Immigration and the Australian Federal Budget 2012-2013
“The Government will provide $1.3 million over two years to improve the Permanent Employer Sponsored Program. This builds on the 2011‑12 Budget announcement that the Government would streamline and simplify the pathway to permanent residency for Temporary Business (Long Stay) (Subclass 457) visa holders.”
No major surprises in this year’s budget so far as it affects ENS (subclass 856 visas and subclass 119 visas), or RSMS (subclass 121 visas and subclass 857 visa ) applicants or 457 visa holders and 457 visa applicants – the relevant announcements were made previously (several months ago) by the Minister at the Immigration Lawyers Association of Australia Annual Conference.
At that earlier time the Immigration Minister confirmed reforms that would streamline six visa classes into two ( the Employer Nomination Scheme and the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme – new subclass 186 visas and new subclass 187 visas), would change some of eligibility criteria for the employer sponsored visa classes, and consolidate the existing employer sponsored occupation lists into one super list. These reforms were announced to take effect from 1 July 2012.
Also of some relevance to employers and foreign workers in Australia is that some comment has been made in the budget papers about Pacific workers (Fiji excluded) for onshore labour shortages but details remain unclear.
Student work entitlements reborn as 40 “hours a fortnight”
Student Visa Change
Effective today: Immigration rules have changed to provide that student work entitlements are measured as 40 hours a fortnight instead of 20 hours a week. They also provide for unlimited work rights for Subclass 574 (Postgraduate Research Sector) visa holders, if they have commenced their masters degree by research or doctoral degree.
Practical Effect of the Change
Not a big deal really, unless you are one of those many conscientious students who have been asked by their employer to work more than 20 hours in a given week but less in an adjacent week to compensate. This would normally have meant that you were in breach of your visa condition and would ordinarily trigger a student visa cancellation.
Immigration Minister Changes ENS (Employer Nomination Scheme) and RSMS (Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme)
At the Australian Immigration Lawyers Association Immigration Law Conference…
-Minister is getting rid of “exceptional circumstances” from ENS applications, noting that 36 per cents of ENS cases run exceptional circumstances arguments.
-Consolidating visa classes in the RSMS and ENS scheme and in particular the distinction between onshore and offshore cases.
-A single occupation list will replace three lists. The ENSOL, the gazetted list of 457 occupations and the State and Territory Sponsored occupation list will funnel into one single list.
On a positive note, for 457 holders going on to seek ENS visas, skills and English will not be re-tested for the PR application.
Minister has promised further details shortly.
Reforms appear set to apply to cases lodged after 30 June 2012.
New Approach To Setting Australian Visa Application Charges (VACs) and Other Fee Related Changes
As part of its plan to move the budget back to surplus, the Australian Government has increased the visa application fees (VAC’s) for the majority of visa subclasses for entry into or stay in Australia.
Relevantly, the proposed increases will include:
- Aligning most VACs with international benchmark standards.
- All VACs will now be calculated on an individual basis varying according to an applicant’s circumstances e.g. number of dependents.
- VAC’s will increase each year in accordance with CPI.
For at least the last decade, the fees for a visa application for a single individual were the same as for example, for a family with five dependents included in the same application.
Further, in the past, fees were increased by regulation and there was no set increase linked to the consumer price index.
The majority of visa applications charges for most subclasses will be considerably more expensive where there are dependents.
It is hoped by the Australian Government that the increase in revenue will assist with the funding of the development of further online processing for most visa applications.
For further information visit:
http://cache.treasury.gov.au/budget/2011-12/content/download/myefo/2011-12_MYEFO.pdf
Top Reason Why Your Australian Defacto Partner Visa Application Will Get Refused (Arghhhh!) – And What Approach To Take.
Most people think that not having enough of a pile of documents showing joint names for a 12 month period* is why they’ll get refused, right?
Wrong. In my experience, it’s not so much the quantity of material but its quality.
Most legitimate defacto partner couples I’ve helped in the last decade haven’t rushed out on day one of their new relationship to set up bank accounts etc. Realistically, you’d only do this is if you were visa-focussed, and your relationship was a sham primarily facilitating your immigration aspirations, right?
Can I say that I feel you are more likely to get refused on a visa law technicality, then get a partner visa refused for not having enough supporting material if your relationship is genuine, and you explain why you are light-on with supporting material.
I’ve had defacto partner visas with only scant supporting material approved time and time again.
The issue is credibility. Is the case officer provided with enough credible information in the defacto partner application to support the assertion that the relationship existed, to the requisite level, at the time prescribed by the Regulations, and does that defacto partner relationship continue to exist?
I’ve found that immigration case officers want nothing more than to approve an application for a defacto partner visa, saving them the anguish of appealing against any adverse decision not to grant their requested visa.
I’ve also found that they are reasonable in their expectations. And if you have the right approach, they will work with you to get your defacto partner visa application approved with the least amount of stress.
So, it’s a win-win scenario to give them sensible material, explain why material is scant if obvious stuff is missing, and above all, be truthful and frank with them.
Immigration officers tend to be smart, experienced and methodical. They’ll smell a rat a mile away, and you can count on them checking things thoroughly – so don’t try to fudge things or skim over gaps!
My advice is to explain carefully why stuff is missing. Further, if there’s any adverse information, be the first to raise it. The credibility you will have as a result of bringing something to the case officer’s attention (rather than the other way around) may well be the credibility that ultimately saves your bacon if you have a border-line application.
If the explanation you and your representative provide is credible, your application for a defacto partner visa will be granted, even though there might be relatively little by way of evidence, and even if there may be adverse items.
Is approval guaranteed?
Absolutely not! But your chances of approval are greatly improved by following the approach above.
This is one aspect of a system that I’ve successfully used in well over a thousand defacto partner visa applications to the Australian Department of Immigration.
For more information call me on +614499 6 8472 or book a consultation with me using the booking tool on our website.
*Note: This post may be of greater relevance to those who don’t have any option of registering their defacto partner relationship in their state or territory.
