Education provider Navitas claims a rising number of foreigners are pretending to be students to get visas according to a report by the Australian Asscociated Press.

Last month DIBP warned in its blog site that it takes any breach of student visa conditions seriously and threatened visas may be subject to cancellation in the event of a breach pointing out that the breach of work rights limits were of a particular concern. Now, the chief executive of Navitas, Rod Jones says there is "higher than acceptable levels" of fraudulent applications coming from "a number of higher risk source countries" for courses run by Navitas.

Consequently, Navitas, which operates university programs, English language training and creative media courses, throughout Australia has tightened its recruitment requirements to ensure it signs up only genuine students, he told the company's annual general meeting in Perth.

"This may result in a temporary slowing of our growth rate in Australia," Mr Jones warned.

But proposed higher education reforms, including the deregulation of fees and increased government support to private providers, likely would have a positive effect for Navitas, if they pass the Senate, he said.

Proposals to cut the time in which asylum seekers' refugee claims would be assessed, could lead to genuine refugees being sent home to face persecution or torture, says Parliamentary Committee into Human Rights according to a report in the Sydney Morning Herald.

The changes proposed by Immigration Minister Scott Morrison would re-introduce temporary protection visas to be applied to about 30,000 asylum seekers still living in Australia. It would mean asylum seekers found to be refugees would get a three-year visa allowing them to work, but they would ultimately have to return to their country of origin.

The committee also criticised the plan to expand powers to detain people at sea, saying it would have prevented the recent High Court case on behalf of 157 asylum seekers who were held on the high seas on the Australian customs ship the Ocean Protector for a month earlier this year. The asylum seekers were subsequently moved into detention on Nauru. The High Court is still considering the case.

The committee says these changes to the Migration Act are incompatible with Australia's human rights obligations

According to the committee, the proposed amendments would "further constrain the already limited ability of the courts to evaluate Australia's treatment of refugees and asylum seekers". On refugee assessments that needed to be "fast-tracked", the report says: "The committee considers that the proposed fast-track arrangement appears to be primarily directed to ensuring the assessment and review processes are as brief as possible."

The committee’s chairman, Dean Smith, a West Australian Liberal Senator, said Australia's sovereignty should not exempt it from the international human rights obligations it has made.

Are your clients making the most financially of their offshore assignments?

Contribute to this important research being undertaken by Stacey Martin, Specialist Wealth Advisor – Expatriates and Significant Investor VISA, NAB Private Wealth

Taking up an offshore posting can be an exciting time – a new country, career opportunities and lifestyle experiences for the family. With an extensive list of things to do before departure, often this leaves little time for forward planning.  

Australia’s $15 billion dollar education industry which saw a revival over the last year is now facing a significant threat because international students in popular courses like accounting, nursing and engineering are being shunned by employers due to alleged racism, reports the Australian Financial Review.

A senior bureaucrat in the Department of Immigration and Citizenship who consults with Australian employers extensively, was quoted in a recent report by the Deakin University as saying there is an “inherent degree of racism amongst middle management in Australia”, states The Australian Financial Review. This is making it difficult for international students to find jobs after graduation.

The Deakin University report, Australian International Graduates and the Transition to Employment, bluntly concludes international graduates without a permanent visa are unlikely to find work in their discipline area in Australia.

“According to our interviews with employers, academics, peak bodies and international graduates, without permanent residency (PR), international graduates are unlikely to secure employment in their field in Australia,” the report states.

The report also found racism remained a problem for students, with “many [participants] in this study experienced discrimination in some form during their time in Australia”.

Is DIBP encouraging independant applications without properly warning applicants of the risks? The answers in DIBPs FAQ website seems to suggest this. Arguably, the answers may even be misleading and deceptive to applicants and possibly in breach of some basic tenets of Australian Consumer Law. Perhaps readers of this blog can let us know their views?

DIBP may be leading applicants to attempt applications on their own without properly letting them know of the risks involved. Many of DIBP commentaries seem to encourage independant applications. For instance, DIBPs FAQs website’s answer to the question, “Do I need to use a registered migration agent?” states:“You do not need to use a migration agent to lodge a visa application...

You can apply for a visa without using a registered migration agent.

• Application forms for a visa are available at no cost.
• ...visa applications can be lodged online.

The Visa Finder can help you find the Australian visa most likely to meet your needs and circumstances.”

Nowhere in DIBPs FAQ answer is there the suggestion that Australian immigration law is complex. Visa application charges are high. DIBP fees are not refundable, generally. If a visa is refused in Australia, the applicant may be barred from making further applications, with only limited exceptions. Nowhere is there the suggestion that registered practitioners are required to undertake regular training in migration law to maintain their license to practice and are obliged not to make vexatious applications. Instead, DIBP spends its words twice in that answer, suggesting RMAs are not needed. Surely this answer must be detrimental to unwary applicants. Would it not be reasonable to let consumers know the risks involved?