| || |
If you are appologising for me mate you dont have to.
Can understand why people do it but some just get the sponsorship as a quick route and have no intention of ever going to that state.
No you have no legal obligation to stay in that state FACT.
But i think they should make you so it stops people taking someones sponsorship with no intention of staying in that state.
Just my opinion and no one needs to appologise for me for it.
Living In Adelaide Since Jan 2012 And Loving It
The answer is yes, he can. There is no Condition on a 176 visa that prevents the person from moving to another State within the 2 years. No such visa Condition even exists.
The DIAC website is misleading about this, in my opinion. Policy says that if a State has been kind enough to Sponsor you then you should at least make a reasonable effort to stay in the Sponsoring State for a couple of years. However, Policy is not Law and DIAC should not pretend that it is.
The actual legal position comes down to the (written) Aussie Constitution. Apparently the Constitition says that an Australian can live anywhere he likes in Australia and can do whatever he likes by way of a job, as long as whatever he does is legal. A Permanent Resident counts as an Australian for this purpose.
The only way to change the Law about this would be to alter the Constitution first, which cannot be done without an Australia-wide Referendum of all its Citizens. That is not going to happen over something as trivial as this, so in practice 176 holders swap around between States until they are able to settle somewhere they like.
I suspect that the swapping probably happens in both directions - ie one 176 holder leaves SA but another one turns up from WA or similar. It probably evens itself out in the end.
Your friend does not need permission from anyone. He merely needs to pack his bags and set off if that is what he wants to do!
You are correct about the legal position.
I also agree with you that I think many a wannabe migrant (and many a Registered Migration Agent advising them) probably does shop around just to find the State which will sponsor the migrant and make it easier to get the visa.
However, the Sponsoring State is not some sort of feeble minded stooge in the whole game. The States all have bigger, sharper teeth than might be apparent.
Let us say that Bloggs actually wants to migrate to Melbourne but his occupation is being Sponsored by SA, under their own SMP. Bloggs has to submit a State sponsorship application to Immigration SA. The people who will consider his application for SA all live in Adelaide, since that is where the Immigration SA office is.
If Bloggs is not serious about moving to SA, the chances are high that he will not research the place properly - which fact will stick out like a sore thumb when he applies for the State sponsorship. The Immigration SA people all know what is reasonable in Adelaide and what isn't - because they live in Adelaide themselves. If they don't think that Bloggs is serious about moving to Adelaide, they can refuse to grant the State sponsorship and Immigration SA are tougher about doing this than the State Immi people in most other States. There is no right of appeal against a decision to refuse State sponsorship, so Bloggs risks finding himself stuck.
I've come across instances of people saying that their Registered Migration Agent has told them that they only have a "moral" obligation to the Sponsoring State.
The Law doesn't know anything about Morality - the Law leaves Moral Questions to the Church to sort out. It isn't a "moral" obligation of any description. It is a straightforward difference between the wording of the strict Law and Policy's wishes. Some of the RMAs merely demonstrate how woeful their own "training" is, I sometimes feel!
Now the critics who want to moan about the "morality" of the whole thing can moan at me instead of at you, mate!
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 20-06-2011 at 11:49 AM.
I suspect you always knew the correct answer but your "opinion" meant that you gave mis-leading advice by stating categorically "NO you can't" in your intial reply to the OPs question??
I have state sponsorship as part of the quota for 2010-2011, I will not emigrate in this period so should I now give up this sponsorship so someone esle can use it in this financial year?
Shame on you for giving mis-leading information in the first instance.
DEFINITELY NOT! Hang on to your SS as if it were your life, my friend! The Aussie Government know perfectly well that their own visa processing takes ages and then the visa holder often takes ages to move to Oz permanently as well. This is all built in to the figures for the number of visas granted each year, so there is no need for you to worry about it.I have state sponsorship as part of the quota for 2010-2011, I will not emigrate in this period so should I now give up this sponsorship so someone esle can use it in this financial year?
That said, have you made your visa application yet? If not, are you aware that the Points Test is going to change on 1st July 2011 and any GSM visa application submitted on or after that date will have to show that the visa applicant meets the new Points total?
If this is going to cause a problem for you, slap the visa application in PRIOR to 30th June. Don't leave it till the last minute because there were furious quarrels last year.
DIAC gave people to understand that they could make their visa application at any time up till AEST 23:59 on May 7th 2010. Their IT people then closed the electronic visa application system - the on-line thing - at 23:00 AEST, which caused endless hassle for both visa applicants in person and their Registered Migration Agents.
DIAC refused to budge about when the cut-off time actually was. It was 59 minutes earlier than they had claimed but they simply shrugged off all complaints about their misleading advice. Apparently "midnight" does not necessarily mean "midnight" in Oz. It actually means, "whatever time the IT people choose to take the system off-line so that they can modify it, ready for the next day."
I was disgusted by DIAC's unhelpful attitude but apparently they took legal advice about the whole thing. So common-sense now is not to leave it to the last minute, my friend!
There is one other thing. A State can grant SS and theoretically, it will still be valid 3 years later. However that is all very fluid. The States reckon that it is reasonable to apply for the visa within 6 months of the SS being granted. If that has not happened or is not going to happen, the sponsoring State expects you to contact them to explain why not? They then decide whether or not to keep your SS going for you.
You can't do anything much if they change their minds about Sponsoring you. All that the applicant can do is to wheedle, plead with the State and hope for the best.
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 20-06-2011 at 12:31 PM.
Gollywobbler, once again thank you for such informative, insightful replies to the OP and other questions. Much appreciated.
Hopefully this has helped those with questions asked in this thread :)
Donning my mod hat now :) Would like to see this thread stay topical and not go off debating the morals of state sponsorship and staying or going elsewhere (that wasn't what the OP was asking ;) ). I think that is a thread better off on its own and not hijacking this one, so if you really want to discuss it, consider doing that. People obviously have strong feelings on the matter but lets be sensible in this thread.
*removes mod hat*
Thanks for your answers. I have some questions:
(1)Do you know any successful cases?
(2)Where to see the "policy" you noted in the DIAC's website? Moving to other state in 2 yrs apparently violate the policy, so what consequence does this violence result in?
(3)Most importantly, what the role does the Immigration SA play during application? (4)Any adverse impact (like honesty record)?
(5)Why do you say the commitment of living in SA for at least 2 yrs is a moral rather than a legal obligation?
2. Read the Legislation and the Constitution - it only comes to about 5,000 pages of EXTREMELY difficult wording, so it shouldn't take that long...... Otherwise, get real, my friend! If you doubt me, instruct a competent Registered Migration Agent and ask him/her, I wold suggest?
3. You asked about a situation where the visa had already been granted? In that situation, Immigration SA would have no further involvement.
5. It is not a "moral" issue. Where do we leave this "moral" red-herring alone? Policy says that one should do ABC. The Law says that there is no legal need to bother about that.
If you are stuck, I STRONGLY recommend that you should consult a competent Registered Migration Agent.
Last edited by Gollywobbler; 20-06-2011 at 06:38 PM.