Should DIAC cut visa numbers for UK?

[downunder]

Looking through the Going Back Home threads and I am just wondering if the Aussie government should cut the visa numbers for UK residents? There is a hugh amount of Poms who return home after a relitately short period of time. I wonder why these people bother going through the process at all. Australia is not UK in the sun. Poms seem to be amazed that you have to pay for doctor, dentist, school books etc. There is nothing free well except in UK it seems. I just think these visa's would be better going to people who want to give Australia a fair go not go home after 9 weeks like I saw in one thread.

[Guest Macb03]

Great post some good pionts

[bungeeman]

I guess to an extent you're right Downunder, although having said that, I guess no amount of holidays can prepare some people for the reality of a place. In my opinion, you can research all you want, but it's very difficult to gauge what a place is like to live until you actually live there.

 

That being said, (again in my opinion) I don't think the visa numbers should be cut for UK people (although I am biased as my wife and I are eagerly awaiting the release of the SMPs to progress our own application). Those people who apply, move and then return back to the UK I can't imagine cost the Australian government too much (my impression is the applicant's pay a lot of the way through the application fees) so the money lost is theirs. And it's not like there aren't enough willing applicants following on to take up the vacant migrant jobs.

 

However I appreciate time, effort etc on the Australian side by the government, employers etc all cost money, but I really dont think limiting the numbers would change things. Those people who want to emigrate will still do so, it may take longer for them to get in, but if they arrive and still don't like it, then they will return to the UK all the same.

 

Well that's just my opinion, but an interesting topic!

 

Bungee

[Pumpkin]

I don't think that DIAC should set targets by country at all. I also think that the Australian government is well aware that not everyone that obtains a PR visa uses it or stays forever and would factor this into the immigration number targets.

[ellasdaddy]

mmmmmmm i cant see what cutting the number would do to be honest.

If they cut the numbers by half (just a random number) whos to say not every one of them will return to the uk.

I think maybe that their seems a lot on this site because its one of the best well know sites for people immigrating, but im sure people from other countries their numbers are prob just as high for people returning home.

And to be honest if they pay to get their visa travel etc then its complety up to them if they choose to go home when all is said and done its only going to be them out of pocket,

People will know themselves if oz is not for them and if the choose to return home then so be it at least they have given it a go

 

P.s I best like it when we get their we have to do 6 years haha but im pretty sure i will:biggrin:

[User Name]

I don't visit the going back thread but if the numbers are really massive then I guess cutting might be an option.

 

Everyone knows the terrible queue out there and government is being selective as the GSM changes reveal. So if a significant chunk of it goes to people who aren't going to live here then it's better to allocate it to those who will.

[Purple Princess]

There is a really simple solution to this:

 

Only grant temporary visa's the application process would be far quicker. Providing you then satisfy some other criteria (like staying for 2 years) PR would be granted automatically.

 

I've seen quite a few threads regarding people who have waited soooo long for their PR visa, that their situation has changed and they don't want to go. If they has been offered a temporary visa first, they would have been in Australia years ago!!!!

 

Just my twopenneth

 

Steph

xxxx

[matjones]

The one thing I would like to see is the end of the people doing the quick 'visa validation' trips and then returning years later. If you're not ready to go right away, then you shouldn't be applying and using up spaces other people could put to good use.

 

Also like Stephs idea of a temporary visa.

[Petals]

I think the temporary visa is a good idea.

 

I am concerned that people do not give it a good go because only so many visas are granted every year and if a good proportion of them return that means the visas are vacant in a way and maybe they should be surrendered so others have a chance to move up the list.

 

Of course people will not like it but 9 weeks does not give any idea of what its like to live here. Also I guess we really do not need people who give up so easily here. Australia is a very hard country, climate and distance and we need people with mettle.

[Purple Princess]

The one thing I would like to see is the end of the people doing the quick 'visa validation' trips and then returning years later. If you're not ready to go right away, then you shouldn't be applying and using up spaces other people could put to good use.

 

Also like Stephs idea of a temporary visa.

 

I can't claim it as totally my idea:no: I was doing some research into emigrating TO the UK and what the process was over there.

 

From memory, the visa application is really cheap and granted usually within about 12 weeks. I think the conditions on it were, providing you were still there 5 years later, you would be granted citizenship.

 

I could be wrong on a few points though, it was a few months ago. But I really liked the idea.

 

3 or even 6 months to process an application should be enough time for personal circumstances not to have changed so dramatically, but 2-3 years, I can understand why some choose not to come.

 

The UK is classed as a low risk country, and we have the same Queen, speak the 'same' language, so I feel the process should be simpler for us!

 

Steph

xxxx

[Guest sooperlids]

The one thing I would like to see is the end of the people doing the quick 'visa validation' trips and then returning years later. If you're not ready to go right away, then you shouldn't be applying and using up spaces other people could put to good use.

 

Also like Stephs idea of a temporary visa.

 

If we are fortunate enough to get a Visa we will be validating, then hopefully leaving 2 years after (maybe more). There are many things for us to sort out. Don't see why anybody should have a problem with that? Nothing wrong so far as I can tell. If there were then you wouldn't be given the time frame to make the move in the 1st place.

 

We certainly won't be selling up & moving within a few weeks/months of a Visa grant.

[Guest guest32776]

There is a really simple solution to this:

 

Only grant temporary visa's the application process would be far quicker. Providing you then satisfy some other criteria (like staying for 2 years) PR would be granted automatically.

 

I've seen quite a few threads regarding people who have waited soooo long for their PR visa, that their situation has changed and they don't want to go. If they has been offered a temporary visa first, they would have been in Australia years ago!!!!

 

Just my twopenneth

 

Steph

xxxx

 

I thought the temporary visa route was normally the case. We have a 475 temporary visa which is valid for 2 years, in which we have to live in a 'regional' area. Only after 2 years can we apply for PR if we have successfully fulfilled our criteria. At the rate it is going it might be unlikely we can fulfil the requirements to get our PR ! There are just not many jobs around and we are spending English pounds which are not going very far at all!!! It might be the area we are in but I just can't see where all the jobs people keep talking about actually are. My OH and myself are both skilled in many areas and have plenty of qualifications but are just not getting anywhere.... There may not have technically been a 'recession' in Australia but the effects are pretty visible in all the areas we have lived in.

[matjones]

If we are fortunate enough to get a Visa we will be validating, then hopefully leaving 2 years after (maybe more). There are many things for us to sort out. Don't see why anybody should have a problem with that? Nothing wrong so far as I can tell. If there were then you wouldn't be given the time frame to make the move in the 1st place.

 

We certainly won't be selling up & moving within a few weeks/months of a Visa grant.

 

From DIACs perspective, their goal is to get people into the country to meet the needs of Australia. Showing up 2-5 years late for the party is of no use to them. (although with their recent immi changes, they are shooting themselves in the foot on this front too)

[Purple Princess]

If we are fortunate enough to get a Visa we will be validating, then hopefully leaving 2 years after (maybe more). There are many things for us to sort out. Don't see why anybody should have a problem with that? Nothing wrong so far as I can tell. If there were then you wouldn't be given the time frame to make the move in the 1st place.

 

We certainly won't be selling up & moving within a few weeks/months of a Visa grant.

 

 

Hi sooperlids,

 

I certainly don't blame you, the rule exists so why shouldn't you use it???

 

From my perspective, I am here on a temporary visa (just need to find a way to make it PR :biglaugh:) and luckily for us, Australia has worked out. I do agree with Matt though, even the first few weeks of living here were like a holiday to us, hubby still at home, sun was shining.

 

I think what I was trying to say (probably not very clearly) is that the whole system needs a complete overhaul. They want the skills from the UK, but the process times for the PR visas are ridiculously long and in that time, lives have moved on, family's grow up. I know that when we applied, if it had taken 3 years, we probably would not have ended up moving.

 

Steph

xxxx

[matjones]

I certainly don't blame you, the rule exists so why shouldn't you use it???

 

I agree with this. The rules allow it, so why not. But I think that it is something they will probably tighten up if they are smart.

[Purple Princess]

I thought the temporary visa route was normally the case. We have a 475 temporary visa which is valid for 2 years, in which we have to live in a 'regional' area. Only after 2 years can we apply for PR if we have successfully fulfilled our criteria. At the rate it is going it might be unlikely we can fulfil the requirements to get our PR ! There are just not many jobs around and we are spending English pounds which are not going very far at all!!! It might be the area we are in but I just can't see where all the jobs people keep talking about actually are. My OH and myself are both skilled in many areas and have plenty of qualifications but are just not getting anywhere.... There may not have technically been a 'recession' in Australia but the effects are pretty visible in all the areas we have lived in.

 

 

I really sympathise with your situation. I know what you mean about jobs. I am in the process at the moment of trying to get employer sponsor (which is what DIAC want), my job is on the 'list', but many Australian employers have either never heard of sponsorship, or think it is going to be too difficult to sponsor.

 

I do think that a lot of it is political though, our local newspaper has hundreds of jobs available for chefs and hairdressers, the very political 'hot potato' from minister evans. Why have they been removed from the 'list'? I can look at this objectively as I'm not a chef or a hairdresser, but really feel for the people trying to get here, where there are heaps of jobs and the minister says "no"

 

Steph

xxxx

[Guest Alejandro]

I thought the temporary visa route was normally the case. We have a 475 temporary visa which is valid for 2 years, in which we have to live in a 'regional' area. Only after 2 years can we apply for PR if we have successfully fulfilled our criteria. At the rate it is going it might be unlikely we can fulfil the requirements to get our PR ! There are just not many jobs around and we are spending English pounds which are not going very far at all!!! It might be the area we are in but I just can't see where all the jobs people keep talking about actually are. My OH and myself are both skilled in many areas and have plenty of qualifications but are just not getting anywhere.... There may not have technically been a 'recession' in Australia but the effects are pretty visible in all the areas we have lived in.

Here are a few facts:

 

GDP (PPP) Per capita 2009 Estimate

Australia: $38,663

UK: $35,082

USA: $46,381

 

Population Density in 2010 per square mile

Australia: 7.3

UK: 659.6

USA: 83

 

Unemployment Rate(%) 2010 (June)

Australia: 5.1

UK: 7.8

USA: 9.6

 

Normally folks look at the first and the third indicator but not the second one. Population growth and density is the backbone of any market. If you don't have enough people living around how the heck would any business make profit. You'd be forced to sell your stock really fast and cheap.

Cutting and containing migrant numbers is very bad for the economy in the long term and the Australian economy has now started to see the effects. Local businesses are facing difficulties due to lack of consumer spending. Newsagents, Takeaways, Bars and so many depend on these consumers.

 

Multi-national companies have started moving business and offices back to the US due to the adjusted currency value that you may have noticed in the last month.

Currencies were adjusted to make it more affordable for businesses to continue or re-invest in the US market.

UK is the dream location for retail, hospitality, fashion, media and many more businesses because of it's stable population density.

 

 

Approximate Values:

1 AUD = 0.98 USD

1 AUD = 0.61 GBP

 

 

Again more people means more businesses eventually and that means more jobs. Economics101:laugh:

[Guest guest32776]

Australia cut back its immigration quotas when a lot of mines reduced staff across the entire country back in 2008 on fears that Chinese demand would evaporate. The history of mining is completely cyclical - good commodities markets = everyone down the mine.... bad market = everyone back in the towns looking for work. The problem for the government is that the huge uncertainty surrounding the global economy and whether the demand will continue long term.... This isn't helped by the fact other areas of the economy are suffering from the strength of the AUD as home tourists plan holidays overseas and other people stay away as they can't afford to come here, exporters can't sell overseas and retailers suffer as consumers buy online...

 

I agree that filling up towns with potential consumers should boost the economy but at the same time there needs to be jobs for these people long term. Difficult to judge if this is the case or not - one thing I have found is that a high percentage of the jobs advertised are very part time - 10 hours a week or so.

 

On an environmental level I think Australia should be pressured to take more immigrants, especially climate change refugees, who are losing their land as a result of carbon burning and the global warming this causes. I can't understand the short termism of a country that encourages people to have more children via overly generous maternity/paternity payments and baby bonuses when the globe is suffering an overpopulation crisis!

[Guest Alejandro]

On an environmental level I think Australia should be pressured to take more immigrants, especially climate change refugees, who are losing their land as a result of carbon burning and the global warming this causes. I can't understand the short termism of a country that encourages people to have more children via overly generous maternity/paternity payments and baby bonuses when the globe is suffering an overpopulation crisis!

"Filling up towns while there are no jobs around would be even worse. Let's stall the immigration until our mining boom returns", I bet what the government thought back in 2008.

Two years later it doesn't seem to have worked despite delaying thousands of immigrants and the scary benefits the government would've had to give them.

Why? If they'd invested in new infrastructure and lowered taxes to a reasonable level, the new immigrants wouldn't be looked at so critically afterall.

By the way, new infrastructure doesn't refer to building new detention facilities for refugees. Not trying to be sarcastic:wink: but the government seems to be planning millions towards these detention centres.

My question around that is,"If you've decided to let someone stay why keep them in captivity and spend millions on it. Don't you have anything better to do with the tax payer's money".

If this keeps up for the next couple of years, people would rather go to Mars.:laugh:

Suddenly, Lots of Talk About One-Way Missions to Space - Tech Talk - CBS News

A total of 81,018 citizens left Australia permanently in 2008-09.

[Guest JK2510]

I agree,9 weeks is not long enough! I've Been told and read somewhere when moving to a new country you've got to give it 2 years! Apperently that's how long it takes to properly settle in and for it to feel like home.

 

I for one when I eventually get that illusive visa we will be gone in 5 weeks! I've tried to plan things for the oz move and it's been messed around soooo much by DIAC that now I just wanna get there! I won't be doing a validation trip.

 

I'm also 100% sure I won't be returning to the uk to live. I'm lucky I have a mother,step father,nan and 2 aunties and cousins all living in Perth.

I suppose a but factor for some is a support network and family. I don't read the going home posts but I should imagine that missing family and friends is the biggest problem if all.

 

I would say that the people that will receive their visas in the next year will all agree with me that after being pushed from pillar to post and jumping through all DIACs hoops we will all be treasuring our visa and giving it 110%.

[Guest sooperlids]

From DIACs perspective, their goal is to get people into the country to meet the needs of Australia. Showing up 2-5 years late for the party is of no use to them. (although with their recent immi changes, they are shooting themselves in the foot on this front too)

 

They can't possibly be in that much of a hurry as I like many have been waiting in excess of 2 years. I will go when I am good & ready so long as it's within the rules thank you very much. I shall be planning my move not just jumping on the 1st plane outta here. And I don't expect it to be a party when I arrive. :jiggy:

 

If it's "of no use" then why do they give you 5 years from the date of meds?

[User Name]

I guess every category of applicant (pom, indian, offshore, onshore etc) has some issues. A particular problem with some onshore applicants is that they don't work in their nominated field after finishing studies. Most likely ones are graduates of vocational colleges (or visa mill).

 

Migrants from UK (a first world country) of course have a high expectation and take some things as granted that others (from third world) see as god-given.

 

Some might complain that medicare doesn't cover dental but others from my country have no idea that such thing like Medicare can exist. Its too good to be true.

[downunder]

I just can't figure out the Brits. What was so wrong with the UK in the first place that made you want to leave? Then after a couple of months the amount of Brits that want to go home. I know the expense is on the individual and it costs the Australian government nothing, it actually generates more tax dollars for Austrlaia but really I do not think the British (in general) are suited for emigration. Time wasters for everyone else in the DIAC waiting list.

[claireg]

I just can't figure out the Brits. What was so wrong with the UK in the first place that made you want to leave? Then after a couple of months the amount of Brits that want to go home. I know the expense is on the individual and it costs the Australian government nothing, it actually generates more tax dollars for Austrlaia but really I do not think the British (in general) are suited for emigration. Time wasters for everyone else in the DIAC waiting list.

 

That's a bit of a sweeping statement about all brits! You shouldn't generalise. Some people realise it isn't for them and who are you to judge them anyway.

 

I think you will find Australia is full of emigrated brits from back in the day who have managed to settle quite well and integrate, bring up families, etc.

[Que Sera Sera]

With us Downunder, its not that we wanted to leave we will never be one of the oh England was so bad this that and the other, it just that we wanted to try something new. The world is a huge place and why should we spend our lifetimes in one little corner. For us its worked out beautifully we love it here, but for some it doesnt. For the original poster, I wish there was a button you could press on the screen where you get your visa that allows you to say, tried it didnt like it now give my visa to some other poor bugger thats been waiting 24 months :eek: