Immigration laws look set to get tighter with Prime Minister Tony Abbot announcing an urgent review of how the Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis slipped through the migration checks and subsequent police monitoring.

Media reports claim that the Iranian authorities warned the Australian government that Monis had been charged with multiple counts in 1996, the time he made an application for asylum in Australia.

Prime Minister Tony Abbot has told ABC radio that the Australian authorities “had to do better” and is demanding answers as to why Monis was granted a visa in the first place and how is it that he was not subsequently monitored given his chequered past and criminal conduct in Australia.

When asked whether the system had failed, despite the introduction of a raft of new security laws in Parliament this year, Mr Abbott agreed it “did not adequately deal” with Mr Monis. “There’s no doubt about that. That’s why we have to learn the lessons of everything that happened, we have to be constantly asking ourselves is this the best we can do and frankly we have to always be better than this, because if we aren’t good at this our people suffer” said Mr Abbot.

The Sydney Morning Herald has called for probationary period to be introduced for new migrants. “Monis is a classic case study of why Australia needs to have probationary conditions applied to the residence status and then citizenship granted to immigrants, refugees and asylum-seekers. To cover for mistakes, this probationary status needs to be rigorous and lengthy.”

Mr Abbott said he wanted to see a report into the events leading up to the Sydney siege, which he intended to release publicly.

The department of immigration will charge 50 per cent more for partner visa application fees from next year, according to a recent media release by DIBP.

A check on the charges using DIBPs online visa charge calculator however shows that it has yet to be updated with the new few structure therefore potentially misleading applicants who are intending to lodge their applications next year.

The new charges will apply to several partner visa categories namely Partner visa subclasses (combined 309/100 and 820/801) and the prospective marriage visa (subclass 300).

DIBP has not stated why it has targeted Partner visas for such a massive price increase and simply notes that it is required “to fund whole-of-government policy priorities.” The fee increases are expect to raise revenues by $373.6 million over four years.

The price rise will come into force from January 1, 2015.

The ‘offshore ID’ scheme has had one website, www.dreamvisas.com boast of a special relationship with DIBP on the basis that, “the Australian migration department has given him [an] offshore agent id”. A Migration Agents Registration Number (MARN) is nowhere to be seen on the website and the only advertised name, Manoj Palwe is not listed on the Migration Agent’s Registration Authority register of agents. This entity is not only providing migration advice without any liability under the Code of Conduct for RMAs but is also offering to franchise its operation. DIBP's scheme certainly allows for the spawning of a web of unregistered practitioners over whom it has no controls.

Another website, www.vmakevisas.com prominently displays the MARN logo and claims to have RMAs. However it names no individual consultant nor does it display any MARN number as required under the Code of Conduct for RMAs. The company name draws a blank when searched on the MARA register of RMAs. Perhaps MARA could take this blog post as a complaint, and comment on the matter. Given that copyright conventions are international, the issue of jurisdiction should not stop MARA from at least issuing a ‘takedown notice’ to this website owner (and any others for that matter) to stop them from using the MARA name and logo.

There are no two ways about this issue. DIBP and MARA need to send out a clear message on this: the authorities will not tolerate unregistered practitioners. It undermines the whole registration regime which in essence aims to protect unwary visa applicants from dealing with practitioners not obliged to abide by the Code of Conduct for Registered Migration Agents.

Unfortunately, DIBP not only sends out mixed signals by encouraging unregistered practice, it also maintains an antagonistic approach in its publicity material about RMAs. In a recent post on DIBPs migrationblog.immi.gov.au, DIBP has posted an article “How the department engages with your registered migration agent’ where it diminished the role of RMAs in the application process making RMAs sound like inconvenient post-boxes.

The Guardian reports that it has obtained internal emails of the department of immigration revealing that DIBP delayed making a decision on an asylum seeker’s case waiting for the government’s new temporary protection visa laws come into force.

The emails were connected with an 84-year-old Iraqi refugee and her daughter who were both found to be refugees by the Refugee Review Tribunal and have completed their health and security checks, according to a report in The Guardian.

Under section 65A of the Migration Act, DIBP is required to make decision on a protection visa application within 90 days of an RRT decision. However, the report states that the women have been waiting for DIBPs decision for over 130 days since the RRT decision.

Among the leaked DIBP emails one noted, ““although she is grant ready for her visa the appropriate legislation has not been passed for the grant; it may take a few months and could be a TPV”

A second email stated,” The applicant arrived in Australia as an Unauthorised Air Arrival (UAA) and therefore, as part of the government’s strategy to place measures on illegal arrivals receiving a permanent visa, the case is on hold until legislation and new reforms are possibly introduced later this month”

It’s time to ease-up on employers and let them focus on business rather than lose days/weeks on DIBP investigations. DIBP had stepped up the investigation of employers over the last few years after the Labor party under union pressure tightened the sc457 program on the claims that there were some 10,000 cases of misuse of the sc457 visa program. That claim has however now been been debunked after 16 months of investigation.

Of the 1267 employer sponsors of sc457 workers investigated for alleged rorts, only 25 were found to be in serious breach of their obligations, according to a report in The Australian. The vast majority of employers investigated were found to be compliant in their obligations which included paying the appropriate salary rates and having the foreign workers work in the nominated occupations.

The Australian reports that rorts in the 457 skilled visa program are a fraction of those claimed by the former Labor government, thus undercutting union campaigns against the ­demand-driven system.

After 16 months of investigations, by the department of immigration, the sc457 is looking like its working as intended confirming the findings of the sc457 review.

Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection Michaelia Cash told The Australian: “The politically motivated allegations of widespread rorting within the 457 program are exaggerated claims and made by those who want to see the program ended. “

DIBPs monitoring of employers increased by some 20%, according to its annual report due to the claims of Labour and the unions. However, despite the recent findings, indications are that the Coalition will maintain investigations at the same levels: “What we will do is ensure that we continue to focus on strengthening compliance and integrity measures within the skilled migration program with the same energy and commitment that we have demonstrated in stopping illegal boat arrivals,’’ Senator Cash said.