Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 6742
- 8 Comments
My FOI on myself and the DIBP List A and B
This is what I got back (as did other RMAs). All are replica replies:
Our references: FA 14/08/00981; ADF2014/30042
Dear Liana Allan
This email refers to your FOI request received on 20 August 2014 seeking access to:
Please provide a copy of any ICSE commentary and/or information / spreadhsheet concerning myself and my conduct as an RMA# 0104178 Please provide a copy of the "Agents of Interest" spreadsheet or list and any narrative that appears on it as it applies to me personally. As a reference please see, but not limited to page 10 of this document: <http://www.immi.gov.au/About/foi/Documents/FA140500374.PDF>
The purpose of this email is to advise you, as required under s.24AB of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) that I consider a practical refusal reasonexists under s.24AA of the FOI Act in relation to your request. I have set out my reasons and the actions required by you (to consult on the scope of your request) in the attached notice.
ALLAN---14-08-00981---s.24AB-Notice.pdf
The current due date for your FOI request is 19 September. In accordance with s.24AB(8) of the FOI Act the legislated processing time for your request issuspended during the consultation period. Please refer to the attached notice for further details.
Consultation period
The FOI Act requires that you respond to this notice before the end of the consultation period, which is close of business Friday 12 September 2014.
You may consult with me by replying to this email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Yours Sincerely
Linda Rossiter
FOI and Privacy Policy
Department of Immigration and Border Protection
_____________________________
Interestingly news has just come in from a RMA that Peter Bollard made an FOI and came up with this document which clearly shows there is a LIST A and LIST B:
http://www.iscah.com/wp_files/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Partnerriskprofile.pdf
Comments
-
Sunday, 31 August 2014Can someone help Liana get information on whether she is or is not on a freaking list from the DIBP? I don't think her email to the FOI was clear enough. LIANA WANTS TO KNOW IF SHE IS ON A LIST. Sarcasm overtones.
-
Sunday, 31 August 2014
If the department is "lying" about this - should not this FoI refusal be a sign of systemic lawbreaking?
Court case? -
Monday, 01 September 2014
http://www.iscah.com/wp_files/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Partnerriskprofile.pdf
It seems to me that this particular list refers to partner applications only in relation to the risk factor, nothing to do with RMAs -
Monday, 01 September 2014
Yes - it does refer to partner application risk factors.b This bis the point.
Perhaps if you read it?
"Migration agent or authorised recipient of
concern List A List B" (and it goes on to give risk "points" for persons on the list.
A list with RMA's names on it - with an implication that these people are "untrustworthy" (outside of o'mara sanctions - mind you) and you think it is nothing to do with RMA's?
There are 3 major problems in what it has to do with RMA's:
-
List A exists (in secret - outside of o'mara sanctions and any due process or accountability)
List B exists (in secret - outside of o'mara sanctions and any due process or accountability)
RMA's are included with (unaccountable) non RMA's in regard to their profession by the department (what do we study for? What do we pay registration fees for?.
-
Tuesday, 02 September 2014
As with the instructions on the form 956, the existence of this list highlights the fact that the Immigration Department views Registered Migration Agents and unregistered overseas people in the same light.
In effect it is a restraint of trade for people operating in the Migration industry in Australia.
If you are in Australia you must study and become registered, pay exorbitant registration fees, attend regular CPD training, have insurance, maintain a client trust account, keep files in archives for 7 years, abide by a strict code of conduct, be liable for information provided by your staff, etc, etc , etc.
If you are overseas absolutely anyone, with zero training, zero qualifications, zero knowledge or understanding of the Australian Migration Regulations, Migration Act or Policy can charge money to lodge an Australian Visa application and the Australian Immigration Department will accept the application and assess it in the same way as an application lodge by a Registered Migration Agents. Not only that, the Australian Immigration Department will also give legitimacy to the overseas unregistered person by giving them an “offshore agent identification number” (not my word).
It is astounding that this state of affairs continues to be accepted as the status quo and that the Australian Immigration Department continues to be complicit in unethical and often criminal business enterprises.· Annette Joy-Evans likes this comment. -
Tuesday, 02 September 2014
Given the Partner Risk Tiering document and the effect that the inclusion of an agent on list A or B might have on the outcome of a client's partner application, shouldn't we have access to this information so that we can advise our client's accordingly? How can we act in the best interests of our client if we are unable to accurately advise the level of risk that their application will be assessed against because we do not know whether we belong on such lists? In effect, the Department is hindering us from being able to advise our clients appropriately.
According to the Code of Conduct:
Part 2.3: agents must have "a capacity to provide accurate and timely advice";
Part 2.6: agents "must be frank and candid about the prospects of
success when assessing a client’s request for assistance in preparing a case".
How can we provide an accurate assessment regarding the likelihood of success of a partner visa application if we're unsure whether an applicant's application may be disadvantaged by our inclusion on list A or B? It would appear that the Department is hindering us from fully complying with the Code of Conduct. -
Sunday, 07 September 2014
Hi Liana,
I have received an identical letter, which is totally unsatisfactory!
Is there anything we can practically do get over this standard message and obtain the information we all wish to have??
Would the Ombudsman have a say on it? What about a class action??
There are so many of us; are we really so helpless ??
Immigration blog
So... it seems that all of us who made a request is going to get a similar response... why not go straight to the horses mouth, that is, the people who had the back and forth emails about the list? they have it, attached to one of the emails - perhaps we need to phrase it differently...
Maybe the request is too broad? I don't think we're going to get anywhere with this...
Perhaps FOI is not what we need (or what we'll get)- we need to go straight to the Minister's office - oh, wait - that's not going to help either as it is an operational issue...
This is a dogs' breakfast, isn't it???? I always wonder in WHOSE interest is it to NOT clear this up? why does our industry always have to be overshadowed by issues which we cannot control and coloured by the innuendo of shonky practice, etc? all industries have shonky practitioners but their minders deal with them effectively.
We need an independent commission more than ever, in order to start putting things right. We are professionals who may from time to time slip, like all professionals but our work is good and our industry should be strong. Once the unregistered practice issue is deal with by those who have the responsibility to stamp it out, we can get on with it and deal with building it up.
Bea