Login / Join
Immigration Daily News Legal basis for OMARA's Practice Ready Program in questionAustralian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 7682
- 23 Comments
Legal basis for OMARA's Practice Ready Program in question
The following query has been received by Migration Alliance today:
I am assisting an agent with his first renewal and I couldn't find any legislative basis for the practice ready program. It's stated on the MARA website it's mandatory for first renewal and MIA also state the same but I failed to find it listed as a mandatory requirement in the legislation. I don't think it is, and I think that as a result many first year migration agents have paid out money for a program that wasn't a mandatory requirement at all.
I thought I'd raise it with you to look at it. I could be wrong but I thought I should raise with you to have a look at.
Please do not mention my details if looking into this further, I have enough fights with MARA as it is.
From what I see, Legislative Instrument 2013 No.33 in the associated explanatory statement paved the way for the Practice Ready Program. On page 4 of the associated Explanatory Statement reference is made to the program being supported through changes to Schedule 5. Refer to http://www.comlaw.gov.au/Details/F2013L00490/Html/Text#_Toc350854990
As a result of these changes we have, in the Migration Agent Regulations 1998, Schedule 2, the following:
7A. The Minister may, by instrument in writing, declare that specified activities, up to the value specified by the Minister by instrument in writing for this clause, are mandatory for:
(a) certain registered migration agents in a particular year of registration; or
(b) all registered migration agents in any year of registration.
7B. The Minister may, by instrument in writing, declare that specified activities, up to the value specified by the Minister by instrument in writing for this clause, are assessable for:
(a) certain registered migration agents in a particular year of registration; or
(b) all registered migration agents in any year of registration.
The changes require the declared activities to to be specified in an instrument. Legendcom links the 'instrument' in these clauses to IMMI 13/015 that specifies 10 points are manatory. There is no statement referencing a practice ready program.
I asked MARA and was advised the practice ready program was specified through a "notice" on the MARA website. I don't believe a notice on the MARA website is an 'instrument' as referred to by the regulations. comlaw.gov.au defines a legislative instrument here http://www.comlaw.gov.au/content/whatisit#L
I think MARA have confused themselves. Under the Migration Agent Regulations 1998 it is required that a list of approved activities is maintained on the Authority's website (refer to 9G (3)(a)) but this website listing is just to show the activity is an approved activity (and I note they refer to the information as a list on a website not an instrument!). I think MARA have ignored the fact that 7A/7B require the Practice Ready Program to be published in an instrument, not as a list on a website.
I could be wrong so it would be good to get a second set of eyes to look this over. If it's correct then MARA and MIA have been imposing costs on agents that were not actually required.
Do any agents out there have an opinion on this?
Comments
-
Thursday, 27 March 2014
I have made an application under FOI for this information.
-
Thursday, 27 March 2014As a Registered Migration Agent in my first year, I am very interested in this. Thank you Liana : )
-
Friday, 28 March 2014
I once looked into this. PRP is prescribed in one of the "MARA notices". Whether this is legal ia another matter.
-
Friday, 28 March 2014
Some questions from an outsider...
Are RMAs regulated by OMARA?
Is OMARA regulated by DIBP?
Who is DIBP regulated by? Is there any independent body and/or Mystery shopper?
Do RMA have any say in how DIBP is or should be regulated?
Can RMA rate DIBP's service and staff?
Is there any disciplinary action taken against DIBP staff? If so, when and how?
Is it heard that wrong advice is given by DIBP to clients and RMAs?
Are DIBP officers qualified and skilled enough to interpret complex Migration legislation?
Do they get it right every time? As DIBP, should they get it right every time?
Should DIBP officers have to go through same complex training that RMAs go through?
How many refused cases are referred back to DIBP by MRT/RRT?
How many refusals are over turned at judicial level?
What happens to those DIBP officer who get it wrong so many times?
How are officers trained, to use their discretionary power?
Who keeps count of all the money, time and resources wasted by wrong decision of DIBP?
What consequences are on DIBP officers for their wrong doing?
Are they in comparison with RMA?
Are RMA being bullied by OMARA and DIBP?
Is this the cost RMA has to pay to practise as a RMA?
Is the profession worth this stress and risk? -
Wednesday, 28 May 2014
Most of you questions are very interesting, I can answer some of your questions, this from past work experience. DIBP officers DO NOT go through the same complex training as RMA, they are trained occasionally in an off line situation, BUT normally are trained as they go along on the job. They DO NOT undergo the University course that RMA need to go through, or complex CPD training for re-registration as a RMA MUST do every year. The percentage of decisions such as refusals referred back to DIBP from MRT has traditionally be very high BUT it is now less.
DIBP officers and their supervisors do not take too much notice of overturn cases of refusals they believe it is a normal course of action that MRT regularly overturn the decision. The ONLY feedback to the DIBP officers if there is a decision made by Judicial review
DIBP is regulated normally through decision made by Federal Courts OR High Court in decisions -
Tuesday, 01 April 2014
I find this to be really unfair i am located in Darwin and I will cost me $4000 for flight to their staggered program and the course. How can they offer this to people who are not in the state the offer it in.
-
Monday, 30 November 2015
For people studying from a distance, ANU Legal Workshop offers the PRP course as a fully online 12 week course. It runs three times a year, in
See the' More information' field in the ANU Master of Laws in Migration Law page https://law.anu.edu.au/study/master-laws-llm-migration-law where it explains how you can take the single course as a non award student, without having to enrol in a full Masters program. -
Saturday, 12 April 2014
I'm in Egypt ... so it will cost even more for me .. and with so many online CPD courses available it seems an annoying expense.
-
Tuesday, 27 May 2014
As a Registered Migration Agent in my first year, this extra requirements are unjust and costly for all new migration agents, after just completing an intensive course to become a migration agent, you then need go through another intensive program to re-register. There many unscrupulous agents out there that are completely incompetent and the monitoring done by either DIBP, MRT or even MARA is beyond a joke, there is NO serious checks done. I can name the agents BUT will not reveal my sources BUT believe me the information I receive is from the inside of government depts. in question. These agents are NOT required to undergo such a rigorous training just because there have been operating as agents for such a long period time. The intense program should be for ALL migration agents, any agent who have been registered for a long time only need to gain 8 points and this can be done online, and you can do this over over and over without paying and only need to pay once you have been successfully completed the subjects required. This cost for new migration agents is utterly outrageous
Yes I am a member of Migration Alliance BUT I will not leave my name in fear of retribution by either MARA or DIBP -
Saturday, 14 June 2014
Has there been any confirmation of the legal basis for the mandatory nature of the PRP yet?
-
Wednesday, 03 September 2014
As far as I can tell there was no legislative authority for OMARA to require registered migration agents to complete the PRP within the first 12 months of their registration. This is presumably why the CEO of OMARA introduced IMMI 14/038.
F2014L01092 was tabled in the House of Representatives and the Senate on 26 August 2014. If it was issued without legislative authority, it will have no effect, If it was issued with legislative authority, it could be disallowed for another 11 sitting days as of today (3 September 2014).
Any concerns about it may be directed to the Senate's Standing Committee of Regulations and Ordinances. -
Friday, 12 September 2014
Like many others, I am in my first year of practice and wondering if there has been any developments in PRP mandatory status? Thankyou for everyone's contributions. Has there been any outcome of the HoR tabling or has anyone contacted the Senate's Standing Committee of Regulations and Ordinances?
Since my renewal comes up relatively soon I'm also getting a little nervous. I'm just wondering what the consequences would be with MARA if you havn't done it? Would they just say go away and do it or your can't register?
Just in case we have to has anyone got a list providers and prices? I can only find MIA. Also, people in this forum have mentioned that there is no online PRP available and potential associated travel costs seem to reduce any equity access. Are they only face to face? -
Friday, 03 October 2014
For an update on IMMI 14/038 see the Senate's Delegated Legislation Monitor No 12 of 2014 (24 September 2014), available at
http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Regulations_and_Ordinances/Monitor
No reference is made to the fact that IMMI 14/038 may have been issued without legislative authority because it was issued by the CEO of OMARA, and not the Minister, who may be unable to delegate his powers under the Migration Agents Regulations.
Nor does the Committee address the fact that the final course of the Graduate Certificate ($3000) and the PRP ($2000) cover the same material, namely office management, client files and client interviews.
The Committee will consider this Instrument again in its meeting on 29 October 2014. -
Thursday, 25 December 2014
any update feedback on these issues?
-
Wednesday, 04 February 2015
This is the Senate Standing Committee on Regulations and Ordinances' statement of 20 November 2014:
It is not the committee’s usual practice to re-visit an instrument, as the committee conducts its examination of an instrument within the disallowance period. However, these instruments are made on a periodic basis, and the concerns you have raised in relation to this instrument will be borne in mind in any future examination of such instruments.
I had raised my concerns during the disallowance period. It is inexplicable for me why the Committee entrusted with scrutinising subordinate legislation did take them into account in its considerations. -
Friday, 14 August 2015
I am infuriated by this and what has happened with my efforts to enrol in the ANU practice ready programme. Despite jumping up and down about having to do the course for MARA registration for months, and having to chase them constantly. They have managed to bungle my enrolment to such an extent that it is too late to get on the course this year, despite my starting enquires last December!! But they are , however, happy to defer my enrolment to next year.
Having relied on them, it is now too late to get on a MIA course before my registration lapses. So clearly I will be joining the heap of agents whose registration will not be renewed! Will no doubt be joining the unemployment lines very soon thanks to this stupidity and negligence!!
I am sooooo frustrated!!! -
Friday, 13 November 2015
Just tell the MARA you couldn't get on a course in time. They'll hang on until you get on one. ANU also made a dog's dinner of my attempt to do their version of the PRP and so I gave up a place on an MIA course (in a city thousands of miles away) on the basis that ANU would enrol me, then they wouldn't, and then I had to go back cap in hand to the MIA and fly in and out of BNE on a daily basis from thousands of miles away anyway. So my registration is super late. As long as you apply before the deadline you should be OK. After all, whilst MARA wants to get as much money out of us as possible in our first year before we go bankrupt, it wants to leave us with just enough to be able to afford next year's fees. So they do have procedures in place for keeping the Golden Goose (us) on life support so that it can lay one more egg before giving up in disgust and going and getting a real job.
-
Thursday, 10 September 2015
Seriously, this is just another way of sucking money out of people who actually want to work. Unfortunately, some of us simply cant afford to pay this. Furthermore, is there anyone out there that can hire a new agent who does not have experience or do we just fall with the statistics that a majority of new agents dont last 2 years. Well, with the fees for PRP and lack of confidence, it is so hard to get started when no one will give you a job. Hmmmm McDonalds?
-
Immigration blog
I think that the words “instrument in writing” is not a “legislative instrument"
Check out this link:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/aia1901230/s15ae.html
Without seeing what the document it is that is the relevant “instrument in writing” all I can do is speculate.
The prudent course would be to FOI the relevant Clause 7A “specification” made in writing by the Minister which purports to establish the PRP.
Assuming that there is in existence the relevant designation of the activity known as PRP and that it is in writing then you would have to resolve the “instrument in writing” is not a “legislative instrument” problem.
If it is a legislative instrument and it is not registered then it has no legal effect.
Assuming that there is no proper designation of PRP as a mandatory activity then each candidate would sue the provider who in turn would seek to be indemnified by the OMARA.
This would see the MIA in effect bailed out by DIBP as it would be their stuff up.
The relevant instrument would come into effect and purport to have a retrospective effect.