Login / Join
Immigration Daily News DIBP must come clean: is it encouraging unregistered practice?
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 3907
- 12 Comments
DIBP must come clean: is it encouraging unregistered practice?
A recently introduced government instrument indicates that the department of immigration has an agreement in place with ‘agents’ in China for the purposes of lodging internet applications. On the face of it, the instrument gives recognition to unregistered practice in China because it fails to make the distinction between registered and unregistered practitioners in its wording. It would be good to know if any readers here are aware of (or party to) this agreement and if the agreement includes unregistered practitioners.
The recently introduced instrument IMMI 14/104 makes internet applications compulsory for certain types of tourist visa applications from China. Particularly, the instrument states as follows,
“that form 1419 (Internet) must be used by persons applying for a Subclass 600 (Visitor) visa who:
(a) hold a passport issued by a country specified in column 1 of Schedule A and subject to the conditions (if any) specified in column 2 of Schedule A; and
(b) make their application through the services of an agent from that country specified in column 1 of Schedule A, and who is party to an agreement with Immigration to use an Internet facility for offshore visitor visa applications from that country specified in column 1 of Schedule A.
This Instrument, IMMI 14/104 commences on 23 November 2014.”
The Instrument makes no mention of any requirement for the ‘agent’ to be a registered migration agent. It lends testimony to the suggestion that DIBP is dealing with unregistered agents through a shadow arrangement facilitated by ‘an agreement with Immigration to use an Internet facility’. It begs the question: Does this agreement mock the OMARA framework and all RMAs who strife to abide by it?
Migration Alliance has been campaigning hard against unregistered practice for several years now, petitioning Scott Morrison MP and Michaelia Cash MP to stop accepting visa applications from unregistered persons.
The high standards of the Code of Conduct which governs registered practice essentially protects vulnerable applicants and gives them the best chance of success at visa applications to Australia.
“Stopping unregistered practitioners from lodging visa applications would prevent fraud, prevent immigration scams and stop criminal entrepreneurs. Undoubtedly, it is essential to preserve the integrity of Australia’s borders.” says Liana Allan of the Migration Alliance.
DIBP has to address this genuine concern.
The Migration Alliance has also been campaigning for the appointment of an Independent Commissioner for some time now to prevent problems like this. Hopefully, Dr Christopher Kendall who is currently reviewing the effectiveness of the OMARA will take into account issues such as these and perhaps provide recommendations to help clean-up DIBP's acts and instruments in his final wording.
Comments
-
Tuesday, 25 November 2014While the offshore 'unregistered agents' in China have facility to lodge the e-visitor visa, our 'registered agents' may not able to access it at all. This morning I tried two Chinese visitor visa applications via ImmiAcocunt but failed. I was advised to lodge paper applications (although I can lodge the e-student visa for Chinese students). This is definitely not a fair trading.
-
Friday, 21 November 2014
Almost every country in the earth can lodge online visitor visa application but Indian passport holders ( except in certain circumstances) still cannot lodge online visitor visa applications.
-
Friday, 21 November 2014
100% agree.
Another question: if DIBP has an agreement in place with ‘agents’ in China for the purposes of lodging internet applications, do we, as Australian registered migration agents, have the access to that agreement? -
Friday, 21 November 2014
DIBP is always against RMA's, to them we are unwanted middlemen. They do not want us to be recognised, that we do most of the work and provide them with decision ready applications or at least reduce their workload.
-
Friday, 21 November 2014
It seemed that these agreement were in place long ago, which DIBP never bothered to disclose or provide the privilege to Registered Agents. I felt that been a Registered Agent we only carry the burdens and worries of the possibility been disciplined because we are 'recorded'. While the 'non-registered', whom are working in the shadows, would not be exposed and instead have the freedom of provide various wrong advise and reflecting us like clowns to the public until the clients suffered by these ill advise -- which again the industry as a whole has to take the blame. This is a real tragic
-
Friday, 21 November 2014
I think it is not fair to us Australia registered migration agents that we are to subject to stringent requirements but some 'agents' are able to bypass all these simply by practising outside of Australia. I think the Migration Alliance should fight for the right for all visa applications to be handled only by Australia registered migration agents.
-
Friday, 21 November 2014
Food for thought .....
An unregistered hack operating overseas (China?) has no right of appeal in any visa application he/she makes (as they are offshore).
A registered Migration Agent will be able to make appeal for good number of decisions.
Is DIBP simply striving to remove RMA's from the equation - in order to reduce the number of idiot decisions that are overturned? -
Friday, 21 November 2014
DIBP provides access for travel agents to register to process tourist visas that can be issued electronically. This has been happening internationally for a long time. I believe they can process these free of charge insead of the usual A$20 fee.
As a RMA I requested for the same access and was told it was only for travel agents. So as a registered migration agent I can't get access to a visa lodgement system that's made available to unregistered agents. -
Friday, 21 November 2014
if DIBP has an agreement in place with ‘agents’ in China for the purposes of lodging internet applications, do we, as Australian registered migration agents, have the access to that agreement? or We can also apply to have the same right to lodge application on line for
“that form 1419 (Internet) must be used by persons applying for a Subclass 600 (Visitor) visa who:
(a) hold a passport issued by a country specified in column 1 of Schedule A and subject to the conditions (if any) specified in column 2 of Schedule A; and
(b) make their application through the services of an agent from that country specified in column 1 of Schedule A, and who is party to an agreement with Immigration to use an Internet facility for offshore visitor visa applications from that country specified in column 1 of Schedule A.
This Instrument, IMMI 14/104 commences on 23 November 2014.” -
Sunday, 23 November 2014
The biggest chunk of visa work lies in overseas student visas and tourist visas. And this chunk of work is growing every minute while other parts of the total visa work volume remain flat or have been shrinking. And yet, as registered migration agents, we are denied on-line access to the most lucrative and explosively growing parts of visa business. Unregistered agents are enjoying the online facilities and we, registered migration agents, are left to fight for our shrinking share in the shrinking part of the pie. I thought this sort of thing only happens in third world countries.
-
Tuesday, 12 May 2015
Another thing is the Family Sponsored Vsitor Visa from India which can lodged online by some special offshore agents and not us the RMAs. This surely is encouraging unregistered practice and makes us think, should we keep on paying registration fees, insurances and be disadvantaged not mentioning the burden of responsibities to comply to the code?
Immigration blog
when all the migration agents will be given facility to lodge e visa application for offshore students, we are losing business...