EFFECTS OF TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF RECEIVING APPLICATION ON EXISTING 475 APPLICATION

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on May 7, 2010 at 21:17

Hi All

I would not be inclined to believe anything that DIAC or their Minister say at the moment.

Dinesh - if you have already applied for a sc 475 visa, today's announcement will not afftect you. A future announcement by these Aussie turncoats might affect you but today's announcement will not affect you, I promise.

DiAC say only that it is "expected that" the current suspension will be lifted on 30th June 2010. For that, we can safely read that they will not lift the ban on 30th June 2010 unless:
1. The details of the new SOL have been thrashed out by then;
2. The details of the new Points Test have also been thrashed out by then;
3. The enabling legislation to cater for the new arrangements has been drafted, approved and passed by the Cabinet (even if it does not also have to be passed by the two Aussie Houses of Parliament.)

DIAC must be regretting having allowed the Minister to state firmly that the new SOL would be published on 30th April 2010 at the latest. It was not pubished on the promised date.

Peter Speldewinde is a senior flunkley within DIAC. He addressed the MIA/DIAC seminar in Melbourne in March 2010. He insisted that it would not be possible to tmake the new SOL take effect prior to 20th June 2010.

He did not mention that they were thinking of achieving the same end via using the cap & cease provsions in S39 of the Migration Act but doing do via the thouroughly devious and dishonest means of calling it something else. The effect is the same, though.

Cheers

Gill

By the way, the Senate Estimates Committee will be grilling the Minister for Immi again on 27th May 2010. Their disussions with the Minister will be interesting, I reckon.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Zaman on May 7, 2010 at 18:13

Hi,
We are really amid of highly anxious of our fate. DIAC is always famous for its surprising news. Plz come and join to pray so that God will save us.

Hope for the best

Zaman

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on May 8, 2010 at 8:54

Brian - or rather, Wanderer, to use the name by which you are better known on the forums devoted to Immigration to Oz

I agree with you that Krudd's Krew are doing all that they can to try to keep the Aussie Voter happy in the run-up to the next General Election. You have always criticised them for their mismanagement of their domestic policies - particularly for turning a large surplus at the time when Lehmann Brothers collapsed tnto a large budget deficit today.

From thousands of miles away in the UK, I have noticed some of the bungles in the "economic stimulus" package, but not all of them by any means. I read about the "Home Insulation" package because I wondered why homes in Australia might need insulation? In the UK, obviously we need it for warmth but Australia does not really have this problem to judge from what I have seen of the place, so what do they need home insulation for?

As I read about the Home Insulation idea, it became clear that the Aussie press describe it as a monumental bungle which has cost a lot of money, was a disaster, has been scrapped and it will now cost the Government another fortune to pay to have the affected homes put right by people who know what they are doing with home insulation. The Government did not know what it was doing with home insulation, obviously, and did not bother to research the question properly before leaping into the home insulation scheme. .

Their Immigration policy is no different. That is a disaster as well which is already scheduled to cost the Australian Government some $14 milion AUD conservatively. That figure ignores the likely costs of the inevitable litigation against the Minister for Immi. As an Aussie these days, you will have to pay for that litigation, mate. Do you consider that permitting the Aussie Minister for Immi to pay for futile litigation in order to try to defend a few principles which you say you hold dear to be a worthwhile use of your money? Wouldn't that money be better spent on providing adequate care for the elderly and the disabled in Australia instead?

Immigration cannot be separated out and treated differently from everything else in Australia. For instance, the UK has no particular need to attract immigrants and there is nowhere to put them once they get here. For a country that is surrounded by water and attracts one of the highest rainfalls in the world, the UK is also p*ss poor at gathering and storing the ruddy water, so the British Government also whinges about a lack of water when it is in a Green mood. They are not worried enough by the lack of water to prevent mass Immigration to the UK, though. So their 'logic' is only a syllogism anyway.

Immigration actually does add economic value to Australia in a way that does not happen in the UK. The Aussie studies have all proven - every time - that immigrants create jobs in Australia and that they create wealth for Australia. Your Government is fully aware of these facts and the figures that prove the facts overwhelmingly.

As far as suspending the offshore GSM program is concerned, it is the one step which the Minister for Immi should have taken as long ago as November 2008. He had the chance to do it back then but he preferred to fool around with the details instead of preventing the backlog of GSM applications from rising still further.

In Novermber 2009, a year later, I went to London for a meeting with one of DIAC's most senior officials, David Wilden. I asked him why his Government shouldn't simply close the GSM program to all new applicants until the Government has sorted out the present, Government-created mess?

Mr Wilden demurred. He remarked that Australia "will always need" immigrants. He was a senior official with Centrelink before he was moved sideways to DIAC in 2005, he told us. I imagine that that is how Mr Wilden knows so much about the "baby bonus" incentive - invented by the Australian Government. Mr Wilden said that the idea was to encourage the people living in Oz to produce three children per couple. He said the baby idea was known as, "One for Mum, one for Dad and one for the Government." He remarked that the policy [effectively trying to bribe the population with offers of money] had had zero effect on the breeding habits and wishes of the said population. (Being a civil servant, Nr Wilden did not mention bribery, obviously, but anyone with a brain can work out what the Aussie Government thought it was up to.)

One of the sad facts about Parliamentary democracies is the idea that we should all be governed by our peers. Unfortunately, ability is not a pre-requisite to entering either House of Parliament. It is not measured by anything except the vote of the man in the street. If it were measured in some way, 2/3 of elected MPs would not be eligible to stand for election, including the Aussie and the British Ministers for Immi. Neither of them have a clue what they are doing and both of them are selectively deaf when it suits them, as well. Henry Ford once remarked that societies get the Governments which they deserve [because they voted for the loons in the first place.]

I know that my sister - who lives in Perth - did not vote for anybody in the current Labor administration in the last Election in Oz. She and her Aussie family have always believed that Howard was doing a much better job and that his administration should be left to get on with it. I gather that the State Government of WA remained staunchly loyal to Howard's principles and policies but I believe that all the other State Governments switched to Labor? (I am not sure about the other States apart from WA.)

I don't think it is open to you to criticise your Government for mismanagement of one part of its job whilst claiming that the same people are as pure as the driven snow and super clued up when it comes to your own wish to pull up the drawbridge behind you now that you have emigrated from the UK to Australia yourself. That fact just makes you, personally, look smug and insufferable to the people who are trying to get to Australia themselves, if you ask me.

Gils

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Christopher McGrath on May 8, 2010 at 11:04

So Brian is Wanderer??? Now that explains his ranting here and elsewhere.!!

This is a Government making rules almost as doorstop answers. Shows a total lack of stratigic planning.

My guess is... actually I don’t have to guess. After 28 years of immigration advising I have seen it all several times before. I believe we will end up with a strong migration policy, but leaner and tighter. Australia relies on migration, it cannot reach its potential without migration. The new State migration program will open doors. DIAC will continue its intake albeit in a different way and skilled people will always be needed. The new points test coupled with the new SOL will highlight the way. Folks, don’t despair, watch this space.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by SKN on May 8, 2010 at 16:34

Hi,

I got my ACS approval year before against 2231-79(.Net technologies) and it will expire on 15th May, 2010. Due to some reasons I couldn't apply for visa before. In Feb 2010, I thought of applying for visa sub-class 175 but MODL revocation decreased my total points to be eligible for visa 175. Then, I planned to apply for visa sub-class 176 and got state nomination few days before. I was about to send my application via courier to DIAC but came to know about unexpected decision of visa suspension.

My ACS will expire on 15th May, 2010 and in July I may also decrease points of age as I would be of 29 year.I am very confused and disappointed that what should I do now?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Wareham McGrath on May 9, 2010 at 1:49

Hi Gill,

Thank you for your posts above, it is so refreshing to read such an honest and intelligent analysis that 'says it like it is".

Dinesh, everything Gill says is correct - you do not need to worry at this stage. Your application is still valid and will be processed under the current priorities, as far as anyone is able to tell at this stage.

SKN, your occupation is on the Critical Skills List, and you have state sponsorship. They are both very positive things. You can apply to the ACS to revalidate your assessment (there is a charge of AU$200), so you will not have to submit another full application. People who have been previously assessed as suitable by the ACS, but whose skills assessment result is due to expire or has expired can apply for this revalidation (there are time limits, but you are well within them). The choice is up to you whether you apply now so you can lodge your application immediately when the new SOL and the State Migration Plans come into force, or whether you decide to wait and see how your application stands against any new criteria that might accompany them.

On another note, as opinion polls show that his government is losing support across Australia, Kevin Rudd is cornered and fighting wildly to claw back another term in government, so we can expect more desperate and shortsighted policy decisions to be across the whole range of government portfolios between now and the election.

It seems to me that behind his transparent and clumsy spin doctoring about his Department's many policy and operational backflips, Evans' real agenda, in deference to his political master Rudd, is to reduce the number of skilled people seeking to migrate to Australia, so they can make an announcement towards the time of the election that they have "saved jobs for Australians".

I believe the real strategy is to make the process so uncertain and wasteful of time and money that intending applicants will look for other destinations.

What an embarrassment their actions are are to Australians who have high ethical standards and compassion for what they're putting applicants through.

By the way Gill, the insulation you mentioned is to keep homes cool in summer. :-)

Best regards
Susan

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by SKN on May 9, 2010 at 12:58

Susan, Thank you very much for your quick and helpful response :)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Susan Wareham McGrath on May 9, 2010 at 10:25

Hi Brian

Your responses to my posts, although obviously well-intentioned, are beginning to have a certain sameness about them - you seem to have brought a touch of Groundhog Day with you to Embrace Australia - ironically, just as DIAC has to the migration arena .

Yawn....

In case you're not familiar with Groundhog Day, it's a movie about a weatherman who lives the same day over and over again; but forgets about the previous day when he wakes up each morning.

The tagline of the move is one that many thousands of visa applicants now identify with, thanks to DIAC's arrogance and disdain for their circumstances: "He's having the worst day of his life... over, and over... "

Moving on, OK, just so I'm not so rude as to leave your questions unanswered:

Nope. I won't be embarrassed if the Govt wriggles around yet again and does not state that it has "saved jobs for Australians" and

Yes, I already donate to a number of multicultural groups that use the funds to support their members who have hit troubled times. Donating to destitute migrants is nothing new to me, Brian.

Have a nice evening, whoever you are.

Regards
S

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gollywobbler on May 10, 2010 at 1:51

Hi Susan and Chris

Trust me, Brian is Wanderer. That is the only bit of my last post that he has not seen fit to argue about, I notice. The use if language is the same. It is almost impossible to diguise one's style of writing, one's favourute words etc.

Leaving him aside, what happened to the Minister's claims that Australia desperately needs all the people whose occupations are on the current CSL? He has slammed the GSM visa door in the faces of much-needed doctors amongst others "until further notice," it seems.What if those doctors etc - whose occupations will undoubtedly be on the new SOL - have decided on the USA, Canada or NZ instead of Australia by the time the Minister decides to re-open the GSM door?

Also, several of the people who planned to apply for offshore GSM visas under the current SOL planned to be sponsored by family members, not by a State. What is to stop the prospective sponsors from convening on the steps of Parliament House in Canberra?

I gather that the night of Friday 7th May was a fiasco in the end because DIAC said on the front page of their website that they would accept GSM applcations until midnight AEST on the 7th. I've read on Poms in Oz this evening that apparently the on-line visa application form was taken off-line sharp at 11.30 pm for planned, predicted and publicised routine maintenance from 11.30pm on the 7th until 01:00 on the 8th. Surely these will be formal complaints from applicants and agents who have been - or whose clients have been - unfairly disadvantaged by the routine maintenance? It makes the Minister, Andrew Metcafle &Co look like disorganised, incompetent clots that apparently none of them thought to check the maintenance schedule before announcing a deadline of midnight AEST.

George Lombard posted on PiO that he spoke with some or all of the State Immi people on Friday afternoon as soon as DIAC's announcement was made. He said that they confirmed that they had not been warned in advance and that some of them are so angry that they are threatening to pull their State Govts right out of providing State sponsorship for GSM visas. If they do that, they might as well refuse to co-operate with providing draft SMPs as well. A lack of support from the States would surely leave many of the Minister's own plans in tatters?

I gather that some of the onshore Students have to apply for the offshore visas, though I am not sure why. The Minister has backed out of using the Cap & Cease provisions for earlier applications if the applicant and his/her family are settled in Australia. Won't this also be true for some of the people who planned to apply for offshore GSM visas under the current SOL?

The whole thing seems extremely disorganised and poorly thought out to me.

Cheers

Gill. . .

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by M on May 10, 2010 at 9:52

Guys, please do not turn the forum into a battlefield. It really is not necessary. If the idea is to turn off new members, its working!

• ▶ Reply