Login / Join
Immigration Daily News Abolish Unregistered Practice - submission sent to Senator CashAustralian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 11405
- 19 Comments
Abolish Unregistered Practice - submission sent to Senator Cash
Migration Alliance members might be pleased to learn that I have sent the following email to Senator Michaelia Cash, Assistant Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, and her Chief of Staff today:
Dear Brooke and Michaelia
Ref: Abolishment of Unregistered Practice and No acceptance of immigration applications or requests from unregistered agents
I would like to suggest that the DIBP look closely at removing the ability for a person or organisation to submit an Australian visa application unless they are registered migration agents. The NZ system seems to have it right and I have outlined their position on unregistered immigration advice under the NZ Immigration Advisors Licencing Act 2007 below for your perusal:
Section 9: No acceptance of immigration applications or requests from unlicensed immigration advisers
(1) No immigration application or request put forward on behalf of another person by an unlicensed immigration adviser may be accepted, unless the adviser is exempt from the requirement to be licensed under section 11.
(2) The chief executive of the department of State that has, with the authority of the Prime Minister, assumed responsibility for the administration of the Immigration Act 2009 must so far as practicable ensure that immigration forms and information brochures prepared or provided by that department advise that, in accordance with subsection (1), immigration applications or requests provided or prepared on behalf of another person by persons who are neither licensed immigration advisers nor exempt from the requirement to be licensed will not be accepted.
(3) Where an immigration application or request on behalf of another person is not accepted by reason of contravening subsection (1), the relevant person or body must notify that person in writing of that fact, and advise the person as to how the application or request may be relodged or advanced in an acceptable manner.
Section 11: Persons exempt from licensing
The following persons are exempt from the requirement to be licensed:
(a) persons who provide immigration advice in an informal or family context only, so long as the advice is not provided systematically or for a fee:
(b) members of Parliament, and members of their staff who provide immigration advice within the scope of their employment agreement:
(c) foreign diplomats and consular staff accorded protection as such under the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities Act 1968 or the Consular Privileges and Immunities Act 1971:
(d) employees of the public service who provide immigration advice within the scope of their employment agreement:
(e) lawyers:
(f) persons employed by or working as volunteers for community law centres (as defined in section 6 of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006), where at least 1 lawyer—
(i) is on the employing body of the community law centre; or
(ii) is employed by or working as a volunteer for the community law centre in a supervisory capacity:
(g) persons employed by or working as volunteers for citizens advice bureaux:
(h) persons who provide—
(i) immigration advice offshore; and
(ii) advice only in respect of applications made under the Immigration Act 2009 for a temporary entry class visa—temporary visa—student visa:
(i) persons exempted by regulations made under section 12.
Section 12: Exemption, or removal of exemption, by Order in Council
(1) The Governor-General may, by Order in Council, make regulations—
(a) exempting any person or class of persons from the requirement to be licensed as immigration advisers:
(b) removing in whole or in part the exemption provided for in section 11(h).
(2) Regulations under subsection (1)(a) may be made only on the recommendation of the Minister given in accordance with section 13.
(3) Exemptions under subsection (1) must be classed as one of 2 categories:
(a) category 1 exemptions, exempted on the basis that—
(i) there is little consumer benefit to be gained by requiring members of the exempt class to be licensed; and
(ii) there are sufficient processes in place to ensure competent and ethical conduct; and
(b) category 2 exemptions, for persons in professions or occupations that, under their own statute, have their own disciplinary procedures that could apply to the provision of immigration advice, and prescriptive requirements as to conduct.
(4) An exemption under subsection (1)(a) may be subject to any terms and conditions specified in the regulations.
(5) Subject to subsection (6), a person exempt under any of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (f), (g), (h), and (i) of section 11 or a category 1 exemptee may, despite being exempt, apply for a licence and, if the licence is granted, operate as a licensed immigration adviser.
(6) A lawyer or a category 2 exemptee may neither apply for nor hold a licence.
(7) A removal of the exemption provided for in section 11(h) by regulations made under subsection (1) may be in respect of all or any 1 or more classes of person to whom the exemption relates, and the removal or retention of the exemption may be subject to any terms and conditions specified in the regulations.
Could Australia please consider adopting a similar model? Unregistered practice slows down the application process within the DIBP, accounts for so much lost time and money and increases the fraud and scamming rates of migrants and applicants, sponsoring organisations and persons. There is no reason in 2014 why we should not abolish unregistered offshore and onshore practice once and for all.
Best regards
Liana J Allan
Comments
-
Wednesday, 08 January 2014I think Canada have similar approach as NZ do. Further strengthens the argument that applications only be accepted by authorised persons..
-
Wednesday, 08 January 2014Thanks Liana
-
Wednesday, 08 January 2014
Great Work!
-
Wednesday, 08 January 2014
Dear Liana
We wish you and MA to have a safe and happy new year. The authority of MA has always given a good recommendation to the Immigration industry. Please kindly ensure that any registered Solicitors without the qualification of Migration Agent should not be able to provide or assist the clients in the area of Immigration in Australia. Once again, "Well Done to your good work".
Regards
Anthony Sim -
Wednesday, 08 January 2014
This extract is from the Canadian Government Immigration Website:
Use an authorized immigration representative
You may choose to use a representative to act for you with:
Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC),
the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, or
the Canada Border Services Agency.
There are two types of immigration representatives: paid and unpaid.
Paid representatives
Only some people can charge a fee or receive any other type of payment to represent or advise you on a Canadian immigration proceeding or application. These are:
lawyers and paralegals who are members in good standing of a Canadian provincial or territorial law society,
notaries who are members in good standing of the Chambre des notaires du Québec and
immigration consultants who are members in good standing of the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council.
These people are called “authorized” representatives.
CIC will not deal with representatives who charge for their services and are not members of one of the above groups. -
Wednesday, 08 January 2014
I have just sent the folloiwing to Michaelia Cash thanks to the comments from David Stephens:
Dear Brooke and Michaelia
Further to my submission today on abolishing unregistered migration practice and unregistered agents, please find another example of a better system, this time from the Canadian government website. I believe if Australia was to adopt a similar model to both NZ and Canada, we would have a far improved version than what is currently in place. Unregistered migration agents are responsible for so much damage.
The following is an extract from the Canadian government website:
Use an authorized immigration representative
You may choose to use a representative to act for you with:
- Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC),
- the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, or
- the Canada Border Services Agency.
There are two types of immigration representatives: paid and unpaid.
Paid representatives:
Only some people can charge a fee or receive any other type of payment to represent or advise you on a Canadian immigration proceeding or application. These are:
- lawyers and paralegals who are members in good standing of a Canadian provincial or territorial law society,
- notaries who are members in good standing of the Chambre des notaires du Québec and
- immigration consultants who are members in good standing of the Immigration Consultants of Canada Regulatory Council.
These people are called “authorized” representatives.
CIC will not deal with representatives who charge for their services and are not members of one of the above groups.
I would urge you to please consider abolishing unregistered migration practice.
Thank you.
Best regards
Liana J Allan -
Wednesday, 08 January 2014
Great work Liana
-
Wednesday, 08 January 2014
You have our full support to this submission. Excellent.
-
Thursday, 09 January 2014
Good job Liana
-
Thursday, 09 January 2014
Good job. NZ does good job to protect and pomote NZ licenced migration advisor, all AU RMA deserve it as well.
-
Thursday, 09 January 2014
great suggestions! thanks, liana! we are yourpeople who fully support you!
-
Friday, 10 January 2014
Important questions arise from some of the "exempt" persons! I've come across a number of politician's staff who are giving advice - but have no idea! Likewise there is widespread scamming from "education agents" - many a time I've come across clients who have been "sold" a cooks course (when they held qualifications/experience that are eligible for GSM visas). Edu agents have an obvious conflict of interest (as they re paid by the uni/rto).
Other persons exempt due to their work agreements should only be so if they are qualified.
Of course - who else has been faced with a client screwed because they followed advice they received from the immigration Dept? -
Friday, 10 January 2014
I have a concern with the fact that Lawyers can offer advice without teh need to be qualified in this complex area. I know several lawyers and the majority of them will refer but there are some who will try with the best of intent but make a pigs breakfast of the whole business.
I do not believe that a lawyer should only do a CPD to gain qualification as an RMA either, there is an expectation by a (often vulnerable) client that they will receive unbiased timely and accurate information that serves them the best chance of success, for the sake of the reputation of the industry as a whole, lets ensure everyone is suitably skilled in this area, by suitably I mean "specifically". I am sure Lianna, Chris et al would not jump into say, Maritime Law without specific training and mentoring! -
Thursday, 23 January 2014
The UK too has its fair share of London based companies and operators outside London but within the UK who claIm to be 'Regulated' Immigration Advisors for more than one country, of which Australia is one of them. Others claim they are 'migration agents' but drop the word Registered attempting to confuse the clients with a play on words and terminology. I have a client currently in dispute with a large London based company whose unregistered UK staff incorrectly advised him as ineligible, yet still charged a hefty fee, using a MARA logo and the MARN of two recently qualified agents (2013) based in Sydney. Claiming " we as a organisation have been accredited by MARA and have two MARA registered agents within the organisation." How can a MARA agent be available to UK residents during normal working hours, as per Code of Conduct requirements, if they are in an AEST time zone? Added to this the company claim "we are fully accredited and regulated by Migration agents Registration Authority. We do not state that our clients will be dealing directly with our MARA Registered Agents." Several clients, to my knowledge who have suffered the effects of poor practice with more than one London company have complained to MARA but i am told the complaint is not taken any further, due to the company being located in the UK. This is detrimental to the client and to the Migration industry being misrepresented in the UK.
-
Monday, 24 March 2014
Katherine, that sounds like Global Visas (or IXP Visas as they are now known because of their horrendous track record of duping clients they had to change their name). Global Visas has ripped off clients from the UK, Canada and South Africa. Google search "Global Visas Review" and you will find a trail of miserable stories. It's unbelievable and they continue to get away with it. When will the authorities wake up?
http://www.thesouthafrican.com/news/south-african-visa-investigation-warns-uk-applicants-to-be-cautious-of-fraud.htm -
Monday, 24 March 2014
Yes journalist Andrew Penman of the UK Daily Mirror has written articles exposing poor practice regarding GV. At a London expo recently (where agents are MARA registered) a tradesman over 50yrs of age had been charged £1200.00 for a 'Certificate of Australian Employability' by the same company. Unbelievable! I would of thought UK Trading standards would have been involved by now. Not good for clients, or the industry represented outside of Australia.
-
Monday, 24 March 2014
Katherine do u have a link to the article?
-
Tuesday, 25 March 2014
Hi Charles here it is
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/global-visas-boss-liam-clifford-2204530
Immigration blog
Good work!