Login / Join
Australian Immigration Daily News
Breaking Australian immigration news brought to you by Migration Alliance and associated bloggers. Please email help@migrationalliance.com.au
- Font size: Larger Smaller
- Hits: 4370
- 5 Comments
45 is far from retirement age for most.
It is now a Schedule 1 requirement that the applicant must not have turned 45 at the time of invitation to apply for the visa.
It seems that the Treasury and DIBP may not be singing from the same hymn sheet. A person of 45 years of age is a long way from retirement age, and will contribute potentially another 25 years of skilled labour to the Australian economy (and to their superannuation funds).
The visa system does not exist in isolation; it sits in a system of markets such as the local labour market, and increased longevity. Australia’s Future Tax Review discussed an increase in the preservation age for superannuation to 67 years to be phased in from 2024. For immigrants, there could be a greater need to work for longer to make up for a potential shortfall in retirement income through Australian superannuation.
The previous 189 points system provided 0 points for the age group 45–49 years, with the opportunity to make these points up in other areas. I suggest that removing this age group is overly prescriptive, and out of touch with the broader market. There is no need to interfere so heavily in a competitive market.
I think there are 3 important factors involved
1. Immigration is an important source of growth of the working-age population (source: The Treasury: Intergenerational Report 2015: Pg. 10)
2. Australia is above the OECD average in the workforce participation of mature aged workers (Source: HILDA)
3. An aging population is a potential strain on GDP growth, if it leads to a decline in workforce participation and greater consumption of welfare.
This arbitrary and ill-conceived change means that there are skilled people waiting for an invitation that will never come. This change has been made without taking into consideration the potential value of these waiting applicants, and their family units to the Australian economy. And again there has been no transparent consultation process, which is not representative of good governance.
I would love to hear what people think.
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Comments
-
Friday, 26 May 2017
I think it is the principle. Was it really worth the time and effort to reform legislation for a pointless outcome? I think it is representative of a core mindset. And what next? Maybe the age will change for the 190 or 489 next. There should have been clear consultation on the impact this could have. Surely there are bits of legislation and policy that are worth the effort of a reform agenda.
-
Thursday, 01 June 2017Hi,
Does this apply to the New Pathway for NZ Citizens as well ? I am confused, I thought that this new pathway for NZ Citizens had no age restriction, and the last I heard indicated that skilled migrants had been capped at 50. This change if it applies to the special 189 Visa for NZ citizens is extremely disappointing. Can you please confirm ? -
Thursday, 06 July 2017
Hi,
I have submitted my EOI on 29-Apr and I am turning 44 towards the end of July. Do you think I have a chance to get an invite. If yes, what are the job opportunities for Software Engineer profession.
Thanks Shakeel -
Wednesday, 09 January 2019
Im 45 years old last December 2018. I am a Carpenter on a working visa since 2012. I have my PTE English test result of 50+ points in each band. I have skills assessment, but cant get permanent residency because of my age. 489 visa state sponsorship allows only 44 years of age.
Immigration blog
I am trying to understand how much difference this would really make to 189 visa applicants. To reach 60 points is probably quite difficult anyway if one is over 45 so not sure if this has such an impact. If this age reduction was applied to the 190 or 489 visa then I can imagine it would have more of an impact on those applicants