Can 176 visa with SA SS move to another state in the first 2 yrs due to job?

[Gollywobbler]

Hi All

 

I just want to make a few things clear so that no-one is in any doubt.

 

The visa system is based upon trust. The Aussie Federal Government and the State Governments always treat every visa applicant with the utmost respect and good faith. They are entitled to expect the same in return, though they are old enough and ugly enough to realise that this does not always happen!

 

Let us say that Bloggs obtains State Sponsorship from SA, on the strength of which he then applies for a sc 176 visa. BEFORE the visa is granted, Bloggs decides that actually, he has no intention of moving to SA.

 

In this situation, there is a positive duty of disclosure. That is, technically Bloggs has a legal duty to inform the Minister for Immigration that he does not intend to move to SA after all. He makes this disclosure via informing his DIAC Case Officer. In effect, Bloggs is rejecting SA's offer of State sponsorship, in which case his application for a visa ought to be refused.

 

Most migration agents are anxious to protect their clients from getting into the same legal problems as Bloggs faces, so they tell their clients that if they get SS from SA then they must move to SA and make all reasonable efforts to live in SA for a couple of years. The migration agent is legally obliged to be truthful towards DIAC, so the last thing the agent wants is a client who has changed his mind about this!

 

AFTER the visa has been granted and validated, DIAC have no further legal involvement with Blogg's visa. I think the "better" view of a fairly grey area of the Law is that as long as Bloggs has validated his visa, there is no problem if he changes his mind. S124 (I think it is) of the Migration Act requires Bloggs to tell the Minister about any material changes of circumstance between the time when the visa is granted and Bloggs validates it, so I think that to be on the legal safe side, it is safer if Bloggs does not change his mind about moving to SA before he has validated the visa. A decision not to move to the sponsoring State is arguably a material change of circumstance, I reckon.

 

This piece of legal purity is often observed in the breach! Bloggs is not going to risk having the Minister trying to cancel his 176 visa, so whatever Bloggs' real intentions might be, he tends not to say anything!

 

In the letter that Immigration SA sent to Ozdream's friend, Immigration SA make their own position clear. They can't prevent Ozdream's friend from moving to another State, as they confirm, but they make it clear that they are not overjoyed about the idea! I don't blame them. SA is under-populated, which means that SA does not receive as much in tax as, say, Victoria next door.

 

From SA's point of view, it is a bit of a kick in the teeth for them to have invited Bloggs - in the utmost good faith - to go and share SA with them but then Bloggs announces that he'd prefer to live in one of the other States. They can't push Bloggs' teeth down his throat for him - that would be a violent assault, which is illegal in Oz - but one can understand the State Government's exasperation with Bloggs all the same!

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest ozdream]

For what it is worth, though, why are you having a nervous breakdown about this for the sake of one of your friends?! If he is worried about something, why doesn't he consult a Registered Migration Agent? That would be by far the best option instead of everybody getting involved in heated discussions about it on an Internet forum.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Hi, thans for your details.

 

My friend is busy in looking for a job in his trade and no more time in posting.

So I was told to help him to make this question clearly:cute:

I will suggest him to consult a Registered Migration Agent.

[Guest ozdream]

Hi All

 

I just want to make a few things clear so that no-one is in any doubt.

 

The visa system is based upon trust. The Aussie Federal Government and the State Governments always treat every visa applicant with the utmost respect and good faith. They are entitled to expect the same in return, though they are old enough and ugly enough to realise that this does not always happen!

 

Let us say that Bloggs obtains State Sponsorship from SA, on the strength of which he then applies for a sc 176 visa. BEFORE the visa is granted, Bloggs decides that actually, he has no intention of moving to SA.

 

In this situation, there is a positive duty of disclosure. That is, technically Bloggs has a legal duty to inform the Minister for Immigration that he does not intend to move to SA after all. He makes this disclosure via informing his DIAC Case Officer. In effect, Bloggs is rejecting SA's offer of State sponsorship, in which case his application for a visa ought to be refused.

 

Most migration agents are anxious to protect their clients from getting into the same legal problems as Bloggs faces, so they tell their clients that if they get SS from SA then they must move to SA and make all reasonable efforts to live in SA for a couple of years. The migration agent is legally obliged to be truthful towards DIAC, so the last thing the agent wants is a client who has changed his mind about this!

 

AFTER the visa has been granted and validated, DIAC have no further legal involvement with Blogg's visa. I think the "better" view of a fairly grey area of the Law is that as long as Bloggs has validated his visa, there is no problem if he changes his mind. S124 (I think it is) of the Migration Act requires Bloggs to tell the Minister about any material changes of circumstance between the time when the visa is granted and Bloggs validates it, so I think that to be on the legal safe side, it is safer if Bloggs does not change his mind about moving to SA before he has validated the visa. A decision not to move to the sponsoring State is arguably a material change of circumstance, I reckon.

 

This piece of legal purity is often observed in the breach! Bloggs is not going to risk having the Minister trying to cancel his 176 visa, so whatever Bloggs' real intentions might be, he tends not to say anything!

 

In the letter that Immigration SA sent to Ozdream's friend, Immigration SA make their own position clear. They can't prevent Ozdream's friend from moving to another State, as they confirm, but they make it clear that they are not overjoyed about the idea! I don't blame them. SA is under-populated, which means that SA does not receive as much in tax as, say, Victoria next door.

 

From SA's point of view, it is a bit of a kick in the teeth for them to have invited Bloggs - in the utmost good faith - to go and share SA with them but then Bloggs announces that he'd prefer to live in one of the other States. They can't push Bloggs' teeth down his throat for him - that would be a violent assault, which is illegal in Oz - but one can understand the State Government's exasperation with Bloggs all the same!

 

Cheers

 

Gill

 

Very Clear! You are so famillar to the policy.

[Guest JLee68]

 

 

AFTER the visa has been granted and validated, DIAC have no further legal involvement with Blogg's visa. I think the "better" view of a fairly grey area of the Law is that as long as Bloggs has validated his visa, there is no problem if he changes his mind. S124 (I think it is) of the Migration Act requires Bloggs to tell the Minister about any material changes of circumstance between the time when the visa is granted and Bloggs validates it, so I think that to be on the legal safe side, it is safer if Bloggs does not change his mind about moving to SA before he has validated the visa. A decision not to move to the sponsoring State is arguably a material change of circumstance, I reckon.

 

This piece of legal purity is often observed in the breach! Bloggs is not going to risk having the Minister trying to cancel his 176 visa, so whatever Bloggs' real intentions might be, he tends not to say anything!

 

 

Hi Gill,

 

Thank you for your knowledgeable posts and the valuable information you have provided. I have one question in relation to the above. What would happen if someone with NSW sponsorship got their visa, but before validating it was offered a fantastic job opportunity in SA, after not having much luck trying to find a job in NSW with the same benefits in relation to cost of living etc? The thought of turning up in Oz and all our savings dwindling before our eyes scares me something chronic hence why I would ideally like a job to go to. If I accepted the job, flew to Adelaide and had our belongings shipped there too would we then have problems? Would we have to head to Sydney first no matter what?

 

Thanks in advance for any insight you can give.

 

Jacob

[traygo]

Hi, traygo.

 

Could you tell me your visa company? Maybe I will contact with them.

 

You could contact any visa company they should tell you the same thing as they should all sing (as the saying goes) from the same hymn book

Mention your concern, then try another company.

[Gollywobbler]

Hi Gill,

 

Thank you for your knowledgeable posts and the valuable information you have provided. I have one question in relation to the above. What would happen if someone with NSW sponsorship got their visa, but before validating it was offered a fantastic job opportunity in SA, after not having much luck trying to find a job in NSW with the same benefits in relation to cost of living etc? The thought of turning up in Oz and all our savings dwindling before our eyes scares me something chronic hence why I would ideally like a job to go to. If I accepted the job, flew to Adelaide and had our belongings shipped there too would we then have problems? Would we have to head to Sydney first no matter what?

 

Thanks in advance for any insight you can give.

 

Jacob

 

Hi Jacob

 

You can enter Oz via ANY airport and your goods can arrive via ANY sea-port. There is no obligation to go anywhere near Sydney if you don't want to.

 

I don't think you really want to agonise to the Minister, do you? Most people in your situation would simply accept the job in Adelaide, fly to Adelaide, get the goods shipped into Adelaide and get on with their lives! There are times when people simply keep their traps shut - it saves an awful lot of paperwork, you know! I doubt whether DIAC would try to cancel a sc 176 visa in your situation, even when they are told about it. There has never been a reported case in which DIAC have cancelled a sc 176 visa because of this. I think they probably think that you have to draw a line in the sand somewhere once the visa has already been granted. The immigrant will be boosting the Aussie exonomy somewhere, so does the Government really care about where?

 

S124 (?? it is Section One Hundred and Something, anyway) really only comes into its own when there has been a medical calamity of some sort. DIAC tend to become nosy if somebody is trying to validate a visa by making their Initial Entry to Oz on a stretcher, and sometimes the medical calamity makes it impossible to make the Initial Entry by the due date. In that situation, there is no option but to tell DIAC about the medical calamity, obviously.

 

Also, in another case that I read about, the visa holder had broken his shoulder badly but he had also got married between the grant of the visa and his Initial Entry. There is a Visa Condition that says the visa holder must not marry before making the Initial Entry - that Condition was slapped onto my 84 year old widowed mother when her Contributory Parent Visa was granted in 2006. She's in a wheelchair, and I had a delicious image of Mum trundling into the old folks home near me in the UK, kidnapping some decrepit old codger from there, marrying him with the aid of a shotgun and then bundling him onto the same flight out to Oz as herself! Mum's generation don't remarry on the whole, when a very long marriage has ended in the death of the other spouse, so I really wondered what on earth DIAC were doing, slapping such a daft Condition on Mum's visa! The idea of Mum with a toyboy was inconceivable to anyone who knows her, and the CO knew how old she was. They'd seen Mum & Dad's Marriage Certificate and they'd also seen Dad's Death Certificate. Where was their sense of proportion, I wondered?!

 

When I read the Tribunal report about the first case, my impression was that the Medical Officer of the Commonwealth was not worried about the shoulder injury, even though it had not been disclosed, but his other colleagues in DIAC seemed to have been mighty p*ssed off about the chap's marriage. Marriages of convenience are illegal in Australia, so DIAC expect to have a proper chew of the legal cud if a visa applicant has a Partner stashed away and they positively spit their dummy if the visa holder has allegedly suddenly had a whirlwind romance, especially when he was a High Risk visa applicant in the first place! That much seemed clear.

 

Is yours a sc 176 visa or a 475, please? There are a couple of extra steps when the visa is a 475 but if you have a 176 then we needn't worry about that.

 

Does this help?

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Mac&Molly]

Hi Gill, Thank you for your knowledgeable posts and the valuable information you have provided. I have one question in relation to the above. What would happen if someone with NSW sponsorship got their visa, but before validating it was offered a fantastic job opportunity in SA, after not having much luck trying to find a job in NSW with the same benefits in relation to cost of living etc? The thought of turning up in Oz and all our savings dwindling before our eyes scares me something chronic hence why I would ideally like a job to go to. If I accepted the job, flew to Adelaide and had our belongings shipped there too would we then have problems? Would we have to head to Sydney first no matter what?Thanks in advance for any insight you can give.Jacob

Hi Jacob, I'm in exactly the same position as you exept with different states. We have saved for three years for this move and have enough money to live without working for a year easily in SA however, if I take a job I have been offered in QLD then this money could go to buying a house. I haven't managed to gain a job offer from SAabd believe me I have tried! We still want to end up in SA but the smart/financially sound decision would be go to QLD first and relocate to SA after a few years. This situation really worries me though as it will be "in breach" of the policy and point of state sponsorship. I know everyone says it won't affect citizenship application further down the road but can't help but worry! I hate breaking this "moral" obligation but what are we meant to do. We are trying to look after our family after all! Have you had any further thoughts on the situation? Mac

[Guest Cadas]

Having contributed to this thread earlier and said I would happily follow a job irrespective of my SS visa, well that's what ended up happening.

 

Couldn't find a job in adelaide but had an offer within 48hrs in Sydney. I did actually turn it down in the hope that something would come up in SA. But nothing did and Sydney came back a couple o weeks later with a better offer so I took it.

 

Follow up to this is that I needed a sticker in my passport, essential in nsw. So I went to immigration and had long chat with very helpful people there. Upshot is they don't give a damn about changing states, we updated my visa details to be NSW resident and we discussed sponsorship issue.

 

As far as they were concerned they were happy I'd found a job and wished me luck.

[ejaytee]

Having contributed to this thread earlier and said I would happily follow a job irrespective of my SS visa, well that's what ended up happening.

 

Couldn't find a job in adelaide but had an offer within 48hrs in Sydney. I did actually turn it down in the hope that something would come up in SA. But nothing did and Sydney came back a couple o weeks later with a better offer so I took it.

 

Follow up to this is that I needed a sticker in my passport, essential in nsw. So I went to immigration and had long chat with very helpful people there. Upshot is they don't give a damn about changing states, we updated my visa details to be NSW resident and we discussed sponsorship issue.

 

As far as they were concerned they were happy I'd found a job and wished me luck.

 

 

Thank you for this information, and thanks to Gollywobbler for the great advice. I am also finding myself in a similar situation..hoping to go out to Adelaide in the next few months, but having absolutely no joy with getting a job at all. As the main applicant, and not having vast sums of money behind us, it is ESSENTIAL that I get a job before we go.

 

Have applied for a few, and almost all have offered me work in other states. I have already turned down 2 jobs in other states, thinking I was 'legally' obliged to go to SA. Me and my husband love Adelaide, and have always said thats where we want to be, but if there's no work, what are we supposed to do??? We started the visa process 2 years ago, at which time there were loads of jobs to choose from in Adelaide, that has now clearly changed, and the SA Gov should recognise this.

 

There are dishonest folk out there that will get SS just to get a visa, but this thread clearly shows that there are a number of us out there who want to be in SA more than anything, but simply can't cos there's no bloomin jobs!!!

[Guest Anouk]

SA can encourage but cannot enforce.

Human Rights legislation allows movement.

Morally it may be an issue, but legally your friend can go.

[Guest Adelaide_bound]

Anouk, I think you'll find its nothing to do with Human Rights, and more to do with just the way they have worded the visa regulations.

[Gollywobbler]

SA can encourage but cannot enforce.

Human Rights legislation allows movement.

Morally it may be an issue, but legally your friend can go.

 

Hi Anouk

 

Technically, it is actually about the wording of and the intentions evinced in Australia's (written) Constitution, which dates back to about 1905, I believe.

 

You say: "Morally it may be an issue, but legally your friend can go." You are 100% correct about that.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Gollywobbler]

Anouk, I think you'll find its nothing to do with Human Rights, and more to do with just the way they have worded the visa regulations.

 

Or, rather, NOT worded the visa regulations because no legislation in Australia is allowed to override or contradict the terms of the Constitution. The Migration Regulations have nothing to say about the matter when a sc 176 or sc 886 visa is involved.

 

Nobody should worry about the technical legal details, though. I'm merely interested in the historical derivation of the whole thing because I happen to be a qualified lawyer and I'm quite interested in the academic law behind all this.

 

The fact is that Anouk's statement is 100% accurate and that is all that anybody except a Law student really needs to understand.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Adelaide_bound]

The fact is that Anouk's statement is 100% accurate and that is all that anybody except a Law student really needs to understand.

 

 

That's the thing, I would argue (from an educated point of view) that it is not correct, and the point being that this is something that is contributing to the downfall of the UK currently - the notion of 'Human Rights' has become something quoted whenever someone feels they cannot do something they want to, or have to do something they do not want to. In the UK we are covered by the European Court of Human Rights. Obviously Australia is not covered by the rulings of this court, but by the Federal Court I believe. The point being, we have been led to believe there is a great overseeing body, much like an intergalactic council telling humans what they can and can't do, which simply isn't the case and something which is a personal bug bear of mine.

 

Its the wording of 'human rights' that is the bone of contention for me - its one of those things that isn't a human rights issue, and to turn it into one makes it an overally complicated fight that does not need fighting - as you having pointed out in earlier posts (and has been backed up by personal experience of a couple of posters) it just isn't an issue, so why make it an issue, and give the possibility of giving them a reason to change the current situation so that there isn't a possibility of moving on a 176. I echo - it is not a human rights issue (they didn't have to give you the visa in the first place, all through the process that is made very clear indeed, as it should).

 

(And I may not be a qualified lawyer, but that doesn't mean I am not studied and learned).

[Guest Anouk]

Look, I'm not a serious forum poster and have no intention of getting into a big philosophical debate; however, I do know that Article 3 of the International Bill of Human Rights (which Australia recognises) proclaims the right of human beings to have freedom of movement and residence. I think the philosophy behind the Bill is well intentioned, but clearly also open to interpretation and, ultimately, 'abuse'. One has to remember that the Bill came after the 2nd World War, where there had been many abuses of basic human rights. I think it's sad that the concept of human rights has become so denigrated ... especially, when there's still so much abuse, suffering, poverty etc. in the world.

 

I repeat, morally I agree that someone holding a SS 176 visa should go to the state that gave them the sponsorship. However, if the chap mentioned above genuinely can't find work in the state he received SS from, then I don't see an issue with trying elsewhere.

 

That's all.

[Guest Chris.H]

I just google around and saw this post and see someone is also struggling between this 2 years term in SA and the desire to support their family better.

 

I took the State sponsorship from SA too as a IT professional. It troubles me for the fact that I could not get a offer to support my family. Though I have preserver enought financially , it is such a bad feeling that you are here as a outsider and in a jobless siuation. Luckily I have got the job offer from Sydney that sounds very promissing, what would you choose ? To live morally while suffer or work happily while guilty ?

 

 

 

Hi Jacob, I'm in exactly the same position as you exept with different states. We have saved for three years for this move and have enough money to live without working for a year easily in SA however, if I take a job I have been offered in QLD then this money could go to buying a house. I haven't managed to gain a job offer from SAabd believe me I have tried! We still want to end up in SA but the smart/financially sound decision would be go to QLD first and relocate to SA after a few years. This situation really worries me though as it will be "in breach" of the policy and point of state sponsorship. I know everyone says it won't affect citizenship application further down the road but can't help but worry! I hate breaking this "moral" obligation but what are we meant to do. We are trying to look after our family after all! Have you had any further thoughts on the situation? Mac

[Guest Chris.H]

Hi Cadas

 

Just wonder what do you mean you needed a sticker in your passport ? If you travel interstate, yo don't need a passport that state which state you're originally from ?

 

I am planning to write a leter to immigration SA to explain my situation too. Just want to sort things out before I make the move.

 

Cheers

 

Having contributed to this thread earlier and said I would happily follow a job irrespective of my SS visa, well that's what ended up happening.

 

Couldn't find a job in adelaide but had an offer within 48hrs in Sydney. I did actually turn it down in the hope that something would come up in SA. But nothing did and Sydney came back a couple o weeks later with a better offer so I took it.

 

Follow up to this is that I needed a sticker in my passport, essential in nsw. So I went to immigration and had long chat with very helpful people there. Upshot is they don't give a damn about changing states, we updated my visa details to be NSW resident and we discussed sponsorship issue.

 

As far as they were concerned they were happy I'd found a job and wished me luck.

[Guest Cadas]

No you misread my post.

 

In NSW you need a sticker to get a driving license, that's all. You do not need a sticker for any other reason.

 

Also, do NOT write to DIAC and tell them you are moving states. It is completely unnecessary. If you have a176 you can live wherever you want and don't have to tell anyone.

 

And to keep the moral brigade happy, you seem to have give SA a good go, but in the end, you need to support your family.

[Gollywobbler]

Hi Chris.H

 

Would it cheer you up if you had a meeting with Immigration SA in order to explain your dilemma to them? Last time I heard, a lady called Anne Johnson was the boss of Immigration SA and everyone seems to speak very highly of her. If you phoned Immigration SA, they would tell you the name of their Manager (ie the overall boss of Immigration SA.)

 

Alternatively, if you prefer, there is nothing to prevent you from moving to NSW without bothering to discuss the move with Immigration SA if you would prefer not to discuss it with the State immigration people in either of the two States. DIAC, which is a Federal Government department, has no relevance to the issues and is not conserned about what a sc 176 holder does or where s/he goes.

 

From what I've been reading over the last 3 years or so, the politicians in the current Labor Federal Government dislike the idea of a new immigrant moving to a particular State and then failing to use the skills that enabled him/her to be accepted for immigration to Oz in the first place. When Senator Chris Evans (Labor) was the Minister for Immigration, he used to complain about the taxi drivers around Melbourne Airport. He said that he had questioned several of the taxi drivers and had discovered that, so Evans said, many of them were highly skilled professionals who had had very good careers in their countries of origin. They had moved to Melbourne in order to join family members who already lived in Melbourne but the new immigrants had not been able to secure skilled positions in Melbourne so they were driving taxis instead, according to Evans. He thought this was "all wrong!"

 

Logic, therefore, suggests that Evans & Co would prefer to see you doing IT work in NSW than selling ice-creams on a beach in SA!

 

Please accept my very best wishes for your family's future in NSW.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest dwethe]

I validated my 176 visa lasy year and went back to the uk to sell house and business, moving to Adelaide in April 2013.

[Guest Chris.H]

Hi Cadas

 

thank you very much for the clarification. I really enjoy the living in Adelaide, and it's very a family- friendly city as I have 2 boys. But the job is much more important , isn't it ?

 

I actually wrote the letter to Sate govt. After I present them with all those 'job-seeking' records, they would appreciate my decision, but they could not provide a official consent which I totally understand. I suppose the officers in the govt of SA are very reasonable fellows. Again, I dislike the idea to abuse the state sponsorship. If you have a hard time on finding jobs, at least prove it before you make the decision.

officer in the govt of SA are very reasonable fellowes . Again , I dislike the idea to abuse the state sponsorship, you also need to show the effort that you have tried before moving to other states.

 

 

No you misread my post.

 

In NSW you need a sticker to get a driving license, that's all. You do not need a sticker for any other reason.

 

Also, do NOT write to DIAC and tell them you are moving states. It is completely unnecessary. If you have a176 you can live wherever you want and don't have to tell anyone.

 

And to keep the moral brigade happy, you seem to have give SA a good go, but in the end, you need to support your family.

[Guest Chris.H]

Thank you for your blessing , Gill

 

It might be very profitable to sell icecream near Glenelg in this season Sorry for my bad joke. I have met so many friedly people in adelaide. I suppose I should return the favor by at least explaining why I am going to other states . I guess it's very lucky for me to be able to find this forum for these very good advices.

 

Cheers

Chris

 

 

Hi Chris.H

 

Would it cheer you up if you had a meeting with Immigration SA in order to explain your dilemma to them? Last time I heard, a lady called Anne Johnson was the boss of Immigration SA and everyone seems to speak very highly of her. If you phoned Immigration SA, they would tell you the name of their Manager (ie the overall boss of Immigration SA.)

 

Alternatively, if you prefer, there is nothing to prevent you from moving to NSW without bothering to discuss the move with Immigration SA if you would prefer not to discuss it with the State immigration people in either of the two States. DIAC, which is a Federal Government department, has no relevance to the issues and is not conserned about what a sc 176 holder does or where s/he goes.

 

From what I've been reading over the last 3 years or so, the politicians in the current Labor Federal Government dislike the idea of a new immigrant moving to a particular State and then failing to use the skills that enabled him/her to be accepted for immigration to Oz in the first place. When Senator Chris Evans (Labor) was the Minister for Immigration, he used to complain about the taxi drivers around Melbourne Airport. He said that he had questioned several of the taxi drivers and had discovered that, so Evans said, many of them were highly skilled professionals who had had very good careers in their countries of origin. They had moved to Melbourne in order to join family members who already lived in Melbourne but the new immigrants had not been able to secure skilled positions in Melbourne so they were driving taxis instead, according to Evans. He thought this was "all wrong!"

 

Logic, therefore, suggests that Evans & Co would prefer to see you doing IT work in NSW than selling ice-creams on a beach in SA!

 

Please accept my very best wishes for your family's future in NSW.

 

Cheers

 

Gill

[Guest Cadas]

In a rather ironic twist to all of this.....

 

Having been unable to find work in Adelaide and taking a job in Sydney, I've just been promoted and give the job of South Australia director.....

 

And that means I have to relocate to Adelaide ......

 

It's a funny old life!

 

So I will be moving back with my family in April.

[minty]

There is no need to say anything it's a moral obligation only. In my opinion it should be changed to a requirement but that's just my opinion.

[Guest zidden]

The 176 visa is valid for 5 years if validated. A lot can happen in 5 years, your occupation that was on the skills list for that particular state many now be off it and vice versa to another state. Alternatively your occupation could have changed if you waited in the UK for a number of years after validating your visa.

 

So you either go to your sponsored state and struggle to find a position in your skills group, work in another sector and potentially lose your skills or move to another state that offers you a chance to utilise your skills.

 

At the end of the day 5 years is a long time - it's very hard to predict tomorrow never mind the duration that your visa is open for...

 

At the end of the day you are only shuffling the opportunities for others around as I am sure DIAC and each state monitor what occupations are in demand and needed for the future.

Edited March 13, 2013 by zidden