Today’s Canberra Times tells us that there have been 16 boats of asylum seekers intercepted in Australian waters this year (see Today’s Forum, p3).
This is, I accept, a serious issue. There are many schools of thought about whether current government policy is somehow inviting these numbers of boats or not. I have to say I’m not convinced that is the case, or even if it is, if that is such a bad thing. Previous government policy on asylum seekers arriving by boat was draconian and completely misplaced.
More on this issue later, but for now I wanted you to check out an insightful article published by the UNHCR: http://www.unhcr.org/pages/49c3646c74.html?gclid=CKXB6dTp3psCFQkwpAodWEBu-w
Refugees are, at the end of the day, just another source of potential workers, families, communities… maybe even prosperity and success.
So why be so quick to turn them away?
Nick
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Thursday, July 16, 2009
Why are Students in Detention?
It seems that policy can sometimes make an ass of our immigration system.
The Australian reported this week that 36 overseas students were in detention for breaching conditions on their visas. The more shocking statistic is that some 2646 students in total have been detained since January 2001. Check out the article here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25784268-601,00.html
Why? Put simply, a student visa has various conditions, including the requirement to attend classes, meet course requirements, etc. These conditions make sense - we don't want people applying for student visas unless they are genuine students.
But the way those conditions are enforced is absurd. Anyone who has been to University knows fails are all too common. As an agent, I've assisted numerous clients who have, following faliures, had their visas cancelled and have had to show that they have "compelling circumstances outside of their control" to blame for that failure. This is too much, really.
A recent client had failed a couple of courses through his own reluctance to own up to the fact that the degree he was studying was too difficult. With the help of his Uni, he changed into a more appropriate degree in which he was getting much better grades. By then though, it was too late - the cancellation process was underway and now he has to leave the country. Goodbye to a future highly-skilled tax payer!
It becomes patently clear how absurd this is when that student then faces potential detention for having failed their courses if they don't depart the country on time. Not even the strictest regimes of the last two-thousand years locked people up just for being bad students!
If you want to have a system for enforcing the "genuineness" of a student, go for it, but think carefully about the consequences and the hurdles you make people jump through!
The Australian reported this week that 36 overseas students were in detention for breaching conditions on their visas. The more shocking statistic is that some 2646 students in total have been detained since January 2001. Check out the article here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25784268-601,00.html
Why? Put simply, a student visa has various conditions, including the requirement to attend classes, meet course requirements, etc. These conditions make sense - we don't want people applying for student visas unless they are genuine students.
But the way those conditions are enforced is absurd. Anyone who has been to University knows fails are all too common. As an agent, I've assisted numerous clients who have, following faliures, had their visas cancelled and have had to show that they have "compelling circumstances outside of their control" to blame for that failure. This is too much, really.
A recent client had failed a couple of courses through his own reluctance to own up to the fact that the degree he was studying was too difficult. With the help of his Uni, he changed into a more appropriate degree in which he was getting much better grades. By then though, it was too late - the cancellation process was underway and now he has to leave the country. Goodbye to a future highly-skilled tax payer!
It becomes patently clear how absurd this is when that student then faces potential detention for having failed their courses if they don't depart the country on time. Not even the strictest regimes of the last two-thousand years locked people up just for being bad students!
If you want to have a system for enforcing the "genuineness" of a student, go for it, but think carefully about the consequences and the hurdles you make people jump through!
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Why use an agent?
Often as agents we get asked - why should I pay for your services when I can do it myself? And that's a fair enough question. There are plenty of visas out there that don't require an agent's input into the application process.
However, I wanted to share three incidents that have happened recently. These all point to why an agent can be crucial. Today, I'll share part 1.
1)
I am assisting a local restaurant to bring in a chef from overseas on a 457 visa. This is not as easy as it used to be and DIAC are closely scrutinising the "benefit to Australia" test to make sure Australian jobs aren't being filled by foreign workers. The politics is rich here and I won't go into it now.
It is hard enough as it is, but add to that a letter received from the Department this week requesting my client meet criteria that have long since been removed from the Regulations. In fact, using what appeared to be an outdated form letter, DIAC requested evidence of matters that haven't been required since late 2007.
Luckily, my client didn't have to waste valuable time and resources gathering this information, as I was able to convince DIAC that they had got the law wrong, and they then issued a correct letter. But imagine if the client (as you would be inclined to do) blindly accepted what DIAC requested and went about gathering that information or, even worse, if unable to gather the relevant evidence, withdrew the application.
So to end part one on this issue, let me just say: not everything that DIAC says is gospel - check it against the Regulations and Act and, if in doubt, ask a registered agent for help!
However, I wanted to share three incidents that have happened recently. These all point to why an agent can be crucial. Today, I'll share part 1.
1)
I am assisting a local restaurant to bring in a chef from overseas on a 457 visa. This is not as easy as it used to be and DIAC are closely scrutinising the "benefit to Australia" test to make sure Australian jobs aren't being filled by foreign workers. The politics is rich here and I won't go into it now.
It is hard enough as it is, but add to that a letter received from the Department this week requesting my client meet criteria that have long since been removed from the Regulations. In fact, using what appeared to be an outdated form letter, DIAC requested evidence of matters that haven't been required since late 2007.
Luckily, my client didn't have to waste valuable time and resources gathering this information, as I was able to convince DIAC that they had got the law wrong, and they then issued a correct letter. But imagine if the client (as you would be inclined to do) blindly accepted what DIAC requested and went about gathering that information or, even worse, if unable to gather the relevant evidence, withdrew the application.
So to end part one on this issue, let me just say: not everything that DIAC says is gospel - check it against the Regulations and Act and, if in doubt, ask a registered agent for help!
Sunday, July 12, 2009
Illegal Workers found in Canberra
This week DIAC in Canberra raided a building site in Belconnen and detained a number of illegal workers: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/08/2619988.htm
Some were people who had overstayed their visas. Others were working contrary to conditions on their visa.
Some of these people have now been shipped off to immigration detention.
The unions have (unremarkably) weighed into the debate (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/08/2620522.htm), but what does all this really say about our immigration system? These people are often taken advantage of - indeed, a large percentage of the time, they simply don't understand their rights and obligations as foreign nationals inside Australia.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to excuse the fact that they were working unlawfully, but let's think about this a bit more carefully...
These people (obviously) were working. This is not in itself a bad thing. If paid, legally, this would mean tax dollars into the government's coffers, and have obvious other benefits for the economy in terms of increased productivity, and not to mention the spin-off services required to enable these people to work (housing, food, transport, etc).
Then there's the employer - a cynic will say they were out to take advantage of people who didn't know better. But then there's no denying the ongoing shortage of skilled and unskilled workers and again I repeat the benefits for the economy in improving productivity etc. Maybe the employer genuinely needed those people in order to get the job done?
So why, instead of jailing people who simply want to earn a living, aren't we making more of an effort to address skilled (and unskilled) shortages and filling them with people who actually want to work?
Just a thought.
Some were people who had overstayed their visas. Others were working contrary to conditions on their visa.
Some of these people have now been shipped off to immigration detention.
The unions have (unremarkably) weighed into the debate (http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/07/08/2620522.htm), but what does all this really say about our immigration system? These people are often taken advantage of - indeed, a large percentage of the time, they simply don't understand their rights and obligations as foreign nationals inside Australia.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to excuse the fact that they were working unlawfully, but let's think about this a bit more carefully...
These people (obviously) were working. This is not in itself a bad thing. If paid, legally, this would mean tax dollars into the government's coffers, and have obvious other benefits for the economy in terms of increased productivity, and not to mention the spin-off services required to enable these people to work (housing, food, transport, etc).
Then there's the employer - a cynic will say they were out to take advantage of people who didn't know better. But then there's no denying the ongoing shortage of skilled and unskilled workers and again I repeat the benefits for the economy in improving productivity etc. Maybe the employer genuinely needed those people in order to get the job done?
So why, instead of jailing people who simply want to earn a living, aren't we making more of an effort to address skilled (and unskilled) shortages and filling them with people who actually want to work?
Just a thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
