Australian Immigration Daily News

Is it possible to challenge the factual conclusions that are made by the Tribunal?

Suppose, for example, that you have a client who is seeking a skilled visa and is relying on a claimed work history in a foreign country in support of that application. 

Suppose further that the Tribunal finds “inconsistencies” between the applicant’s account of her prior employment – for example, the hours during which the applicant worked, or the tasks that the applicant carried out - and the employer’s account.

If you are planning to lodge an Australian visa application and you ring 131 881 you are putting your life at risk. Quite literally. Your Australian immigration future is at stake.

Today, I have three separate examples from three different Registered Migration Agents (RMAs). This is not a new story, or a new problem. This has been going on for a long time. Too long, in fact. There are countless stories which come in from RMAs, who describe their absolute horror and frustration at the information provided to their clients from officers manning the phones at DIBP.

131 881 is literally an immigration death trap.

TAFE NSW students benefited from training provided and supported by Training benchmark A contributions from the Environmental sustainability industry scholarship fund. This was an amazing opportunity for TAFENSW students to engage with industry experts in sustainability current best practice for hairdressing salons and related industries.

We should not compromise the future of the next generation. Implementing sustainable waste management systems and making them a priority will introduce our next generation of hair stylists, colourists, managers and business owners to a new mindset where minimizing our impact on the environment is a core value. The workshops were run by TAFENSW and supported by Sustainable Salons Australian Industry based organisation which actively supports innovation and sustainability in the hairdressing and related industries in NSW.

Students gained the knowledge and practical skills and ideas that can be transferred to Industry. To encourage innovation and improved outcomes for students and their Industry workplaces.

Life is full of ironies, so why should politics be any different?

So then it shouldn’t come as a surprise that yesterday, 21 March 2017, a day that was proclaimed as “Harmony Day” by the Australian Government, a day intended, according to the government’s own Harmony Day Website, to promote “inclusiveness, respect and a sense of belonging for everyone”, the Turnbull Government announced proposed changes to section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 to loosen restrictions against hate speech.

As currently in force, section 18C, which is headed: “Offensive behavior because or race, colour or national or ethnic origin” makes it unlawful for a person to do an act “otherwise than in private” (in other words, in public) that is reasonably likely, in all the circumstances, to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group of people, and is done because of the race, colour, or national or ethnic origin of the other person or of some or all of the people in the group.

Is there something rotten in the state of Denmark?

Or to put the question in contemporary and migration terms, is the existing framework for assessing non-judicially determined claims of family violence flawed?

Is it fair? Is it just?