suesk

Hi,

Yes the disscussion would have still come about but as I said in my post who ever had carried on with the discussion would have been off topic as it stands no one was off topic.

If he received hate e-mails he must have given that person his e-mail address maybe he should be more careful who he gives his e-mail address to. If they are PM's then he should report it to a moderator.

Alan Collett

In responding to the invitation to comment can I first say that I have no desire to upset or offend anyone, particularly those who are the beneficiaries of accelerated visa application processing.

My question though is this: is it fair and reasonable - and indeed lawful - for the Department of Immigration's Skilled Processing Centre to prioritise the processing of a category of visa applicants without due advance notice so that persons affected (intending migrants and their advisors) can make informed decisions as to when and whether to lodge a visa application.

We know that certain occupations are prioritised - MODL occupations for example. Ditto State sponsored visa applications. This arises because of a Ministerial Direction that requires the ASPC to process certain visa applications more quickly than those that are not the subject of the Direction.

Similarly, skilled visa applications from lower risk countries (such as the UK) are generally processed more quickly by the ASPC - because (amongst other things) case officers are more able to accept documentation lodged in support of an application.

These things are known. We agents and our clients can plan for them.

By contrast in recent weeks we have seen the introduction of e-lodgment for general offshore skilled visas under the post-01/09/2007 skilled visa regime. Those of us who follow these things knew e-lodgment was coming. Indeed, we as a firm planned for the change so that we have been able to adopt e-lodgment as our firm's default method for submitting client applications. We have done so because we agree that e-lodging facilitates the acknowledgment and capture of a visa application, and helps the ASPC manage the progress of visa applications.

What was not known (at least publicly) in the lead up to the change in the skilled visa program was that e-lodging skilled visa applications after 01/09/2007 would result in visa applications being assessed by case officers and processed through to grant months before those who applied for visas under the analagous visa classes that existed in the lead up to the change in visa classes. Had we known this situation would arise agents and skilled visa applicants who had a choice as to whether to lodge before or after 01/09/2007 would have been in a position to make an informed decision as to when to submit their visa applications.

It is this lack of transparency that concerns me, and that I know frustrates visa applicants, I dare say more than a few migration agents, and my consultant colleagues within Go Matilda who are having to manage disgruntled clients asking why we lodged their visa applications before the start of the new e-lodgment regime at the beginning of September.

To those who can obtain their visas within a few weeks rather than a few months I say congratulations, but please recognise your good fortune. To those who lodged their skilled visa applications in June, July, and August 2007 (and indeed before then), I hope adequate ASPC resources are allocated soon so that the processing of your visa applications is expedited and the discrepancy in processing times is minimised.

Best wishes to all.

Alan Collett

The DIAC does read this forum, I can assure you of that.

Best regards.

Dorothy

Actually, many case officers from ASPC read this forum.

BethandAndrew

Glad to see we're in safe hands with you then Allan
Beth x

Dorothy

Very well said, Alan.

Sally Simpson

Hear, hear!

suesk

Hear hear

Alan Collett

It shouldn't be a lottery. The Department of Immigration is required to process applications in a particular order.

Best regards.

Alan Collett

Just a quick technical note. Here are two extracts from the relevant Ministerial Direction (Number 35 of 2004) under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 that pertains to the processing of skilled visa applications entitled, "Order of Consideration of applications for sponsorship, nomination and visas under the Skill Stream of the Migration Program and the Temporary Residence Program":

"Persons or bodies having powers under the Migration Act 1958 to consider visa applications (or to review decisions pertaining to such applications) have power under section 51 of the Migration Act 1958 to consider and dispose of applications for visas in such order as they consider appropriate."

and

"The order of processing of applications for Business Sponsorship, Business Nomination, Approved Appointment and visas under the Skill Stream of the Migration Program should be:

- applications relating to the entry of a person whose occupation is listed on the MODL; and

- applications for State-specific and regional migration visa subclasses; then

- all other fully completed applications in the order in which they are received."

I defer to the more legally minded, but I see nothing in this Direction that says e-lodged visa applications shall be processed more quickly than paper based applications.

Best regards.

Sally Simpson

OK, point taken!
My main point was really that we have no control & should not be bitching at each other when someone is fortunate to get their visa before another.
I do think DIAC have not done this very well but in reality, what can we do about it?

scrum

Well said.

Trish

ex_exile

In this context fair, reasonable and lawful are almost certainly three different things.

Fair - No

Reasonable - Yes, though I accept the lack of transparency argument you also have to accept that DIAC wasnt going to make any promisses to accelarated processing times for e-lodgement

Lawful - Almost certainly yes as 136 and 175 are legally different subclasses, anyway we know that Skilled migration applications are not processed in strict date order

Alan Collett

Do you work for the Department of Immigration?

1. Thanks for agreeing with me as to the fairness point.

2. I'm not after promises from the Department as to processing times. However, I see no reasonable justification for withholding information that would have allowed applicants and their advisors to plan their affairs. The ASPC flagged e-lodgment well in advance. Why not also let it be known that they would be processing them as a priority?

It might have even helped reduce the 30,000+ offshore paper applications I understand were delivered to the ASPC in August.

3. I don't follow your "lawful" point I'm afraid. My understanding is that the Ministerial Direction applies to the whole skilled caseload. In other words a MODL 136 or a Skilled - State Nominated 137 should be processed before (say) a non-MODL 175.

Best regards.

ontheup

I'm not on either visa so it doesn't affect me but just to add fuel to the fire: I could be wrong but I guess they pulled the meds out of the LCU back log in order to grant a 175 within 7 weeks. Does this mean they will be doing the same with the rest and the back log will take longer to clear. Thus not affecting just the 136's but in fact all visa applications?????:curse: