Pollyana

Haven't seen a hint of that scenario happening. Australia is merely applying its normal migration policy, and if PR is refused then the family has to leave at the end of the 457 - the same as other families have to, and I don't remember reading any previous reports of 457-ers being dragged across the tarmac.

ABCDiamond

But they are not.

They are limited to a certain number of migrants per year.

They try to take the best they can, from those that apply, for the betterment of Australia.

Many are refused for no reason other than there are not enough places, let alone any other reason.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

I myself said that understood the policy, but that doesn't make it morally correct. I don't think that this is a discussion that has a 'right' answer, but i do think its one that needs to be aired more.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

http://www.safecom.org.au/2004/12/ba...eported-to.htm

Come on Polly, Australia forcibly ejects people on a daily basis. That's just the first one I found in a Google search. What do you think happens to people on 457's who refuse to leave when the visa is up?. They are dragged to a plane and thrown out.

ABCDiamond

Initially I felt it was wrong to not grant this Doctor PR, but after I heard his actual comments, I changed my attitude to him.

He thinks it is wrong to be asked to leave the country when his Temporary Visa expires! Everyone else has to. But he thinks that because he has a disabled child, he should be treated differently to everyone else, and he appears to be using that disability to get media attention to help him to stay.

There is of course a simple answer. Extend his 457 visa.

LouiseR

If they didn't forcibly eject then what would happen? No one would bother applying for a PR we'd all get Temporary's and then just not leave...

Its the individuals fault for overstaying their welcome.

Australia set out a list of criteria in order for people to obtain PR, those include age, skills and health so whilst we're on the subject is Australia age-ist as well?

If you don't meet the criteria for whatever reason be it age, health or you don't possess the skills they require then ultimately Australia is not for you.

It doesn't have to be fair, it doesn't have to be right they are the rules.

ABCDiamond

Ummm.. That one you just quoted is a slightly different case...
PS: thanks for keeping me occupied, i'm not feeling too well, but I can't lie down, so I need something like this to keep me occcupied.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Agreed. If the 457 can be extended then he should do just that.... but that still doesn't change the basic premise that a good percentage of immigration policy is discriminatory, and that cost is simply used as an excuse.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Its the beer keeping me awake... and also preventing me from reading through that link properly !

ABCDiamond

Cost is not an Excuse, it is a reason.

Every countries immigration policy is discriminatory, if it wasn't they would have no policy. They can't let everyone in.

Cheetah7

What happens if someone is on a 457 visa and then goes for the medical to go for PR, they are discovered to have HIV - yep they will get refused due to potential health costs.

I do not think this child is being refused because he is disabled, he is being refused because he has an increased potential to develop health problems in his life.

If his parents should die, he may well need care for the rest of his life - it is all well and good when someone offers to pay for potential medical treatment, but I do wonder how many would actually have the thousands upon thousands of dollars that a person could cost.

The health criteria is strict, it may or may not be fair but it is strict. God forbid, had I found out I had a long term SERIOUS health issue, I would not have applied.

It is the potential for costs that put a spanner in the works, nobody can predict their financial future, so imagine not being able to honour an agreement to pay for medical costs.

It is so sad that they have to go back but I bet they are not the first to be refused on medical grounds and they won't be the last.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Cost is given as a reason, but I think it's really an excuse.

My own case seems to highlight that. My son will absolutely be a drain on Australia's resources. His chance of ever holding down a full time job is slim at best. I never thought for one moment that we would be granted PR and never considered it a realistic option. My local MP's office had already told us that it would be pointless applying as we "would use scarce resources".

It was my company who told me to apply and said 'those rules are not designed to keep the likes of you out' and "don't worry about it, we will sort it out"... and from what I saw of it they did exactly that.

Cheetah7

Good post.

ABCDiamond

Obviously the review took account of you, as well as your son. Hence the result that occurred, and which will almost certainly also occur in the review of this Doctor.

However, the initial basic rules MUST be adhered to, and cost is used as a method in first decisions.

But that is why there is a review process, to catch and allow those that should be allowed to slip through the normal rules.

Remember, these first decisions are often made by people at a low pay scale. They can't have every first design made by a senior high paid professional, they have to keep an eye on costs

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Tilt signs are up for me.. time for bed..