The DIAC remain tight-lipped on the furore surrounding visa processing changes.
As the furore surrounding priority processing changes for Australian state-sponsored visas and the refusal of refunds still rages, we thought we’d put some questions to the Australian Department of Immigration and Citizenship.
The core of the problem came about when the DIAC announced in September that all those applying for Australian state-sponsored visas would no longer be eligible for priority processing, and that this would not only affect new applicants, but existing applicants too who were, in some instances, months away from having their applications finalised. These visa applicants have now been told that they could expect to wait until 2012 to have their visas finalised. Furthermore, the DIAC also informed applicants that no refunds would be issued to those wishing to withdraw their applications.
Since then forums, including our own embrace community, throughout the internet have been filled with enraged visa applicants demanding to know why the changes were suddenly made and how the government can justify changing the rules whilst still pocketing the money of those who applied under the old rules.
With these complaints in mind we put some questions to the DIAC. We asked them what steps were being taken to address applicants’ concerns and if they would relent on the refunds issue. We also asked if any consultations would take place between the DIAC and state governments in Australia over skill shortages in certain Australian states. Finally we asked them if they would release a statement that would at least acknowledge the despair felt by many people hoping to immigrate to Australia on state-sponsored visas.
We should have known better than to expect relevant answers to the questions we put to them, given that Senator Evans has refused to be interviewed on the subject by Peter Mares of ABC media in Australia. We could hardly expect the DIAC to suddenly address the issue now. And indeed they didn’t, the DIAC simply issued us with a statement that they have been firing off to all journalists when pressed with these questions. In case you haven’t already seen the statement, we’ve copied it in below.
- Australia’s migration program is more effectively meeting the needs of employers through a focus on employer-sponsored skilled migrants and those occupations in critical demand.
- Australia has long been an attractive destination for migrants and demand across the world for all our permanent visa classes is extremely high and usually exceeds the annual number of available program places.
- It is worth noting the effects of the economic cycle have had on the number of applications on hand. At a time of recession around the globe and with growing unemployment, it is to be expected that the supply of potential migrants would outstrip available places in Australia. Larger than normal supply of potential migrants is being driven by recession abroad and lower intake is being driven by rising unemployment in Australia.
- The increase in processing times is a result of these global factors. We cannot allow client service standards to determine the levels of immigration to this country. The migration planning levels are determined by economic and other interests of this country.
- So while Australia is still open to skilled migrants, it has adjusted its settings to operate in a more targeted way.
- To ensure immigration is responsive to the current economic climate and the needs of the Australian economy, in December 2008 the government announced a more targeted approach to Australia’s skilled migration program.
- This announcement included the introduction of a critical skills list of occupations that have been identified as being in critical demand. It is focused on medical and key IT professionals, engineers and certain construction trades.
- The CSL is underpinned by the labour market research undertaken by the states and territories and reflects the differing regional economies that have emerged across the country. The demand for skills in the north-west of WA is vastly different to the skills needed in Hobart, Melbourne or regional NSW.
- This list also takes into consideration industry demand and occupations are added and removed as demand requires. As a consequence, it is more responsive in identifying and prioritising applications from people with skills in critical shortage.
- The Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) was consulted in its development.
- The CSL is reviewed regularly, in consultation with the states and territories, industry and unions to ensure that it remains valid and current in the changing economic circumstances.
- The current ministerial direction gives priority to applicants whose nominated occupation is on the CSL.
- The requirements for the grant of a GSM visa have not changed as a result of this direction.
- For applicants whose nominated occupation is on the CSL, it is estimated that these applications will be finalised within about 12 months from the date of lodgement as these applications receive priority. For those applicants whose nominated occupation is not on the CSL, visa processing times are expected to be much longer.
- Former overseas students in Australia who have applied for an onshore GSM visa and whose nominated occupation is not on the CSL are generally able to continue to live and work in Australia while they await a decision on their visa application.
I’m afraid it looks as though that is the only response anyone is going to get from the DIAC on this issue, which does little to ease the heartache felt by many existing applicants who have spent thousands on their visa applications.
So why is the DIAC being so tight-lipped on the issue? One can only speculate, but the recent news that visa applicants who were assigned case officers are now being told that those case officers can no longer deal with their enquiries does not look good. We’ll keep you updated with all the latest developments so make sure you bookmark this page.
If you have any comments on the statement above please fill in our comments box, we’d love to hear your views and find out how you’ve been affected by the changes. Also, why not join in the debate on our lively community.Â
Love Australia? Let us keep you informed...
- Join the Embrace Australia community today. Have your questions answered by our experts, start your own blog, get vital migration information and gain valuable insight from those who have already made the journey.
- Subscribe to our RSS Feed and have all our daily news and features delivered straight to your news reader.
- Join our mailing list -
8 Responses to “Australian Visa Changes – the DIAC’s Response”
Comment by SAGAR — November 12, 2009 @ 5:38 am
BIG Thanks for your Effort
Really you are taking pain for us……
Moreover From total of Approx 1.63,000 cases at ASPC if 31,500 are Non CSL
and from that only 3500 are State nominated(nonCSL)….Then the DIAC should process StateNominatedApplicaitons at priority as Few months ago this was at 2nd priority…and moreover last year in 2008 the SenatorChrisEvan has told the States to SPONSOR (call) more Skilled applicants as per their needs(states need). And when they did as per the directions of Minister now their priority is pushed back. This is really unfair for States and as well as for the applicants who are waiting for long time.
O’ GOD Please Change the mind of Hon’lbe Minister so that he will restate the old rules. Because After God’s will only The MINISTER has power to change the rules BECOZ
“Section 51 of the Migration Act 1958 gives the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship powers to consider and finalise visa applications in an order of priority that the Minister considers appropriate.:”
This is the power the Minister is having and i wish now he would find our problems as genuine and will help in retaining or restating the Old Rules…
Thanks
Wishing Best for All from GOD
Comment by Jumbojet — November 12, 2009 @ 7:52 am
DIAC should be ashamed at all the confusion they are causing. Applicants have paid their fees in good faith that DIAC would process them in a well-thought and equitable manner and in a reasonable time-frame. If, as is suggested, we have to wait until the end of 2012 to get our visa, then we would have waited 4 years!! And should we change our mind, we have no recourse for a refund!
Comment by Jaspreet Singh Bajwa — November 12, 2009 @ 8:39 am
Hi everyone,
This is one of the best article on Embrace Australia. I feel really down after reading this that Minister refuse to comment anything on the issue. Well media has the full right to get the replies.
Every democratic country has the right to get information. And every leader has the right to answer those queries.
Yes some of the questions are answered by Minister. But most of them are still unanswered like wat is fate of those who applied long back and still in limbo. who were in the last state of their applications.
yes I know Minister has to take care of all the things like unemployeement, scams related to student visa, illegal immigrants.Still I vote for Minister who is thinking hard about the economic structure of country…But I think people who are effected by the changes are also feeling very hard as they all are very well qulified and want to serve the country. They are from all over the wolrd.They have their families and have to think abt future of their family as they invested in the country.
Comment by Romit Patel — November 12, 2009 @ 7:52 pm
DIAC and Senetor must have to look on the figures of CSL & NON CSL Applicants. They also have to look for that Applicants who are final stage and submited all medical and pcc as well..who must have to wait for more than 2 years which is unfair to them. Secondly, after 2 years at the time of visa grant, case office may be demand resubmited / renew submited documents then again he / she have to bare for thousands of money as well as mentaly frustrate. I think this is very wrong decision by Senetor and DIAC. Inspite of this, they have to applicable for new applicate instead of existing which are at final or near to final stage. because this burdon will be on their head in near future and at that time they have to look in that files from the beginning..We can do only one thing that PRAY TO GOD TO GIVE SOME WISE IDEA TO CHANGE OUR LIFE.
Comment by Dr Priya — November 13, 2009 @ 8:26 pm
The minister’s actions are without doubt UNFAIR. For me, being an applicant on neither of the priority lists, ‘the changes’ mean that my wait time has extended from the earlier stated six months (as onshore applicant) to four years. Now if I am not willing to wait that long, the minister will not refund my money, he simply expects me to forgo it. How can you explain that as FAIR?
And furthermore as an onshore applicant, I also have some restrictions on overseas travel. So for four years the minister expects me to live with these curbs on my freedom. And if I choose to or need to disregard them and overstay outside Australia, my migration application will be canceled and invalidated. Now how FAIR is that?
Comment by Shadreck — November 17, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
It would have been a bit better if the new changes did not affect the applications already in the system.They should have put these new rules on the fresh applications only from the date of those changes.
Comment by Michael David — November 17, 2009 @ 8:24 pm
What DIAC did was to shift the goalposts in the middle of the football match. Unannounced! And the committed players were struggling with all determination to kick the ball into the net. And accurately the determined player shot towards the netted goalpost, only to discover to his greatest shock and dismay that the refree has shifted the goalpost unannounced.
What DIAC and the Australia Minister of Immigrations Chris Evans have done to thousands of applicants intending to migrate to Australia is outright injustice.
It is the worst than can be expected from a civilized country of the status of Australia. What about the monies they have paid? What about the time wasted, including the funds spent in processing papers like skilled asessments, english language tests,that must expire before the new finalization years for visas,plus migration agents fees.What a loss! This is a serious matter, and if DIAC and the minister do not handle this matter with all fairness and justice that it demands, its going to be a ghost that,ll hunt the country for years to come. The imminent future damage it will cause Australia as a nation as well as its people will never be balanced by whatever labor and industry demand considerations mentioned by DIAC. Altogether, it will present the country as a very unserious nation whose leadership and laws cannot be trusted. Those concerned should better think a way out of this blind alley , rather than keeping tight lips because its not over until it is over. Of all the advanced countries of the world i do not think anyone among them would condescend so low as to act as irrationally as we are seeing in Australia.
Comment by yan — December 2, 2009 @ 5:02 am
Thanks for sharing the thoughts, very impressive one.
I thought no one will debate that DIAC has the authority to adjust their policy according to the current situation. The issue is, whether they fully respect, take into consideration of all related parties while put enforcement some specific rules to benefit only a part of the applicants. And whether the policy is fair for remained.
Surely, if some lodged AFTER the policy changed, they need to follow the new rule. But if some lodged long before that, they should not be treated in that way. Time, energy, money are all there and DIAC obviously, at current stage, not willing to compensate.
One foundamental of the western culture is contract spirit. I will think, once some lodged the application, contract is there. It’s DIAC’s obligation to follow the flow to complete ASAP, instead of harm the contract.
Welcome any further comments.