IMMIGRATION NEWS AILS logo small                
15th August 2012
Volume 223

 Subscribe To Our Newsletter

In This Issue
The EOI crawls before walking
Crisis in Sponsorship Updated
Want your EOI lodged for free?
Dear students, 


Welcome to IMMIGRATION NEWS and to our new subscribers. This free service is brought to you by Australian Immigration Law Services. You can subscribe by using the link on the right hand side or by visiting our web site. Please feel free to forward this email to any of your friends.

So HAL the computer running the EOI (Expression of Interest) is just learning how to walk it seems. Read the details of it slow progress.


The issue of sponsorship crisis remains unsolved and DIAC dodges the hard questions, for now.

The EOI crawls before walking 

Watched over by its DAIC parents the EOI begins its crawl


It seems DIAC's new EOI system has yet to learn to walk. Incredibly after its first month of operation, from the 1st August, they will be only sending out 100 invitations.


Of these 90 will be issued for the 189 visa and only 10 will be issued for the Designated Area relative sponsored class. Then after they can see their system actually functions they will be gradually increasing this number month by month.


You can read DIAC's announcement here;



SkillSelect Invitation Announcement

On August 1st, the first invitation round for Skilled Independent (Subclass 189) and the family sponsored Skilled Nominated or Sponsored (Provisional) (subclass 489) visas will be held.



As SkillSelect is a new and complex system, our first run of invitations will be reduced in size, to allow us to ensure that all elements of the system are working smoothly. 

As such, we will issue the following number of invitations:



* 90 in the Skilled Independent subclass 189; and
* 10 in the Skilled Nominated or Sponsored (Provisional) (family sponsored) subclass 489.
The invitations will go to the highest scoring Expression of Interests (EOIs) in these subclasses, with ties in points decided by the date that the EOI reached their current points score.
Clients that have been invited will receive a notification to their email address, as well as their SkillSelect inbox.

However, while this first round of invitations will be comparatively small, we expect to be increasing the numbers of invitations issued, with a significantly larger round in September, and potentially a second round in August.

To date the enthusiastic uptake of SkillSelect by people all around the world interested in Skilled Migration to Australia has been pleasing.  





One would have imagined that a system that no doubt cost tens of thousands to design, would have already been tested more than 100 times? For those who have quickly lodged their EOI applications after the first of July, the message is clear; don't hold your breath waiting for a response.


The uncertainty of how much time it will take for applicants to get an invitation, has led to a significant increase in the interest of the employment sponsored visas such as the 457 Employer Sponsored and the Regional Sponsored Migration Scheme.



The new Employer Nomination Scheme is harder for recent onshore graduates to reach since DIAC scraped the waiver provisions for the 3 years of work experience requirement. Now all potential applicants will have to meet the 3 year requirement of hold a 457 visa for at least 2 years.

Crisis in Sponsorship Update

The NSW government released a statement that it would possible offer off list nominations to individuals who have moved to their perspective areas in anticipation of their 487 visas to be granted.


However they have included a whole new set of rules not in existence there when applicants lodged their visa applications, some more than 3 years ago. Many applicants will now find that no longer will meet the requirement to have their visas granted.


One of the rules created is that applicants must have moved and began living in the regional areas before the 1st July 2012, another one, that they must demonstrate at least 6 months of living in this region before they can be considered.


Can the NSW regional areas be trusted then? Remember these are the bodies that did not even send to DIAC all the appropriate forms to DIAC in the first place and if they had there would not have been a problem in having the visa's granted. It seems incredulous to IMMIGRATION NEWS that these same properly have the gall to impose further restrictions on applicants where as they could do there jobs properly in the first place.

Our office has been flooded with email from adversely affected students who have now found themselves with little chance of being granted their visas because the regional office failed to supply DIAC with the signed Form 1100. We couldn't think a greater demonstration of incompetence in handling applications whereby they did not complete such a simple task.


But does this let DIAC off the hook, not by a long shot. We raised the following questions to Mr.David Stewart, then Program Director of the GSM program at the Adelaide Skilled Processing Centre;

1) Please supply the appropriate sections in the Migration Regulations
your department is threatening to reject the application by not accepting
the state sponsorship Form 1100 which has been issued? We require this as
part of the natural justice procedure so an appropriate response can be
made on behalf of our client.

2) As previously mentioned there has been no information released by DIAC,
to my client or to my knowledge any other 487 or 886 applicant, that a
cutoff date existed where the Form 1100 would not be accepted by the
sponsoring bodies. Please provide the date when my client was affected in
this instance whereby any Form 1100 sent by the MRDB regarding my client
would become invalid?

3) On the MRDB board web site a statement has been released regarding this
problem with 487 applications. They state "The Department of Immigration
and Citizenship (DIAC) Adelaide Skills Processing Centre (ASPC) has
advised it will recognize officers of sponsorship by State Territory
Governments or their delegates where the "nomination" does not occur
promptly after the offer of sponsorship." This implies that they have only
recently become aware of the issue of old sponsorships not been honored by
DIAC if the Form 1100 was not sent "promptly. This public release is only
about one week old and confirms information received by our office that
the MRDB was not aware previously of any cut of date where the Form 1100
would become invalid. This seems to contradict your statement that the
participating governments were informed earlier regarding this issue. Can
you provide an explanation for the contradiction?

4) Do you know what the definition of "promptly" is as the statement made
by the MRDB seems to indicate this comes from a recent DIAC requirement?

5) Your letter indicates you are aware of communication sent to the MRDB
(or to the NSW state government) regarding nominations no longer being
accepted unless they were on the new SMP. Please provide any evidence
where the communication was sent to the MRDB or to the NSW state
government that any Form's 1100 sent to DIAC after the implementation of
the SMP would not be valid?

6) As you mentioned the nomination acceptance provision is "time of
decision". The ASPC would be well aware that in many cases in the
processing of these files, agents have to chase sponsoring bodies to send
of Form 1100. This was often done at the request from the case officers as
they did not have the Form 1100 in the applicants file. Please provide an
explanation as why no information was released publicly or to us as the
authorized agent or to my client whereby DIAC created a critical cutoff
date that would have to be adhered to make the nomination valid?

7) The ASPC would be well aware of the various requirements of sponsoring
bodies in order to gain such sponsorship. In most cases applicants have
been recently notified of this issue and they have no possibility of
meeting the current sponsorship requirements. This has put applicants in
an impossible position to provide a new nomination approval before a case
officer is allocated and a decision needs to be made. Please provide an
explanation as to why the ASPC, knowing this problem was going to arise at
a later date, left it so late to notify applicants that a problem existed
in their files? Would not DIAC have a duty of care to notify applicants of
a policy change that would affect their applications possibility of being
successful? Why was this policy change not put into the Procedural Advice



For the record not a single question above was answered.


Remember from one of our previous newsletters, Mr. David Stewart is the same Program Director who wrote to our office condoning intimidation and terror tactics and a legitimate DIAC policy where truthful answers are being sought from applicants.


We note with interest that Mr. Stewart if now the Principle Migration Officer for Kabul. I'm sure the tactics that he believes in will sit quite well with the locals there. We covered this issue of DIAC condoned Terror Tactics in Volume 208.


Well while Mr. Stewart escapes the limelight of this monumental disaster at the ASPC these questions will now be for the Minister to address. Let see if we can get an honest answer from him where the efforts to date have failed.


For the record it is clear both the regional certifying bodies and DIAC are equally responsible. It is grossly unfair to apply new rules and regulations upon those who lodged their visas years ago, especially where in many cases they are impossible to meet. It would have been far simpler to provide an adequate response from the start that to dribble out new rules that favours some but not others.


Read more in the Editorial.



In what seems to be a re-run of the 4 Corners program we were involved in nearly two years ago now, the issue of organised crime and visa scams have not gone away.

Have a read of this interesting article in The Telegraph





Expression of Interest Lodged Free of Charge*

Australian Immigration Law Services are offering GSM prospective GSM applicants to lodge there EOI free of charge.


*This offer is for clients who have a consultation in our office, or by telephone to discuss their points score ensuring their eligibility for the EOI system. The usual consultation fee of $165 will apply. The EOI must be ready to lodge within a week of the consultation.


After we are sure the EOI is suitable for you we then lodge the Expression of Interest free of charge. This promotion is for the lodgement only of your EOI. If you wish our company to manage your EOI for the two year period then further professional fees will apply of $165 for every six months you remain in the EOI system.


Of course the EOI is not a visa application and there is no guarantee that you will be issued an invitation to lodge a visa. However if an invitation is sent to you then it is vital that the information you lodged in your EOI be an accurate representation of your individual points score.


Please use the details below to book your appointment.

Some light reading?
Have a few spare minutes and nothing to do? Try reading one of our riveting historical newsletters to give you a buzz.

Won't exactly blow your mind but might rattle loose a filling.


For the recent ones using the new newsletter format, they can be found here; 

For our older newsletters they can be found on our web site through the following link;

If you would like to join the other 9500+ subscribers then click on this link to Subscribe to Our Newsletter or the link on the right above the Editorial.


Kind regards,

Karl Konrad, Managing Director


Jee Eun HAN, Executive Manager     

Australian Immigration Law Services

MARN: 9904238, 0850073 

AILS stuff photo
 At Australian Immigration Law Services (AILS), we offer professional advice and practical solutions to all migration matters. Our team of licensed agents and consultants specialise in various areas of immigration law, such as skilled migration, business, family, and reviews.


저희 회사에는 한국인 스탭도 일하고 있습니다.







Crisis in Sponsorship Continues......


Clearly the NSW government's peace offering to hundreds of sponsored 487 applicants, who have had their sponsorship applications judged invalid, does not go far enough.


Why create a cutoff date without warning that if they had not moved to the regional area before the 1st July 2012 they would not qualify for off-list selection?


In the past two weeks we have learned of hundreds of students from the Northern Inland region who did not have their sponsorship forms sent to DIAC as they should have been.


All of these poor individuals have been waiting years for their visa approval only to discover that their NSW government approved regional body failed to do their job.


Isn't simply enough to acknowledge that they stuffed up and say sorry, here is your new sponsorship approval letter?


For goodness sake, what a blatant demonstration of arrogance to now add extra hurdles to these people when it is your own fault to begin with.


Why not simply say, "well sorry for stuffing up your lives but guess what, if you do what we tell you to do now, we may considering sponsoring you in the future".


Why is it that only government departments have the mannerisms that would be abhorrent to the business world?


Are public servants so bereft of basic decency that they only place they can be employed is in the safety net of taxpayer's money. I am sure none of these high end public servant managers could survive in the business world where customer service is the key to success. Obviously they have no idea how to treat people with honesty and respect.


And the EOI?


One would have to imagine that DIAC actually tested this new EOI system before its implementation on the 1st July 2012? I mean if you're going spend tens of thousands of dollars of taxpayers money on a new IT system, surely it was tested first?


Now they are going to test it with a 100 possibly genuine applicants. Perhaps it would have been easier before the 1st of July to get 100 DIAC staff to pose as dummy applicants to see if the system actually works.




Karl Konrad

Karl Konrad

Managing Director

Han Photo with Jacket

 Executive Manager

Jee Eun HAN


Australian Immigration Law Services  

phone: 61 2 92791991 | fax: 61 2 9279 1994
email: | website: 


 Level 13, 37 York Street Sydney NSW 2000

Disclaimer and Copyright

IMMIGRATION NEWS is intended to provide general information on migration issues and does not constitute legal advice and no responsibility is accepted by Australian Immigration Law Services (AILS) for the accuracy of material appearing in IMMIGRATION NEWS.


People seeking advice on migration law should seek advice from a registered migration agent. The copyright of IMMIGRATION NEWS belongs to Australian Immigration Law Services (AILS) and no part of IMMIGRATION NEWS is to be reproduced by any means without the written consent of AILS. Australian Immigration Law Services is a trading name licensed to AILS INTERNATIONAL PTY LTD