tomar

Really sorry to hear your news. Worrying times for lots of us still waiting for visas that we thought had been lodged in good faith. Had no idea till recently that valid applications could just be deemed as never lodged if the cap and cease bill goes through, with no appeal. Naively thought that if you met all the requirements when you lodged your application that you were fairly safe. It's probably always been there in the small print?
Wish you all the best.

louie

I have to disagree with you there. I think it is completely unjust and unjustifiable and that you do (or at least should) have a right to a visa if you qualify for one, which this chap appears to have done. The only reason people in his situation don't already have a visa is because of DIAC's incompetence, yet he is the one made to suffer. His life has been on hold for three years and he has incurred significant costs over and above the visa fee; Australia should be ashamed of itself.

This whole ceasing of pre September 2007 applicants is morally wrong in my view. I could accept the new cap and cease provisions as long as they apply only to future applicants who would be aware of the risk they take, but when the OP applied (roughly the same time as me) there was never any indication that you would not get your visa - eventually - if you had your points, were healthy and had no criminal background etc. The goalposts have since been changed and that is wrong.

Dorothy

Perhaps the 2 of you should take a read of the site rules. Particularly numbers 14 & 15...

14. Anyone who finds a posted message objectionable is encouraged to notify a moderator immediately. We have the right to remove objectionable content, within a reasonable time frame if we determine that removal is necessary.

15. Discussions about moderator or administrator actions are welcome in email or local private messages, but should not be discussed in public forums. This is out of respect for the members, moderators and policy involved.

moneypenny20

I and other Mods close threads that either have no purpose or degenerate in to rudeness and unhelpful comments.

As for the comment that I have a grudge, sorry but I have no idea who you are. There are several hundred posters around at any one time and apart from the people I actually know, I take little notice in who the poster is. I take notice of the content.

If you continue to break the rules I'll close the thread. If you don't I won't. Not complicated.

wookiee06

Applying for a visa is luxury not a right. You are living delusions of grandeur to believe you have a right to visa. So you are saying because you paid money, u have the right? Australia has the right to protect its work force, and infrastructure.

Bermudashorts

I think OP was correct to think he qualified for a visa, I don't think he (or Louie) ever said they had a *right* to one but they did meet the qualification criteria set out by the Australian government.

And indeed the OP still does meet the criteria in all respects other than in the three years he has been waiting he has turned 45.

How is cancelling the application of an electrician who applied 3 years ago protecting the Australian workforce exactly? Considering other electricians are still free to apply today and more recent applications are still valid.

This is not about protecting the workforce, this is about clearing a backlog because the government does not know what else to do with it.

Qantasflyer

I do not think louie was advocating that anyone has a "right" to a visa. On the contrary, people should have the right to certainty in the regulations as published at time of application. The retroactive effect of the Cap&Cease powers, as well as any kind of ex post facto law, is both unfair and make a mockery of the rule of law as applied in a modern, democratic society. If the OP satisfied all published requirements to get a visa 3 years ago, it is not only unfair but morally reprehensible for DIAC to turn around and tell him "oops sorry we've changed our minds, go take a hike."

Shellyj

Totally agree. There is no statement made by the Australian Government anywhere that says if you apply we will guarantee you will get a visa. It's a all a game of risk that we knowingly enter into!

Bermudashorts

So hand on your heart, can you honestly say that if you waited for a visa grant for three years and were then told that you could not have one for no other reason than you had been waiting for three years, you would shrug it off and be perfectly happy about it? You wouldn't feel a bit peeved, or angry or hard done by?

Oh and actually it was perfectly reasonable for people to assume that if they met the criteria for a visa they would get a visa. There was never an element of subjectivity about this, CO's couldn't turn down visas because they were in a bad mood or something. When I applied for my visa I did not consider it was a risk as I knew I met the criteria.

Qantasflyer

That's about to change I'm afraid. As if the existing Cap&Cease powers (S39 Migration Act) weren't bad enough, the Minister is proposing an enhancement of these powers with the Visa Capping Bill which is currently undergoing a Senate Inquiry. The Bill would enable the Minister to Cap&Terminate any visa applications based on unspecified "special characteristics." This effectively makes the entire visa application process nothing more than an audition or lottery system.

Bermudashorts

Yes I know.

wookiee06

bottom line is you dont presume anything while dealing with DIAC, You apply, if you number comes up, then you are lucky. If it dont then its life. then move on.

wookiee06

If the Op satisfield the visa requirements there would of been a result long before now. Lousie directly was advocating that anyone has a "right" to a visa

Bermudashorts

Rubbish. Applications have been sitting there for years without being looked at.

She said no such thing. I am not even going to waste my energy explaining / repeating what she said because it was perfectly clear as she said it and she did not say that.

Qantasflyer

You'd hope so. You'd also hope that if the OP had not satisfied the visa requirements, there would also have been a "result long before now." Sadly the reality is that DIAC has a huge backlog and has no idea how to clear it. The invocation of the Cap&Cease powers is a direct admission of this.

Clearly, the skilled migration process has to be tidied up substantially. But applying new standards retroactively to existing visa applicants who have followed the process in good faith and satisfied all the requirements that existed at the time they lodged their applications is not the way to go.