Australian Immigration Daily News

Readers may have noted that in several articles that I have posted on the MA blog regarding visa cancellation cases, I have invited opinions as to whether Australia's legislation is "too harsh" in its approach to longstanding permanent residents.  

My assessment of the comments on this issue is that the the weight of opinion is to the effect that visa holders should expect to be removed if they commit criminal offences causing them to fail the character test, and that they shouldn't cry about it.

In light of these comments I thought it would be interesting to check the New Zealand Immigration Act and see how it compares with our own.

Suppose you have a case involving an application for a partner visa. 

There is a 20 year age gap between the applicant and the sponsor.  The evidence is that the applicant and the sponsor do not share a bank account, the sponsor does not contribute to shared household costs, and the sponsor instead spends large sums of her money on alcohol and cigarettes. 

Although the applicant and the sponsor are lawfully married,  the relationship ended after the partner visa application had been lodged, and before it was determined by the Department.  There is a claim of family violence by the applicant. However, the Department’s officer declines to consider the family violence claims on the basis that the evidence does not establish that the applicant was in a genuine and continuing relationship with the sponsor at the time of the application. 

Is the visa cancellation regime under the Migration Act too harsh? 

Does it effectively impose “double punishment” on offenders by making them subject to removal from Australia in addition to whatever sentence of imprisonment they receive? 

Should someone who has committed an offence spend a longer time in immigration detention – where they have lost their liberty as effectively as if they were in prison serving a custodial sentence – for a longer period of time than they have been incarcerated for the original offence?  

Your business is your livelihood. So it’s vital to protect your business assets and revenue against potential risks that may impact your business, such as fire, storms, theft and accidental damage.

When insuring your business you should consider cover to protect the following types of assets:

Contents

Dear Migration Alliance Members,

An AGM has been called for 19 August 2016 at 12PM AEST.

In the intervening period, elections will be held for the positions of: