Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
PIC 4020 and the DIBP
Today I attended the NSW Client Reference Group meeting hosted by DIBP at the Gateway building on Elizabeth Street, Sydney NSW.
Lyn Heinz from the DIBP spoke on PIC 4020.
The Public Interest Criteria (PIC) 4020 was originally introduced in April 2011. On the 22 March two new subclauses were introduced to PIC 4020 as follows. The identity requirement was one.
Identity Requirement
The Minister must be satisfied as to the identity of an applicant.
Failure of an applicant to satisfy the DIBP officer as to their identity can lead to a 10 year exclusion period.
There are around 80 visas affected by PIC 4020 and these visas are mainly in the skilled, business, student, temporary and family subclasses.
Over the past several years the DIBP have been strengthening identity management. The onus is on the applicant to explan and demonstrate who they are. The onus is not on the DIBP to disprove a person's claim as to their identity.
It is not always just the documents that demonstrate who a person is. All the information that is known about the applicant including their history, information they have told the DIBP and previous applications is taken into account.
The DIBP would prefer applicants to be up-front about who they are than to give incorrect information to the DIBP. Putting in a dodgy document is not a preference of the DIBP. What they want is honesty and proper information.
Part 2. AA uses the word 'satisfied' meaning 'all information will be taken into account' to ascertain someone's identity.
An example is Dubai where visa applicants have often arrived and do not have documents. In instances like this, the DIBP recommends that visa applicants explain how they came to arrive in Dubai without proper documents, how they got to Dubai and their life story. There is a high level of skepticism in Dubai. If the visa applicant has no documents, then this is what the DIBP want them to put in. NOTHING. They don't want to see bogus documents.
Over 4,000 visa applications have been refused on the basis of PIC 4020. Of those around 2,000 are currently under review in the tribunals and courts.
Immigration blog
PIC 4020 Integrity overkill.
The focus of DIBP on PIC 4020 and the lack of any meaningful discretion is creating anomalies which are unfair, unintended and quite frankly insane.
Thus a person who is the victim of a fraud perpetrated on them by a criminal entrepreneur which includes false(and unnecessary work references), fake IELTS test results are treated no differently to a client who has set themselves on the path to tell lies to TRA.
This serious anomaly now punishes all and sundry irrespective of the "facts".
However as we all know the facts never got in DIBP's way when it came to decision making.
The discretion is too narrow, too vague and the policy is ultra vires the regs.
If this is an integrity measure where is the 'integrity" in allowing unregistered persons to operate overseas. This integrity problem is a self inflicted wound by DIBP who allows unregistered persons including education agents access to the agents portal and does nothing to assist the vulnerable.
Here is a quick question...How much money will DIBP allow you to steal off vulnerable consumers if you are an unregistered agent before they take action? A. The facts suggest that you can steal about $4M before they do anything.
You have DIBP to thank for Eddie Kang and his ilk..where are 3AW and 2GB on this?
We know they are "tough on crime" but why don't they ask the Minister what he doing about this failure by DIBP to act with integrity.
I guess integrity ain't worth nuthin