TOEFL-PBT no longer accepted as evidence of English Student Visa Applicants

The ‘Test of English as a Foreign Language Paper-Based test’ (TOEFL-PBT) previously accepted by the Department of Home Affairs (the Department) for Subclass 500 (Student) visa applications, for establishing an applicant’s English language proficiency has been removed by a legislative instrument released on 5 June 2018. 

On 14 October 2017, the TOEFL-PBT was revised by an external agency and the TOEFL-PBT no longer includes a measurement of speaking. Testing of English language speaking skills is a requirement for assessment of an applicant to establish they have the required English language proficiency. The Testing of English language speaking skills is designed to ensure applicants can communicate effectively in face–to–face situations within Australia.  As a result of the change to the TOEFL-PBT, the instrument IMMI 18/015 does not specify TOEFL-PBT as an accepted English language test due to its inability to measure the English language speaking skills of an applicant.  Therefore, the purpose of the revised instrument is to remove the TOEFL-PBT as one of the specified tests for establishing an applicant’s English language proficiency accepted by the Department for Subclass 500 (Student) visa applications. 

We have just read the Law Council of Australia submissions to the Joint Standing Committee on Migration. *

Law-Council-Submission.pdf

Now we understand why our inboxes are full of emails from RMAs who are calling this a 'power grab' and are very critical of the motivations underpinning this submission.

We think it is fair to say that whilst the Law Council of Australia's (LCA) submissions are pitched towards higher standards and the exclusion of RMAs from the representing applicants for review at the AAT, what surprises us is that apart from the general statements and concerns there is simply no real evidence to support the recommendations made by the Council.

We for one do not buy into general statements about competence or incompetence or the conduct of RMAs concerning their clients.

The Law Council of Australia has recently published (on 11 May 2018) a set of submissions to the Australian Parliament’s Joint Standing Committee on Migration regarding the efficacy of current regulation of Australian migration agents.

These submissions from the Law Council will be of interest to lawyers practising in the field of migration law as well as to Registered Migration Agents, as it is possible that these submissions may result in or influence future changes to the regulatory regime governing the practice of RMAs.

The submissions from the Law Council can be accessed by clicking on this link, while submissions from other interested persons can be accessed here.

MIA MEMBERSHIP RENEWALS………..A GOOD DEAL?

MIA’s CPD “REWARD” TO MIA MEMBERS FOR PAYING THE MEMBERSHIP RENEWAL FEE

I understand the MIA is offering incentives for their existing membership to renew their membership. That offer, sent to MIA members via email at 3pm on 4 June 2018 looks like this:

“MIA Membership Renewals

How unusual is it for a judge of the Federal Circuit Court to call for reform of the migration legislation?

Or to include in the reasons for decision criticism of the inflexibility of the provisions which prevent the Tribunal from extending the deadline for filing an application for merits review of a refusal of a visa application, or other decision of the Department?

Would you agree that it would be safe to say “very”? Or even “very very!!!”?