Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers.
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 6332
- 40 Comments
DIBP negative propaganda about RMAs must end
The Office of the MARA annual report for the 2013-2014 year has been published.
I saw it on a Facebook post today from the DIBP. The DIBP was advertising the Office of the MARA. It reads as follows:
As at 30 June 2014, there were 5212 migration agents registered with the Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority (OMARA). The authority decides who can register as a migration agent, monitors the conduct of agents, and manages complaints about them.
How do other agents feel about the wording in the advertising of our profession? In my view, this type of wording implies that agents need to be monitored, that their conduct might be less than ideal and that migration agents need to be 'managed' due to the fact that they get complaints raised against them.
I don't see this as positive messaging by the DIBP about the RMA profession. In fact I see it more as fear mongering and negative, only pointing out the 'policing' angle that the Office of the MARA has.
I don't see 'facts' being published by the Law Council or the Law Society, CPA, ICAA, or Bar Association about lawyers or accountants like these #ImmiFacts about RMAs.
I see this messaging by the DIBP as evidence of the often unspoken conflict between the DIBP and RMAs. This is because the making of visa applications by RMAs to the DIBP can be an adversarial process. Agents are there to represent the best interests of their clients and know their law well. The case officer is there to represent the government and often finds it more difficult to refuse a visa when an RMA is involved. This is because RMAs are more willing to fight for their clients on technical grounds, use legislation to argue against policy, and to appeal poor DIBP decisions to the tribunals and beyond.
This visa application 'adversarial battleground' has led to the 'us' and 'them' situation between RMAs and the DIBP, and a general unspoken distaste by the DIBP for the RMA profession. In many ways RMAs can be the bain of the DIBP's lives, constantly pushing the law and relentlessly advocating for their clients. The DIBP could otherwise just refuse applications if it were not for the presence of an RMA in the equation.
There is conflict between RMAs and the DIBP. It is there. Real. RMAs smile through gritted teeth and remain courteous in meetings, but the cold war is there. Part of it is evidenced in the propaganda spread by DIBP/OMARA about RMAs through DIBP/OMARA media channels.
Probably every conflict is fought on at least two grounds: the battlefield and the minds of the people via propaganda.
The “good guys” (In this case what the DIBP/OMARA want to be) and the “bad guys” (RMAs). I believe that this type of information is guilty of misleading the public with distortions about the RMA profession, exaggerations about RMA conduct, subjectivity, inaccuracy regarding 'facts' and even fabrications ("The authority works collaboratively with its stakeholders"). In many ways the DIBP sends this information out in order to receive support and a sense of legitimacy for the Office of the MARA.
I am not saying that all agents are without fault. What I am saying is that we need to look at comparative statistics and analyse the number of complaints against agents as against other professions, and the number of agents disciplined by the OMARA within the last 12 months to understand that the levels are extremely low. The problem is almost non-existent.
In many ways I see the OMARA contracting the DIBP to sell a very negative message about the RMA profession. The OMARA engages in general, low-level negative propaganda about RMAs without attribution to source documents (facts).
It is this general, low-level dialogue from DIBP/OMARA about RMAs that RMAs are somehow so 'dodgy' that they need to be managed, monitored and have their conduct scrutinized which is leading everyone into a lose-lose situation. It keeps 'us' and 'them' alive like a cold war.
What I want to see is real collaboration. I want to see messaging about the profession which is positive and speaks of our true role in the big picture. The reality the public need to be made aware of is as follows:
1. Registered Migration Agents are skilled and qualified and have proven sound knowledge in Australian Immigration and Citizenship Law.
2. Registered Migration Agents do the hard work before it gets to the desk of the DIBP case officer, making their job to decide an application easier.
3. Registered Migration Agents can take matters up beyond the DIBP to the Tribunals, Minister, Federal and High Courts.
4. Registered Migration Agents are helping to encourage their clients to invest in, build businesses and work to pay taxes which all contributes to the building of our economy.
5. Multilingual Registered Migration Agents are the nexus between Australia and persons in other countries who may not be here contributing to the growth of our nation if it were not for their agent.
I think that the DIBP should spend more time and energy creating positive news stories about RMAs and more time and energy focusing on the unregistered migration agents who are causing absolute havoc out there. Unregistered migration agents bring the whole industry into disrepute and make a mockery of the systems we have in place to protect vulnerable consumers. Unregistered agents can be stopped. NZ has done it. Canada has done it. Why not Australia? Unregistered agents are the real enemy.
It's much easier to focus on regulating a group of people behind bars than it is to regulate the free person.
If the OMARA really want to work collaboratively with stakeholders then a good start would be for the OMARA to work collaboratively with the peak professional association, Migration Alliance, to create mutually agreed messaging about our profession, joint strategies for the future of the profession, and consult with agents using round-table discussions and focus groups in order that joint objectives are created. That way we will get RMA 'buy-in' and can grow positively together.
There are great people within the Office of the MARA just as there are great people within the RMA community. Let's work together, collaborating as a team so that we can achieve the best outcomes.
Comments
-
Monday, 01 December 2014All the issues and concerns raised are at the forefront of all RMA's. However, the one issue that i would like to see given priority and relentless action is the issue of unregistered practice. If the DIBP is not willing to stop dealing with unregistered agents world wide then as RMA's we should band together and use Lexus Nexus rather than Legend. With 5212 agents that would be a potential loss of $4,169,600.00 to the Australian Government (assuming all currently use Legend). Its about time we played fire with fire... its doesnt seem the DIBP care about RMA's.
And if that doesnt work, we should band together with Canadian or NZ migration agents and divert all potential business visas to these countries........
Time to Take a Stand... enough talk...
Migration Alliance... schedule a meeting and invite all RMS to discuss this specific issue.
Ill be happy to pay all costs associated with hiring a venue. -
Monday, 01 December 2014
Canada and NZ does not accept cases only from registered agents if the applicant uses third party. It is time Australia too should adopt similar policy.
OMARA can certainly say " Australian registered Migration agents are trained to be knowledgeable and competent in dealing with the DIBP.
I do agree that Department officers are generally anti agents and we need to build bridges. -
Monday, 01 December 2014
How about the immiaccount when an agent logs on to an incomplete application for the first time which asks whether you are an agent representing the applicant [i.e. education agent, travel agent]? No acknowledgement that RMAs exist, that Australian based education agents cannot actually lodge an application without being in breach of legislation and travel agents can only do so on a very limited range of visas seems to reinforce the fact that we are "persona non grata". DIBP case officers regularly bypass agents in contacting applicants directly and then run down our role as "unnecessary". I always tell my clients to refuse to correspond with any person claiming to be from DIBP and to refer that person to contact me, their agent, who will refer any questions to the client and answer within any proscribed timeframe. I also take umbrage to case officers rigid penchant for citing the 28 day time frame for any further evidence when, under Reg2.15 (2), PIC [amongst other evidence] is excluded from any time limit.
-
Monday, 01 December 2014
I agree that the DIBP does not understand that good RMAs actually do their work for them. OMARA appears very much part of the DIBP and I wonder where the INQUIRY went into them. BUT the words used in the Annual Report are all factually correct and for such a report this is all that could and should be said. I see nothing wrong with the tone and the initial argument in this blog about this sounds petty - sorry.
An Annual Report is not a marketing exercise so I suggest leave this one alone. Criticizing this criticizing the wrong thing. Yet there is a good argument about DIBP bias based on other material from the DIBP. -
Monday, 01 December 2014
I am at a loss why the OMARA pursues confrontational approach with the Profession . Surely money can be saved and better outcomes achieved with co operation . The Big Brother /Gestapo approach in dealing with issues only keeps Professional Standards in work and makes the law firm DLA Piper very rich feeding on this conflict !
The Minister really needs to reform the OMARA . I am very disappointed CEO Ingram who showed so much promise and initiative has turned into a clone of the previous CEO Wood . Ingram is responsible for the ongoing failures and bad relationship with the profession as he has failed to deal with the mess left by successive incompetent CEO's -
Monday, 01 December 2014
The emphasis should be on the huge amount of compliance Migration Agents do in order to remain registered. And how this is lifting the standards and level of knowledge of the whole legal migration industry.
The barriers for unregistered agents especially those overseas should be lifted in order to make it unprofitable for them to survive. After who had heard of unqualified lawyers or judges? Our professionalism should be emphasised and lauded by MARA and the DIBP. -
Monday, 01 December 2014
I do not see this statement as negative comment.
In fact it emphasizes that Registered Migration agent has been "checked"and "approved" by OMARA and also manages the complaints about their conduct.
I am not sure why you see it in negative connotation when it is clearly positive comment that states the agents are approved by the authority and will handle your case professionally.
Maybe it's me that see it that way, I'm "glass is half full" type of person. -
Monday, 01 December 2014
So the Authority decides who can register as a migration agent, does it! What tosh. The Authority may do no more than what it is empowered to do by law. The Authority is not a law unto itself but is confined to the powers that Parliament conferred upon it.
-
Monday, 01 December 2014
Hear Hear! I will certainly be looking at joining the migration alliance having been the subject of a vexatious complaint by a client who went to OMARA who in turn really handled this very poorly.
-
Monday, 01 December 2014
Why are so many posts about RMAs and the department done anonymously?
-
Tuesday, 02 December 2014
The authority doesn't decide who can register as an agent. Law does. Agents have been sanctioned by Omara and appealed. Courts and judges and law decides. Omara needs to stop their false messaging and power tripping. They act like cops with their peers. No wonder there's so much disharmony. Bilijana could you deal with the words used in the Omara article? I think the issue is that Dibp have never advocated for RMAs and never had a positive word to say about the profession.
Ray -
Saturday, 06 December 2014
WARNING
The OMARA is an essentially useless office that is part of the Department of Immigration and Border Protection and I have told them so repeatedly. With the stroke of a pen the minister can terminate them all as easily as s/he can terminate a perfectly valid visa application. The OMARA can do nothing about unregistered agents overseas or parliamentarians or DIBP officers who give, often incorrect, migration advice in Australia, or education agents who give catastrophically incorrect migration advice under the table. About all the OMARA can do, having received a complaint, is haul a registered migration agent over the coals - after the event. They cannot order repayment of money lost. They can do nothing when the minister (The Terminator) changes the rules in the middle of the game or one of his delegates or ‘designated authorities’ bungles your case. By the way, the ‘average fee’ misinformation published by the OMARA is just that.
The warning above appears on all my service agreements and has been sent to the minioster and various others. -
Saturday, 06 December 2014
Wesley. With your ranting tone I cannot see us being taken seriously when the Minister looks at changes to Mara. There is so much wrong with what and how you say it. If we are to get the big changes we need lets show we are professional and reasonable. Omara needs an independent Board to make decisions with the staff following instructions. The regulator of Tax Agents has a Board that makes the final decisions to cancel, suspend, register etc. the Board has members appointed by the prof bodies, the Minister, the equiv of the DIBP and the public. All very senior and experienced and independant. It means the bureacrats do not make the decisions.
-
Tuesday, 02 December 2014
Liana,
Let me raise a potential sore point.
Migration Alliance (MA) does not charge membership fees. MIA does (and really outrageous ones at that).
MIA has argued that MA is little more than a collection of sore-losing bloggers that do not represent the majority of RMAs.
Do you think we might survive a $99 (inclusive of GST) a year membership fee? It might help define our organization as a genuine spokesperson of the profession. I think that we are still seen as a projection of Chris's anger (an anger well justified) and a rallying point for those unhappy with MARA but without the gumption to lay out a few dollars to show our genuine desire to reform the profession and its relationship with MARA.
If you choose not to print this, I understand. -
Tuesday, 02 December 2014
Hi Liana,
I saw the Facebook post and I thought it was absolutely misguiding.
None of the public knows how there is an increase in DIBP Case Officers just refusing applications for absurd reasons.
The DIBP only filters the public's point of view about RMA's with absolute negativity.
As professional RMA's, we need to clean up the s%#t that is caused by the 'unregistered loons' out there.
The unregistered loons are the ones that have made a bad name to us professional RMA's and to top it off, the DIBP has labelled the professional RMA's as a 'not so professional body'.
I mean, have you read what the public's comments were on the Facebook post??
I hope that one day this vicious cycle will end and that the professional RMA's can finally have some peace and confidence in going about their professional daily work without having any 'watch-dogs' like the DIBP behind our backs!!! -
Tuesday, 02 December 2014
Dear Liana,
Have you seen the public's comments about RMA's on the Facebook post??
The RMA's have no voice to speak out to the public about how the DIBP is treating professional RMA's.
I wonder how the public must know on the increase of DIBP Case Officers refusing applications in absurd reasons. I wonder if the public knows that the DIBP Case Officers are 'trained' for their positions.
The public doesn't know much about how professional the RMA's are and the public only seek out mainly the 'unregistered agents' that the government should have cleaned out long ago.
The DIBP also sends a messages to the public, on their website, 'if you need to use an agent', and 'you don't need an agent'.
If that's the case I wish the public (who are full of negativity about RMA's) 'good luck' in lodging any visa application. -
Sunday, 07 December 2014
If OMARA were doing its job effectively it would have cause to showcase the reliability, integrity and professionalism of migration agents as a demonstration of its own success. If this is not happening, then something is amiss.
If OMARA detects wrongful conduct by migration agents it has (or ought to have) the resources to take action under its statutory charter to uphold the integrity of the Profession. It is unedifying for a Federal Agency to be narky and petty towards one of its major stakeholders. If lack of resources prevents OMARA from performing its charter (or is otherwise prevented from doing so) its frustrated senior officials might consider resigning. Whether resources is the problem or not, the Honorable Minister might demonstrate his signature toughness by sorting out OMARA. -
Monday, 08 December 2014
Excellent comment Letitia ( December 1 ) .....horrendously expensive registration fees , seriously incompetent staff , arrogance , nastiness and illegal conduct . Very sad successive Ministers ( including the current Minister ) have allowed CEO's to continue the mismanagement of the OMARA . No professional bodies in Australia are as incompetent as the OMARA . Any criticism meets with denials , cover ups and persecution of the complainant. Very sad indeed.........
-
Monday, 08 December 2014
Brilliant comment Ian B ( Dec 6 )
yes an independent Board needs to inject some sanity and accountability to the OMARA . There is something seriously wrong with the current OMARA .....
Immigration blog
Hi all
The relationship between RMAs, DIBP & OMARA, has and will forever be toxic, as Liana has hit the nail on the head when referring to the difficulties for case officers to refuse applications because of RMAs vigilance and ready to lawfully fight for our clients. It is our obligations to do so as per the Code of Conduct, regulated by none-other-than OMARA! and who else? The DIBP! Talk about "conflict of interests"! There has never been any positive advertisements for RMAs from either OMARA or DIBP and this will never change evidently from their websites. They have only emphasized to our prospective clients how to either find information and forms from DIBP or how to lodge a complaint from OMARA (example the IRMAP - the sue the agents leaflet).
Yes and those "unregistered crooks"... I mean unregistered agents! Many apologies to those offended by my ignorance of better terminology". The DIBP and OMARA in their own words "regulates, monitors and caution" if necessary the good, hard working and resilient RMAs and yet enthusiastically ignores those crooks who practice illegally and rort the very system the OMARA and DIBP stringently implement for RMAs. RMAs have to complete CPDs, hold indemnity insurance, subscribe to a professional library and pay the repeat registration fees in order to stay registered and earn our right to act for our clients professionally, diligently and with honesty, otherwise we face legal reprimands by the very authority that we have registered with - OMARA. We might as well join the crooks, as there seems to be no regulations, monitoring or cautions thus far for them!!
In my naive personal opinion, the DIBP and OMARA are to blame and should be held responsible for the exploitation of the regulatory instruments implemented for RMAs, by "unregistered agents". I mean, DIBP and OMARA even gave them a fancy if not a proper tittle.
Back on point about the URMAs (for short...), DIBP have created this loop-hole by having form 956A - Appointment or withdrawal of an Authorised Recipient. What is the purpose of that form, if not to provide the very pathway for URMAs to bypass the regulatory system and practice illegally.... the same goes for form 956 @ question 12 relating to an exempt person. There should not be an exempt person other than a government body or registered authority (ie. parliamentary member). Where do you draw the line for "Authorised Recipients" with respect to whether they are or are not giving immigration assistance and advise to the sponsor and applicant. How would or rather HOW COULD the OMARA and DIBP regulate and monitor their conducts. They should get rid of form 956A and the exempt person in from 956 in order for RMAs as a profession a clear path to representing our clients as it is our duties and obligations to them.
Clients should only be represented by RMAs or themselves, no one else should have this right! RMAs as a professional should have the same practice as that of our friends in the legal profession.
I hope that OMARA and DIBP can see this very ignorant view of mine as theirs in my opinion are very cloudy. And to all the RMAs, I hope you share my view and unite to influence the change from the regulatory bodies to life the image, standards and advancement of our profession, as we are entitled and have earned our right!
Respectfully
Anonymous RMA of 15 years