Last night was a huge success with over 400 people turning up to the Australia-Korea Political and Business Forum at Le Montage, Lilyfield.  Migration Alliance hosted a table at the event and our member agents were able to meet Scott Morrison MP in a relaxed setting.   Above are some RMAs with Scott Morrison out on the deck before dinner.  Migration Alliance supports a multicultural Australia.

Tony Min RMA and Scott Morrison MP (Immigration Minister) outside on the deck having pre-dinner drinks before the Korea-Aiustralia political and business forum Gala dinner.

A Work and Holiday Arrangement was concluded alongside the China-Australia FTA (ChAFTA)which will allow 5,000 Chinese Work and Holiday Makers into Australia annually, according to the office of Trade Minister, Andrew Robb.

It is important to note that Australia and China have only signed an intention to enter a free-trade agreement. To be effective the agreement must pass the scrutiny of the Australia’s parliamentary system (and any further scrutiny by the Chinese government). So the final form of any ChAFTA could be very different from what is currently being touted. The intended outcomes are set out here: http://dfat.gov.au/fta/chafta/fact-sheets/key-outcomes.html

Labour, the Greens and the unions have launched attacks on the agreement with particular concerns over provisions that aim to allow Chinese companies to import labour into Australia.

According to The Australian, under the free-trade deal, Chinese workers would gain entry through a new mechanism called an ‘investment facilitation arrangement’ or IFAs.

The government said the IFAs would operate on a similar basis to enterprise ¬migration agreements yet do not require labour market testing.

I have been approached by a colleague who has slipped through the looking glass and is now stuck at the mad hatters tea party for eternity and is destined to cycle back and forth between the MRT and DIBP.

Here is the story so far ( we have the permission of the client to publish these details):

Dear XXXX,

Agents have come to me reporting emails from the OMARA that look something like this:

Dear XXXXXXX (agent)

The Office of the MARA is monitoring the conduct of registered migration agents to verify agents' compliance with the Code of Conduct.

Some of the 10,000 asylum seekers whose personal details including “a) full names; b) gender; c) citizenship; d) date of birth; e) period of immigration detention; f) location; g) boat arrival details; h) reasons why the individual was deemed to be unlawful” were accidentally published by the department of the immigration are now demanding that they be granted visas as the breach of privacy has exposed them to danger should they return home.

Privacy Commissioner Mr Timothy Pilgrim who is investigating the matter found that the Department of Immigration was in breach of important privacy principles under existing Australian legislation. He explained in his findings that he had received many complaints from individuals affected by the breach and said that it will be possible for him to award a financial remedy, provided that the affected individuals can establish that they have suffered loss of some kind. The Commissioner is continuing to investigate those complaints.

In the meantime, other asylum seekers are pursuing the matter through the courts claiming that they cannot return home due to the dangers they now face due to the privacy breach by the department of immigration.

Tasmanian Labor senator Lisa Singh, is currently seeking to revive laws, which were due to pass under the last government, that would enforce businesses and government to notify the public about data breaches, according to a report in The Australian.

“As people who were already in ¬vulnerable situations who could be ¬targeted, and have their families and friends targeted, by oppressive groups or governments, the leak of this -information over a period of eight and a half days on the department’s website and 16 days on the Internet Archive was especially worrying,” Senator Singh said. She said legislating mandatory disclosure requirements with penalties would have a much greater effect on creating a culture of protection and responsibility around personal data than otherwise would be the case.

“Currently there is no obligation on public and private sector organisations to notify people whose details they have leaked or accidentally made public on the net or elsewhere” said Senator Singh.

According to Patrick Gunning of King & Wood Mallesons, “The Commissioner found that the Department had contravened Information Privacy Principle 4(a) – the security principle – because the Department’s policies and practices failed to adequately address known security risks. The Department’s policies recognised the risk of inadvertent publication of personal information, but staff had not been made aware of why it was important to follow the policies, and how to do so.”

DIBP claims to have now reviewed its internal processes and put in place measures to prevent such a breach from occurring again while it awaits further decisions by the Courts and the Privacy Commissioner.