have been granted this program year and will come off the totals but overall there will be another complete change of direction.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

 

Thanks George,

 

Just to throw out a scenario, what if you switched from 175 to 176, but don't make the initial quota for SMP. Could they possibly process you as part of the 175 quota for that year?

 

Mat

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Thanks George,

 

Just to throw out a scenario, what if you switched from 175 to 176, but don't make the initial quota for SMP. Could they possibly process you as part of the 175 quota for that year?

 

Mat

 

Hi Matt

 

I'm not George but I have heard of this happening recently. Apparently the main applicant has ticked all the boxes for a sc 175 visa but s/he has also obtained State sponsorship and has notified DIAC that s/he would like to proceed on the basis that DIAC will grant a sc 176 visa.

 

The CO has then granted a sc 175 visa. They are obliged to consider the application against the criteria for both visas because both visas are in Class VE. Some of the COs then proceed to grant a sc 175 visa on the basis that the applicant can meet all the criteria for the unfettered sc 175 visa.

 

I've wondered whether some of the COs are merely being purists or whether DIAC are trying to fill the quota for the sc 175 visa wherever they can? I've definitely heard of it happening. George might well know why.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[crispysince70]

Hi Matt

 

I'm not George but I have heard of this happening recently. Apparently the main applicant has ticked all the boxes for a sc 175 visa but s/he has also obtained State sponsorship and has notified DIAC that s/he would like to proceed on the basis that DIAC will grant a sc 176 visa.

 

The CO has then granted a sc 175 visa. They are obliged to consider the application against the criteria for both visas because both visas are in Class VE. Some of the COs then proceed to grant a sc 175 visa on the basis that the applicant can meet all the criteria for the unfettered sc 175 visa.

 

I've wondered whether some of the COs are merely being purists or whether DIAC are trying to fill the quota for the sc 175 visa wherever they can? I've definitely heard of it happening. George might well know why.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

I too know someone who this happened to. He applied for a 175, then swithched to a 176 but got the 175 granted in the end.

[Guest atul2941]

Dear Mr.Gill,

What are the chances of June 2009 state sponsored 475 candiadtes.if there occupations are not covered in current SMP.

 

How much time they will take to settle the case.

 

Pls reply

thanks

Atul

Hi George

 

Thank you very much indeed for this information.

 

Did anyone say anything about S39 or about the Cap & Kill Bill 2010, please? Senator Evans' own plan was clearly to decimate the backlog of GSM applications via the Cap & Kill Bill and he was in a heck of a hurry to slam it through Parliament until the Senate stepped in and blocked that idea temporarily.

 

I'm wondering whether Mr Bowen is similarly keen to brush the Australian Government's money-spinning "mistakes" under the carpet in the same way?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Taylor72]

Hi MT,

 

No I think the clear indication is that they'll now start allocating SMPs casesin bulk and with priority - when there are SMP cases - until that capacity is exhausted and then go back to Schedule 3 (ie Priority group 3 cases). Some overlap between Schedule 3 and the SMPs so some state sponsored cases would already have been granted this program year and will come off the totals but overall there will be another complete change of direction.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

Hi George

Im a nurse who has state sponsorship and have applied for a 176 visa for Queensland, and just wondering what will happen to me when smp s released ? Are they planning to process us the same as smp? Are we in for a long wait ??

Thanks

Annette:hug:

[clickettuk]

Unfortunately the Minister did not use his opportunity on Friday to announce the SMPs at the MIA National Conference, but some information about developments is now available.

 

The starting point is the table of planning levels at Migration Program Statistics - Statistics - Publications, Research & Statistics . There will be 61,700 general skilled migration visa grants in 2010/11. Of these, 23,000 are allocated to state sponsored migration and 35,200 to skilled independent applicants. A further 3,500 people are anticipated under the family sponsored stream.

 

Talking to states and DIAC people at the conference it seems that the 23,000 planning level on state sponsorship is effectively a cap, ie if they can't reach you in the current program year then it will need to be the next one, or the one after that. This will be made more complex by planning levels for particular occupations in particular state migration plans.

 

Anecdotally, some states are already highly oversubscribed even though the number of state sponsored visas available has increased dramatically. This may mean that a longer wait is involved for most of those seeking state sponsorship. There are of course already longer waits for everyone else and this form of management may at least allow some sort of orderly progression for all those who fit within DIAC priority groups 1, 2 and 3. Priority groups are explained at http://www.immi.gov.au/skilled/general-skilled-migration/pdf/priority-processing-14-july-2010.pdf . For priority group 4, although there is an allocation under the GSM program for family sponsored cases, it's hard to see that the specified allocation will make much of an impact as there are as many as 40,000 applicants in this group.

 

On the timing of the GSMs it seems that 1 November is a popular choice but there are still those who expect it earlier. DIAC of course can't say anything on this.

 

More to come I hope.

 

Cheers,

 

George Lombard

 

Hi George,

 

Is there any way of knowing how many of the 23,000 SMP places are allocated to each state? We're off to the ACT which is obviously the smallest state.

 

Thanks.

[Guest JK2510]

Hi clickett,

 

You have a 175 in the system as well so you may end up with the original visa you applied for.

[Guest fintanok]

hi guys.

is there any accurate number on the amount of 175 and 176 apps currently waiting.

thank you.

[claireg]

Hi George,

 

Is there any way of knowing how many of the 23,000 SMP places are allocated to each state? We're off to the ACT which is obviously the smallest state.

 

Thanks.

 

Would like to know this too if possible. I can't see the ACT being one of the over-subscribed states so those sponsored by the ACT may be in a good position?

 

Ta

Claire

[Guest JK2510]

I think the oversubscribed states may well be WA,QLD and NSW.

[claireg]

I think the oversubscribed states may well be WA,QLD and NSW.

 

Yes I would agree with that too. I just hope we get our visa next year, even if it is December.

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Dear Mr.Gill,

What are the chances of June 2009 state sponsored 475 candiadtes.if there occupations are not covered in current SMP.

 

How much time they will take to settle the case.

 

Pls reply

thanks

Atul

 

Hi Atul

 

I don't think anybody knows the answer to your question. I suspect that even DIAC don't know what would happen.

 

The existing Section 39 is a very blunt instrument. It does not give the Minister to finesse anything based on the applicant's occupation.

 

The new Cap & Kill 2010 Bill would give the Minister infinite powers to do as much finessing as he likes. That is why most people object to the new Bill. Personally, I think that any Parliament would be crackers to delegate so much power to one person without retaining any Parliamentary oversight of the actions of the one person, but that is what Evans demanded from Parliament.

 

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

 

Evans himself then said that he has enormous faith in Parliament's ability to prevent any pollie from doing anything crazy. Good. So did he present that Bill in jest. or what????

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Graemsay]

I think the oversubscribed states may well be WA,QLD and NSW.

 

I'm not so sure about NSW, as they don't tend to sponsor that many applications. I'd argue that VIC might get a cutback, as they seem to hand out nominations to just about anyone.

[SHANO7]

Just when you think there is a glimmer of hope the light gets turned off.

 

Why the hell cant somebody from the states or DIAC state what is going to happen with those poeple already sponsored but not on SOL3 ????

 

FFS it takes no time at all to say they will be ok or they will be left to rot .

 

This whole process is starting to really really frustrate the hell out of me and my family.

 

Will somebody please leak any news as it is so clear that the answer to the question is known my somebody.

 

Shane

[Ozzieland]

Yes I would agree with that too. I just hope we get our visa next year, even if it is December.

 

Me too... I was just wondering if the 23000 visas are included for 2010-11 then another 23000 visas will be for 2011-12. I wonder how many SS visas have already been processed for this year ? Are these figures available somewhere ?

[claireg]

Me too... I was just wondering if the 23000 visas are included for 2010-11 then another 23000 visas will be for 2011-12. I wonder how many SS visas have already been processed for this year ? Are these figures available somewhere ?

 

I should think visa figures will be reviewed every year, some states will get less, others more, depending on the skills shortages in each state. But what the overall amount would be is anyone's guess.

[Ozzieland]

I should think visa figures will be reviewed every year, some states will get less, others more, depending on the skills shortages in each state. But what the overall amount would be is anyone's guess.

 

Yeah, I think you are right. Hopefully, we all get our visas ASAP !!!

 

Good luck !!!

[alex2010]

I think the oversubscribed states may well be WA,QLD and NSW.

Hi,

 

I cannot comment if NSW is oversubscribed, but NSW say they sponsored around 280 applicants for 176/886 last year. If NSW gets only 10% of 23000 places, their applicants should be ok, even those from previous financial years.

 

Alex

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Just when you think there is a glimmer of hope the light gets turned off.

 

Why the hell cant somebody from the states or DIAC state what is going to happen with those poeple already sponsored but not on SOL3 ????

 

FFS it takes no time at all to say they will be ok or they will be left to rot .

 

This whole process is starting to really really frustrate the hell out of me and my family.

 

Will somebody please leak any news as it is so clear that the answer to the question is known my somebody.

 

Shane

 

Hi Shane

 

I tried it last year. As you might know, 4 other PIO members and I hoofed up to London for a meeting with David Wilden, DIAC's Head Honcho in Europe.

 

During the meeting, we asked David for the GSM figures to the end of November 2009. David said that he wuld get them and send them. Nothing happaned so I nagged David in January 2010. He had had word from Canberra that the figures would be "too confusing" for a mere mortal like me. I had a fit. How dare a bunch of arrogant Aussie civil servants in Canberra take it upon themselves to decide whether I might find something "confusing" or not?????

 

I made a fuss but the figures were never produced. I had no intention of trying to work them out by myself anyway. My own idea was to get the figures and to e-mail them to George Lombard and Alan Collett, and for them to say what it all meant. Alan is an accountant, so he can definitely count. George is an Aussie lawyer who does hundreds of visa applications every year. Between them, those two could definitely have said, "These figures mean XYZ."

 

I've had a suspicion ever since that DIAC in Canberra do not want a couple of brainy RMAs getting hold of the detailed figures. The crowd in Canberra read PiO so it must have been obvious that I would not have tried to work it out by myself.

 

You are in touch with David Wilden. I've always made it clear to DIAC and to everyone else that I don't "own" David. He did start off with the idea that people's queries should be channelled through me but I said, "No. It is DIAC's responsibility, not mine. I don't do these visas for a living so I am not prepared to take the the responsibility for being the channel, either. The applicants can talk to you by themselves without me having anything to do with it and I think that that is a better way to proceed."

 

I don't think that my own insistence on this has ever caused a problem with DIAC. My impression is that they understand very clearly that getting involved is not my own job and that I don't want to interfere in visa applications that are none of my business. They seem to be very willing to accept the responsibility themselves instead.

 

You could try asking David for the up-to-date figures and you might well get further than I did last year. David is unfailingly nice. He is also unfailingly clever. It might be worth another go, though.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Gollywobbler]

Hi Shane

 

I tried it last year. As you might know, 4 other PIO members and I hoofed up to London for a meeting with David Wilden, DIAC's Head Honcho in Europe.

 

During the meeting, we asked David for the GSM figures to the end of November 2009. David said that he wuld get them and send them. Nothing happaned so I nagged David in January 2010. He had had word from Canberra that the figures would be "too confusing" for a mere mortal like me. I had a fit. How dare a bunch of arrogant Aussie civil servants in Canberra take it upon themselves to decide whether I might find something "confusing" or not?????

 

I made a fuss but the figures were never produced. I had no intention of trying to work them out by myself anyway. My own idea was to get the figures and to e-mail them to George Lombard and Alan Collett, and for them to say what it all meant. Alan is an accountant, so he can definitely count. George is an Aussie lawyer who does hundreds of visa applications every year. Between them, those two could definitely have said, "These figures mean XYZ."

 

I've had a suspicion ever since that DIAC in Canberra do not want a couple of brainy RMAs getting hold of the detailed figures. The crowd in Canberra read PiO so it must have been obvious that I would not have tried to work it out by myself.

 

You are in touch with David Wilden. I've always made it clear to DIAC and to everyone else that I don't "own" David. He did start off with the idea that people's queries should be channelled through me but I said, "No. It is DIAC's responsibility, not mine. I don't do these visas for a living so I am not prepared to take the the responsibility for being the channel, either. The applicants can talk to you by themselves without me having anything to do with it and I think that that is a better way to proceed."

 

I don't think that my own insistence on this has ever caused a problem with DIAC. My impression is that they understand very clearly that getting involved is not my own job and that I don't want to interfere in visa applications that are none of my business. They seem to be very willing to accept the responsibility themselves instead.

 

You could try asking David for the up-to-date figures and you might well get further than I did last year. David is unfailingly nice. He is also unfailingly clever. It might be worth another go, though.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

PS. I do gather that some of the RMAs have told David that they "do not approve" of me! My heart breaks - or it would if I had one, I expect!! It is not possible to curry favour with another group and to think idependently at the same time, so I have never bothered with the idea of currying favour from anyone.