Christopher Levingston Blog

Dear Migration Alliance Members and Colleagues in the Australian Immigration Profession,

I had a fun day yesterday and I thought I would tell you all about it.

Actually, I can’t tell you what I did yesterday.  If I do tell you I can face imprisonment for a long period of time.

Anyhow, the day started well enough with a warrant for my arrest and my appearance before a Judge of the Federal Court, but not exercising powers as a Judge of that same court.   Confused yet?  Read on....

I was then bailed, on my own recognisance, to attend a certain place at a certain time for the purposes of being asked secret questions.

So off I went.

I was shown into a room which looked like a Court but it wasn’t a Court.

I was warned about certain things, took an oath and then I was asked stupid questions by a “Counsel’ assisting Madam X. The role of “Counsel” was to ask me questions and for me to answer on my oath. I wasn’t allowed to refuse to answer questions.

I was warned that I had to be respectful of Counsel but there did not appear to be any legal requirement for me to behave that way as it was not a “Court” exercising judicial powers but looked like a Court and conducted itself like a Court. I was told that I had no choice about the proceedings being videotaped and recorded.

Madam X looked like a Magistrate or a Judge and held an appointment like a Judge but wasn’t a Judge.

Over the course of about 3 hours, I was asked on my oath, to  take a ramble through a system which is fully explained on a Government website.  Then I was asked to guess, speculate and opine about other matters for which there was no evidence, including what was described as “gossip” as opposed to "intelligence" (an oximoron).

The document (which I am not allowed to describe by its proper name), the terms of which I had refused to comply with and which led to my subsequent arrest was predicated on a false and fraudulent basis which did not relate to me specifically but may have related to a group of people generally (a group I am not allowed to identify).

As it turns out, without exception, the answer to every question could have been found out by any 12 year old by resort to publically available information on the internet.

After a couple of hours the proceedings stopped and I was given a cup of tea (medical strength) in a handsome mug emblazoned with the logo of this secret entity.  It set me to wondering, "did the makers of the mugs have to be compelled to keep their involvement secret or is it ok to make a mug with a logo on it"?

When I finished my cup I asked them, “ Is there any chance that I can get one of these as a souvenir from the gift shop on my way out”?

Counsel for Madam X look very irritated.

When the “proceedings” (generic not descriptive) recommenced I was asked more stupid questions and was accused of being “recklessly indifferent’ to conduct which was not a crime but might have been somewhat troublesome to people who do not represent applicants in unspecified legal proceedings (generic not descriptive).

Then the proceeding were concluded but not before I was given some homework.

I don’t think Counsel or Madam X will be on my Christmas card list this year.

So what did you do yesterday?

Two Officers from the Australian Federal Police Waiting for me outside the Federal Court in Sydney yesterday

Following the publication of the Singapore Oil / Mr Kang article I have been inundated with telephone calls from concerned people who tell me that the issues surrounding Singpore Oil and Mr Kang have been canvassed at the Office of the MARA by a variety of complainants both consumers and practitioners over at least the last 12 months.

If that is correct and the Office of the MARA has been in the know concerning these allegations then the question needs to be asked what steps have the OMARA taken to protect the consumer?

The Office of the MARA's job is simple.  They only have two jobs.  One is to regulate RMAs.  The other is to protect consumers.  What is the problem?

The incoming coalition government has put to the sword Andrew Metcalfe, who for many years was the secretary and head of DIAC. Mr Metcalfe oversaw a number of paradigm shifts on innovations in policy and law whilst he headed up the Department.

A few years ago there has seemed to be a failure on part of DIAC to engage members of the public (its clients) and RMAs. DIAC initiated a program around the slogan ‘people are our business.’

Mr Metcalfe was a very strong head of DIAC and oversaw a culture of control driven by DIAC with successive Ministers being deeply influenced by departmental strategic and tactical initiatives.

I have just read an article in the SMH about the tweeteraty at DIAC.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/public-servant-loses-fight-over-twitter-attack-on-government-20130812-2rsgn.html

From what I can gather a DIAC employee using the twitter id @Lalegale had 700 followers and used that id to (apparently) make a commentary and disparaged DIAC. There was no id linking her personally to the twitter account and she was to all intents and purposes.

Dear Colleagues,

I refer to the following email received by a member of Migration Alliance from the Office of the MARA setting up an appointment to:

“As discussed, the Office of the MARA will be undertaking a range of outreach and monitoring activities in Melbourne next week. As part of this, we will be visiting a number of randomly selected agents to review and discuss their current practice, any issues or challenges that they are facing, and how we as a regulator may be able to provide help and support.”

I have some reservations about these ‘random’ visits which take 2 hours to “review and discuss their current practice”.

I note the generous offer to provide ‘help and support’.

OMARA has a history of using these outreach and monitoring activities to conduct a ‘soft audit” of the RMA’s practice.

Given that we are talking about the Regulator and the pronouncements of the CEO with respect to the role of the OMARA as a regulator rather than some outreach service I think the key words here are the combination of words “outreach and monitoring’.

I am very sceptical as to what that means particularly if the component described as “monitoring” is  not on a ‘without prejudice” basis.

In other words, RMA’s need to be very protective of their legal rights and the lack of power of the regulator absent the specific invocation of a statutory power to enter upon their business premises and to start looking through client files and other records maintained by the RMA.

There is in my view, no power to conduct “outreach and monitoring” visits at your office which will take 2 hours.

If you agree to such a visit then you permit the entry upon the premises of officers of a statutory authority who may wish to review confidential client records and other materials which may traverse your client’s privilege to privacy, confidentiality etc.

The OMARA is not independent of DIAC and if I had received such an invitation I would say that I am unavailable as  am washing my hair!

I think if this is what the OMARA wants to do then they should discuss it with MA and sort out exactly what they are up to. 
 
Check out the email:

From:

"Aileen ZHENG" <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. >

To: Deleted

Cc:

"Louise LAZZARINO" <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. >

Sent:

Thu, 8 Aug 2013 07:16:38 +0000

Subject:

Meeting with the Office of the MARA [DLM=For-Official-Use-Only]
For-Official-Use-Only

Dear Mr Deleted

Thank you for your time on the telephone today.

As discussed, the Office of the MARA will be undertaking a range of outreach and monitoring activities in Melbourne next week. As part of this, we will be visiting a number of randomly selected agents to review and discuss their current practice, any issues or challenges that they are facing, and how we as a regulator may be able to provide help and support.

As discussed, I propose to visit your office at  DELETED. I will be visiting with Louise Lazzarino, Assistant Director, Registration and Client Services, and as you have suggested, would like to meet with both you and your colleague Mr DELETED. The meeting would take no more than 2 hours.

I thank you for agreeing on the phone to meet with us, and understand that you may need to further discuss your availability on the day with your employer. We are happy to communicate directly with your employer if there are any questions.

I look forward to your further reply and to meeting you on     DELETED August 2013.

Kind regards

Aileen Zheng
Monitoring and Complex Case Officer
Registration and Client Services
Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority
Telephone: 02 9078 3504
Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

No cooperation without consultation.  It's simple.  The Office of the MARA have not consulted with stakeholders and are off on a jaunt of their own.  If you have received an invitation and you don't want to do it let me know and I will help you refuse the Office of the MARA nicely.  Anyone who wants a template letter to get them out of having to go through a 'random audit' with the OMARA please contact me.  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.