Australia Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
The MIA has received confirmation from the Department of changes to Partner (SC 309/100 & 820/801) and Prospective Marriage (SC 300) visa application arrangements mooted at the MIA National Conference.

On or after 18 November 2017 the following changes will occur to Partner and Prospective Marriage Visa (PMV) application arrangements:

• Partner and PMV visas must be lodged online.

• Paper applications received after COB on 17 November 2017 at any office of the Department, Service Delivery Partner, overseas embassy or High Commission will be invalid.

The following policy will be applied to applications lodged before and after 18 November 2017 and not finally decided:

• Undocumented or poorly documented applications lodged by RMAs, eg applicatons that only meet the basic Schedule 1 requirements for lodging a valid application, may be refused without notice and without requests for further information.

• Where natural justice letters have been sent to RMAs, no follow up or subsequent reminders will be sent. The Department will decide the application on the information before it, unless an extension of time has been requested and granted.

For applications lodged prior to 18 November 2017, the Department will provide only ONE opportunity to submit additional information and/or documents or respond to a natural justice letter.

These measures have been implemented by the Department because of the high level of incomplete and undocumented applications lodged and are aimed at freeing Departmental resources to address the second stage processing backlog.

The Department has also indicated that it will prioritise well documented and low risk applications in 2017 - 2018. AAT applications will also be remitted to one central office to speed up processing.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
The Department has also indicated that it will prioritise well documented and low risk applications in 2017 - 2018.
Sounds like discrimination if you ask me!

Just because someone is from a high risk country they will suffer.

Personally I think it should be ALL well documented applications no matter if they are low risk or high risk should be prioritised (if they want to prioritise applications).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
I read it that well documented applications will get priority

also so will low risk.


* We have all seen the vast differences in what gets presented and how it is presented. I have seen here some that ask for a review of what they plan to submit and it is clear they have spent months researching and gathering, then others ask a review of what they have submitted and it is not even a valid application.

* I think the RMA's should get cut some slack too and get some priority in the quota allocation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
I read it that way as well initially, but you could take it either way really as they had AND, they really should have OR if they wanted it to show well documented applications from high risk countries.

Low document low risk applicants will get priority over low document high risk applicants. That doesn't seem fair if you ask me. Just because someone is from a low risk country does not mean that they are a lower risk.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,033 Posts
I see where you're coming from, Mish, but as you know they do certain types of external checks on applicants from high risk countries which they have little to no control over and can't speed up, so I can see why they can't expedite those. It does suck, though, and feel really unfair. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: HRose313

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
I see where you're coming from, Mish, but as you know they do certain types of external checks on applicants from high risk countries which they have little to no control over and can't speed up, so I can see why they can't expedite those. It does suck, though, and feel really unfair. :(
I am talking about the ones that are considered high risk but don't undergo those checks and there are a lot of those. For example citizens of South Africa has one of the lowest processing times (some only 6 weeks) and they are classed as a high risk country.

I could understand if it was from countries like Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria etc which are all very high risk countries and their security checks forever.

Then you also go to the 801/100 where the security checks are already done so for them they don't even come into play.

All I can say is that I am glad that we are dealing with it anymore, but I do have friends that are, and I really feel for them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 · (Edited)
I am talking about the ones that are considered high risk but don't undergo those checks and there are a lot of those. For example citizens of South Africa has one of the lowest processing times (some only 6 weeks) and they are classed as a high risk country.

I could understand if it was from countries like Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Syria etc which are all very high risk countries and their security checks forever.

Then you also go to the 801/100 where the security checks are already done so for them they don't even come into play.

All I can say is that I am glad that we are dealing with it anymore, but I do have friends that are, and I really feel for them.
There is a lot of checking behind the scenes that you are not privy to. The security checking handbook lists requirements for each country and the thing is the access that Australia has to other countries intelligence also has a lot to do with it. For example in the "five eyes" group, it's relatively easier to obtain intelligence about an applicant than from many other countries. Also applications can trigger a "safeguards alert", which subjects them to even more delays.

Here's a quick excerpt that might give you a better understanding of what exactly is assessed in making the overall determination for scrutinization of applicants.

BBordernet Briefly, however, the methods and procedures vary according to the applicant's:

  • age
  • ethnicity
  • current nationality and country of residence
  • country (or countries) of previous residence
  • proposed purpose and duration of stay in Australia
  • own statements and
  • other relevant information.
  • One or more of the above factors may be used in assessing the security requirement.

Form 80 (Personal particulars for character assessment) provides information that, under policy, may be relevant in assessing the security requirement, depending on the security checking that is required for that applicant. If appropriate (having regard to the Security Checking Handbook), officers may ask visa applicants to complete a form 80 - see regulation 2.03AA.


-- and yes ethnicity is actually a factor unfortunately. It's just the reality of the situation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
Barker, are you a migration agent?

Yes DIBP are exempt from discrimination laws it seems.

It is also amazing what they and members of parliament say but will not put in writing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,960 Posts
I read it that way as well initially, but you could take it either way really as they had AND, they really should have OR if they wanted it to show well documented applications from high risk countries.

Low document low risk applicants will get priority over low document high risk applicants. That doesn't seem fair if you ask me. Just because someone is from a low risk country does not mean that they are a lower risk.
Nothing about the visa process is fair and why should it be? Why does a skilled indipendant get instant pr, why do some visas take 30 years. Why are there only X places for Each different visa.

They are following a logical route. A low priority application is going to be the easiest one to assess and complete - lowering the queue size and meeting Immis goals.

Not that I agree with most of the things they do, it is a logical route. I wonder what the high and low risk split is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
I love there is no limit on Family Stream Partner Visas that can be approved - but planning levels are never exceeded!

Seems like piss poor planning over a very long time now!! and no planning improvements in sight.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
There is a lot of checking behind the scenes that you are not privy to. The security checking handbook lists requirements for each country and the thing is the access that Australia has to other countries intelligence also has a lot to do with it. For example in the "five eyes" group, it's relatively easier to obtain intelligence about an applicant than from many other countries. Also applications can trigger a "safeguards alert", which subjects them to even more delays.

Here's a quick excerpt that might give you a better understanding of what exactly is assessed in making the overall determination for scrutinization of applicants.

BBordernet Briefly, however, the methods and procedures vary according to the applicant's:

  • age
  • ethnicity
  • current nationality and country of residence
  • country (or countries) of previous residence
  • proposed purpose and duration of stay in Australia
  • own statements and
  • other relevant information.
  • One or more of the above factors may be used in assessing the security requirement.

Form 80 (Personal particulars for character assessment) provides information that, under policy, may be relevant in assessing the security requirement, depending on the security checking that is required for that applicant. If appropriate (having regard to the Security Checking Handbook), officers may ask visa applicants to complete a form 80 - see regulation 2.03AA.


-- and yes ethnicity is actually a factor unfortunately. It's just the reality of the situation.
And you are not privy to the checking either ... only ASIO knows what goes on.

FYI - There are high risk countries that do not ask for form 80's so your argument is still irrelevant about why high risk countries take longer.

It is discrimination!

If you are migration agent you should be quoting your migration agent number.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
11,215 Posts
They are following a logical route. A low priority application is going to be the easiest one to assess and complete - lowering the queue size and meeting Immis goals.
And that there is the issue. They think that because they are from a low risk country that they will not try to commit visa fraud but they commit visa fraud too just because someone is low risk doesn't mean that they are fine.

Imagine how people would feel if with citizenship applications they said ... I will process everyone in Perth before the rest of the country. Can you imagine how everyone will feel? Imagine if people in other cities had to wait longer just because they were living in the wrong city. It is no different than high/low risk countries how high risk countries are discriminated against just because they are not born in a lucky country.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
25 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
And you are not privy to the checking either ... only ASIO knows what goes on.

FYI - There are high risk countries that do not ask for form 80's so your argument is still irrelevant about why high risk countries take longer.

It is discrimination!

If you are migration agent you should be quoting your migration agent number.
I didn't mean "you" in a literal sense. Let me rephrase, we can only go by the information that is provided to us by the department, and information that is available by experience of us as applicants.

And no, I'm not a migration agent. I also don't ever give advice if you've noticed! I don't even think there is an actual high/low risk list anywhere that's available to us.

And that there is the issue. They think that because they are from a low risk country that they will not try to commit visa fraud but they commit visa fraud too just because someone is low risk doesn't mean that they are fine.

Imagine how people would feel if with citizenship applications they said ... I will process everyone in Perth before the rest of the country. Can you imagine how everyone will feel? Imagine if people in other cities had to wait longer just because they were living in the wrong city. It is no different than high/low risk countries how high risk countries are discriminated against just because they are not born in a lucky country.
Completely different argument, you're talking about processing citizenship requests in ONE country differently.

Different countries are grouped differently because of past experiences of applicants. Yes, there is visa fraud from every country. But I can almost unequivocally guarantee you that there is more visa fraud from India than from Canada.

This is exactly the same reason there is an ETA traveler list, and why back in my student days my 4 year student visa was processed in 2 days (not including the medical), while my friend from Russia's visa took 4.5 months.

Is it unfortunate that everyone can't get a visa processed immediately? Yes. Is it the imperfect system we live in? Yes.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
I did notice - that's what prompted me to ask.

Lists like the Black List still exist I am sure - no that list has pretty much been erased from the internet that will have taken some time and money.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
252 Posts
Different countries are grouped differently because of past experiences of applicants. Yes, there is visa fraud from every country. But I can almost unequivocally guarantee you that there is more visa fraud from India than from Canada.
I agree, the truth of the matter is fairly evident (just read/watch the news). With the sheer volume of applicants, some filters must be put into place, otherwise the system would bog down even more so than it is. Similar procedures happen in other western countries as well, and for good reason. Also there is going to be a lot more applications from less developed countries with huge populations than with the opposite.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
Different countries are grouped differently because of past experiences of applicants. Yes, there is visa fraud from every country. But I can almost unequivocally guarantee you that there is more visa fraud from India than from Canada
100% agree with you.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,023 Posts
DIBP have the modified non-return rate data - its a bit rare now but was easy to find before.
July 2010 to December 2012

United Kingdom :- 0.68
Russia :- 0.47
Irish Republic :- 1.39
India :- 0.84
Afghanistan :- 18.23

The Irish don't seem to get the more stringent checks from DIBP for visas.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,612 Posts
DIBP have the modified non-return rate data - its a bit rare now but was easy to find before.
July 2010 to December 2012

United Kingdom :- 0.68
Russia :- 0.47
Irish Republic :- 1.39
India :- 0.84
Afghanistan :- 18.23

The Irish don't seem to get the more stringent checks from DIBP for visas.
I think they do when it comes to WHV...
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top