Login / Join
Immigration Daily News Would you agree to a two-tier Migration Practitioner registration system?
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 7511
- 49 Comments
Would you agree to a two-tier Migration Practitioner registration system?
Former State President and National Board Member of the Migration Institute of Australia Mark Glazbrook has called for the introduction of a two-tier RMA registration scheme, whereby, “migration agents that meet the necessary criteria …would be granted a higher level of accreditation than their peers, and extended streamlined processing rights that make it more attractive for applicants to engage their services,” according to a recent report on the “In Business South Australia” website: http://www.in-business.com.au/news/story/2014-8-12/18852
The report states that the partnership would be similar to the model recently proposed in New Zealand, with responsibility for visa application processing shared between government and approved industry representatives.
The Migration Alliance cannot agree with this proposal. There are currently over 5000 RMAs. The proposed scheme mocks the effectiveness of the MARA Code of Conduct which in essence is meant to put registered practitioners on a similar playing field in order to provide competitive, accessible and professional services to a diverse range of people. However, the MA is not against experienced practitioners being granted ‘Specialist Accreditation’ as is the case currently with Lawyers with the various state law institutes.
MA believes that the big issue that must be addressed is unregistered practice. This must be the focus at present given all the media hype about widespread rorting of Australia’s immigration system. Once unregistered practices is minimised or better still stopped, then perhaps a system whereby applications lodged by experienced registered practitioners are allowed streamlined processing ahead of direct public applications ought to be considered.
Liana Allan of the Migration Alliance says, “The department of immigration must develop a partnership of trust with the migration advisory industry. DIBP must recognise the professionalism of registered practitioners and not mock the entire OMARA registration system by dealing with RMAs in the same light as applications from the general public.
“Given the information in the leaked documents, DIBP has failed to deal with systematic rorts on its own and now will have less money and staff to combat the reportedly widespread problem. The time has come for DIBP to seriously look at developing a closer and better working relationship with the migration advisory industry.” says Liana Allan.
The establishment of an Independent Immigration Services Commissioner (IC) would certainly go a long way to help with all this by independently ensuring that those who are allowed entry into, and to remain in, the regulatory scheme are fit and competent to operate at their IC authorised ‘Advice Level’ as a registered practitioners. The IC could be the cornerstone of that relationship.
Comments
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014One of the main objectives of the review of MARA and establishing an IC, announced by Minister Cash in her press release, was to identify opportunities to reduce regulatory burden. Establishing a 2 tier registration system would surely increase the regulatory burden.
What would happen to recent RMAs that have invested a lot money in setting up their practices and are providing a service at a competitive price? Surely the focus of the IC should be on the unregistered agents and the quality of the RMAs measured by their application failure rate.
Also why has the MA advocated in its submission to the IC Review, under Objective 1, for different advice levels? -
Friday, 15 August 2014
Sorry, Please dont use the word "surely" becasue that is for the future, no one knows "2 tier registration system would surely increase the regulatory burden".
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014Different advice levels are operating in the UK whereby immigration advisors are registered to perform certain types of work. It reflects the area that the agent prefers to work. For example, I am never going to lodge applications at the Federal Court or High Court, which in my view is at a certain advice level. Horses for courses. Speaking from personal experience only, my main area of expertise is submitting applications at the DIBP level. I would be happy being registered as a normal agent along with everyone else, as that relfects my core area of competency as far as visa applications go.
I am no Christopher Levingston, Nigel Dobbie or Peter Bollard or Ros Germov....those agents create magic out of migration law in the courts. I believe they should be recognised for that. I do not believe in a two-tiered system as that makes little sense to me. Splitting the profession in two just sounds like 'good and 'bad'. -
Friday, 15 August 2014
Agree.
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Hi all , again debating irrelevant stuff. As said by many of this site ""go and get the crooks"" that is DIBP job as at present we will look like thieves in the national press. I would hate to be a newcomer to this profession as who would trust me after all recent publicity.?!
Helen Friedmann
MARN 0256768 -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
The idea of tiered system is discriminatory and ridiculous. Yes, it is ridiculous given the fact the the issue of unregistered practice fully eclipses the point under consideration. The real big issue that threatens the service standards of the industry is unregistered practice. The very existence of accepted unregistered practice offshore is discriminatory and ridiculous by itself, and mocks the MARA Code of Conduct. As I see it, the issue of unregistered practice is an issue of paramount importance. I cannot understand why the main and bigger issue is not being resolved while other smaller, insignificant and irrelevant issues are being considered.
By way, could anyone kindly elaborate on what is the model recently proposed in New Zealand (as mentioned in this article in relation to the tiered system)? -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
While I don't agree with the tier system, it does work well in the UK. Anyway, some migration agents are better than others FACT! A Migration agent with 18 years experience should know more than fresh graduate of 12 months etc.... Unregistered practice and Human Resource Managers first these are the persons that need to be weeded out.
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014
I really don't think the UK can be held up as the shining light of immigration procedures and processes.
The overwhelming feeling is that the biggest problem for our industry is illegal and incompetent advisers. The problem is that we all come across unregistered agents and sort out the mess (when possible) knowing that sadly, these grubs will continue to charge high fees and have no conscience about what they are doing to these clients.
Worse still is the registered agents who blatantly flaunt the Code, give (knowingly) wrong advice, charge a fortune and sit secure in the knowledge that nothing will happen to those who really matter in this world - they leave a trail of desperation and sadness that often has ramifications that go way beyond these shores. For the record, I have come across such persons who are both pre and post Grad Cert registered agents. I mainly boils down to the person - do they have integrity or are they morally bankrupt! A Plaque on a wall will not fix that...... -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
We already have a 2 tied system: registered migration agents and unregistered migration agents.
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Sorry 2 tiered not tied ₩ Perhaps I'm just too tired?
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Dear readers,
It is terrific to see that MA have chosen to publish this article, and I am delighted to see the level of discussion which this has generated around what is a very important issue affecting our profession.
The concept of a tiered system of registration is to investigate ways that we can improve the overall perception, integrity and recognition of our profession, and to investigate ways that we can work closer with the Immigration Department. I have been involved in the migration profession for a long time and I am very proud to be involved in the work that we do, and secure the outcomes that we as a profession strive to achieve.
The issues surrounding unregistered practice are of great concern to the entire profession and I believe that the sooner that something can be done about this the better. This would be a great step forward for the profession, and most importantly, to those consumers who are abused by such practice. We should stop referring to these people as unregistered migration agents, they are not migration agents, they are people who are deliberately and intentionally acting dishonestly and deceptively. Unregistered practice is against the law.
It is also important for me to clarify that whilst I was a former state president and was on the board at the Migration Institute of Australia, I no longer hold this position. My comments are not necessarily endorsed or supported by the MIA, and I apologise if the article implies that they were.
I will send a copy of my recommendation to the MA and would be very interested in your comments once you have had an opportunity to read this document in its entirety.
Thank you for your comments. -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Thank you mark,
No doubt we are all in agreement on the issue of unregistered persons - and the dangers that they pose both to the profession and to clients.
However that has nothing to do with a "two-tiered" system of registration - which smacks of self interest (of existing firms).
It is a nonsense to put them together (unregistered persons and the "need" to have a "tiered registration"). That you do so lessens credibility, there is NO connection. Just as there is no need to change the licences of some ("senior") taxi drivers because cyclists disobey the road rules.
In any case there is a two-tired system now along natural lines; RMA's cannot represent in court (and are restricted to migration matters) - Lawyers can represent in court and can also represent/advise in migration matters (although any who do should perhaps also be registered with o'mara given the regulated nature of the profession). -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Just today, I was reading the Australian Immigration Fraud Report by Wayne Sievers published on MA website. Among other things he discusses the dismantling or downsizing of the Investigations unit in the Department.
Of note to me, was how he describes the celebration of ancillary products (such as a visa refusal) as achieving success, while the bigger fish that widely defraud the system is not even looked at by lack of resources.
This proposal or idea seems to be almost a reflection of a systemic issue affecting many of our government organisations. It easier to allocate resources to targeting low risk issues (when registered migration agents are have a number of filter to go through to become registered and are closely scrutinised) than targeting unregistered advisors.
Now, this is the big problem that affects our industry and worse of all, it undermines the entire immigration system. -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Hi MA Staff,
I see this blog as a big winner for MA. It showed people are reading!
As to the last commentator, I agree with the analysis.
Let's say you were a police officer at an intersection. A middle aged couple drive through the yellow light a bit late. Behind them, two bikies also run the yellow/red.
Which of the offenders will the officer stop?
Most enforcers would pick those who will accept the fine with barely a murmur.
The same thing goes for the health departments and restaurants. Just look at who gets fined. Everyone in the enforcement bureaucracy likes to do jobs where the targets are easy. Even the notoriously feisty ATO has been frightened off "big names" after its failure with Mick Hogan. He turned out to be more dangerous than Dundee's crocodiles. -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Let's just focus on getting this immigration commission idea off the ground. I don't agree with all aspects of the proposal but I do agree with most of it. I don't think MARA are doing a good job because MARA are the DIBP. They can't even regulate thrmselves let alone external persons in private practice. It's logically bizarre.
I was too late adding to the submission on the IC. Pity. I would have added a segment in it about getting a costing on the new commission v a costing to run the current MARA. It seems to cost a lot to run. -
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Following on from Mark's comment, what did NZ do to fix the problem of unregistered offshore agents.
-
Thursday, 14 August 2014
Sounds like George Owen's Animal Farm, where "some are more equal than others". We have just finished hosing down the IELTS requirement, now another discrimination strategy is being proposed.
-
Friday, 15 August 2014
There should be no two-tier system when we are trying to instil confidence in our industry that we are a professional group of people. A two-tied system would only provide a question mark in peoples minds that some agents are less qualified than others.
It would also open up the door for "specialist" agents to charge over the top prices and exploit an already opportunistic market for those most in need of specialist assistance.
Furthermore, those without the "specialist" title would then be considered a lesser agent which is by no means an accurate portrayal of the gifted and bright young agents emerging into the market.
Two thumbs down for a two-tiered system
-
Friday, 15 August 2014
Absolutely not!!! This is why I left the others who kept on inventing “honours” to call themselves.!!
Immigration blog
what does (migration agents that meet the necessary criteria) mean?????? all RMAs working in this profession should meet necessary criteria to be called a RMA. Why would we tie ourselves with more burdens?