Emigrate to australia: skilled workers wanted
![]() Emigrate to Australia where more than one in four workers Down Under were born in another country.
Since 1945, immigrants and their immediate descendants have accounted for over half of Australia’s population growth. The foreign-born population as a share of total population is higher in Australia than in any other OECD country, except for Luxembourg and Switzerland. “Australia is actively looking for skilled workers and will continue to need more workers for many years to come,” says Darrell Todd, founder of thinkingaustralia “Opportunities for migrants are increasing. Contact us today to find out how you could live and work in Australia”. Australia’s visa and immigration policies have changed a lot in recent years. They are now focused on skilled, working holiday and international student visas. Skilled migrants have boosted Australia’s ageing population, improved labour productivity, helped businesses to source skills that are difficult to find at short notice and addressed the needs of regional areas and industries. Unemployment among skilled immigrants is negligible because they tend to be employed in high-income occupations and contribute more to government revenue through taxation than they take through public services and benefits. Just as a steady inflow of immigrants has eased Australia’s shift from a manufacturing to a services economy, they will play an important role in helping Aussie businesses to innovate in the face of intensified global competition and technological change. Article Source: thinkingaustralia |
All About Australian Immigration Is Available Here
|
The latest changes in Australia’s student visa processing is causing delays and a big rise in visa application rejections, The Australian has reported. The new Simplified Student Visa Framework which aimed at making a complicated student visa process simpler, came into effect on 1 July 2016. However, it is now threatening the $18.5 billion international education sector in Australia. According to the news report, thousands of overseas students, particularly from China, are caught up in the complexities of the new system, forcing many educational institutions to postpone the course commencement. Australian Council of Graduate Research’s executive officer Fiona Zammitt told the Australian that concerns over the delays have prompted the Chinese Scholarship Council to recommend students seeking postgraduate education in Australia to look for other countries for their study. She said some applicants were waiting for up to nine months to hear the outcome of their visa applications. English Australia, a body of the colleges running English language colleges has termed the high visa rejections as a crisis. Brett Blacker, executive director of English Australia said the new system applied the same criteria to very low-risk students from Japan, for example, as to high-risk applications from Nepal or Pakistan. A Department of Immigration and Border Control spokesman acknowledged changes to the visa system had caused delays in processing of applications. He said the department aimed to finalise 75 per cent of complete applications within a month.
Under the Simplified Student Visa Framework, visa subclasses were reduced to study in Australia. International students can now apply for a single student visa- subclass 500, regardless of their chosen course of study. Article Via Source
0 Comments
Many people were simply too embarrassed to publicly declare they were voting out. "I don't like [UKIP leader Nigel] Farage but he's got a point", explained one elderly man, who asked to remain anonymous. "The major parties aren't addressing immigration. Why should we remain in?" A few weeks later we were in working class Leeds, the other end of the country and social spectrum, yet the sentiment was surprisingly similar. "I don't want to say it loudly but I'm out", whispered one woman with a baby on her hip. "With all the new people, there ain't many jobs and I just can't see a good reason to stay." There are a variety of theories as to why Britons ultimately backed Brexit. They're all being fleshed out now over the sleepy weeks of summer by shocked commentators and pundits, who are still trying to work out how they got this campaign so badly wrong. Some blame Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn for not doing enough, others accuse the Leave side of lying its way to victory. But as an outsider, I found the lack of a coherent Remain campaign on immigration startling. Remain camp lacked passion, coherenceIt was probably the biggest issue, yet when politicians, media pundits or punters raised concerns about EU migrants or asylum seekers, they were often labelled racists, shouted down or the topic was changed to the economy. Few Remain figures passionately and articulately argued for immigration and free movement until the last fortnight of the campaign. Perhaps this was because so few people thought Leave would win but it meant the public anxiety about migrants wasn't addressed head-on. Many wavering voters waited in relative silence before turning out in big numbers on polling day. Leave EU strategists, who caused controversy with the "breaking point" asylum seeker poster, believe they got stronger every time they were attacked, or derided, because although people were offended by some of their tactics the "basic underlying argument" about migrants struck a chord and was rarely challenged. So, would a different Remain campaign on immigration have changed the result? Maybe not. The outcome was influenced by a vast array of factors, not least that both sides of British politics have blamed the EU both fairly, and unfairly, for a variety of problems over several decades. Even before the campaign started, the Leave camp was on fertile ground. Lesson: Don't mock anti-immigration groupsBut if there is a lesson in Brexit for Australia's political class, it's probably that the concerns of anti-immigration groups, like One Nation, shouldn't be simply mocked, ridiculed or ignored.
One Nation has four senators. In comparison, UKIP, which former UK prime minister David Cameron once described as a bunch of "fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists", has just one representative in the House of Commons and three in the Lords — it also has 22 members in the EU Parliament. Yet the party's long running campaign played a major role in getting 52 per cent of voters to remove Britain from the EU. During the UK referendum campaign Australia's points based immigration system was put on a pedestal. Brexiteers, particularly Mr Farage and Foreign Minister Boris Johnson, lauded its ability to attract skilled workers and integrate new arrivals into society. At home however, the relative economic and social success of the bipartisan program is often overlooked. If One Nation is to be vanquished, a goal both major political parties have, then Australia's leaders could do worse than looking back at Brexit and fostering frank, fearless public debate. Article Via Source AUSTRALIA’S asylum seeker policy has been condemned both nationally and globally, but in some parts of the world it’s seen it as an aspiration. Over the weekend, a delegation of Danish parliamentarians were given the opportunity to visit Australia’s largest offshore detention centre in Nauru, to find out if they could adopt a similar policy in Europe. According to local media reports, six members of the Danish parliament’s Immigration and Integration Affairs Committee left for Nauru on Saturday to more closely examine Australia’s asylum seeker policy. The trip came just weeks after The Guardian published a shocking cache of leaked documents detailing the extent of human rights abuse and sexual assault claims. Martin Henriksen, a member of the far-right Danish People’s Party, said Denmark could take a similar approach to Australia and maintain offshore refugee camps in Kenya or Greenland. “Australia has found an interesting model,” he told Danish radio station 24syv. “The government will continuously assess different migration policies by looking at the experiences of other countries — including Australia.” WHERE DOES DENMARK STAND ON ASYLUM SEEKERS? Australia’s record on human rights has drawn international condemnation. Human Rights Watch’s World Report 2016 condemned our “abusive” approach to asylum seekers, as well as our “overly broad” counter-terrorism measures. Late last year, at a United Nations Human Rights Council in Geneva, council members from countries including Fiji, Egypt and Iran scolded Australia’s human rights record. But Denmark has increasingly come to see our policy as something to aspire towards. Last year, 20,000 asylum seekers applied for asylum in the Scandinavian country, which has a population of roughly 5.6 million. Mind you, this figure was far smaller than that of neighbouring Sweden, which recorded 163,000 arrivals, and Germany, which took in more than a million. Over the past year, the Danish government has employed a series of tactics which seem to state the country will not get overly complacent on its acceptance of refugees. Earlier this year, for example, the country sparked widespread outrage over a “jewellery bill”, which effectively allowed immigration authorities to confiscate valuables in exchange for their accommodation. In January, a bill to allow the government to confiscate migrants’ valuables exceeding $1450 was approved by 81 of the 109 politicians present. Likewise last August, the government cut social benefits for immigrants by 45 per cent, in a move marketed as an “integration benefit”. “The government will, as promised during the election, quickly implement a new integration benefit for new arrivals, in order to make Denmark a less attractive destination while making it more attractive to work and contribute to Danish society,” a press release from the Ministry of Employment stated. The government advertised the benefit cut in newspapers in Lebanon, which has a large refugee population. Similarly, a Danish city sparked controversy this year after it ordered pork to be mandatory on municipal menus, including for schools and daycare centres. Frank Noergaard, a member of the council in Randers that narrowly approved the decision, says it was made to ensure that pork remains “a central part of Denmark’s food culture”. Pork is the most popular meat in Denmark, but it is forbidden by adherents of Islam. Most of the asylum seekers who have sought refuge in Denmark have been Muslim, and according to the US Department of State, Islam is its second-largest religion, at around four per cent of the Danish population. DENMARK’S POWERFUL ANTI-IMMIGRATION GROUP The Danish People’s Party, the country’s second-largest political party, has been gaining increasing support since 1995. The party surprised opinion pollsters after bagging 21 per cent of the country’s votes in last year’s general election. The controversial group is best known for its anti-immigration stance, and has proposed legislation targeted specifically at adherents of Islam. Kenneth Kristensen Berth, the European Affairs spokesman for the party, has stated he is a “big fan” of Australia’s border policy, describing it as “very sensible”. “We need an Australia solution,” he told the ABC. “I think it’s the only possible solution. If you don’t do anything, then I think the European culture will evaporate in a couple of years.” Like how Australia processes asylum seekers offshore on Nauru, Mr Kristensen wants Denmark to send people to Greenland or an African country in exchange for aid money.
“We need to make it clear to these people that they cannot have a permanent life in a European country.” Last month, MP Søren Espersen proposed a blanket ban on all immigration from Muslim-majority countries in a controversial opinion piece called ‘Stop immigration from Islamic countries’. “We will have to change our way of life,” he wrote. “The first step is to stop being naive.” He said imams found to preach teachings in accordance with Islamic terrorism should have their citizenship revoked, and also proposed a “special obligation” on the Muslim community to report to the authorities if a young person ever showed signs of fanaticism, or else face “penalties”. His suggestion was blasted by members on both side of Danish politics. A couple of months ago, the party proposed to ban all school students from speaking Arabic in public schools. “If you live in Denmark, you should speak Danish,” Mr Henriksen told news agency Ritzau. “From what I hear, this is unfortunately a problem among students with Muslim backgrounds. There are certain languages belonging to certain cultures and that is what we are talking about.” The proposal did not pass through the stages of legislation. Article Via Source A landmark study will for the first time determine the prevalence of sexual assault and sexual harassment in Australian universities. The study, commissioned by Universities Australia – the peak body representing the university sector – is being conducted by the Australian Human Rights Commission. Students at the country’s 40 universities will be invited to answer the confidential survey, which will ask them about their experiences of sexual assault and sexual harassment. All student responses will be de-identified so that confidentiality and privacy are protected. The commission, rather than universities, will hold the data. The study is part of the Respect. Now. Always. campaign launched in February, which aims to raise awareness of sexual harassment, increase the profile of support services for students, and obtain prevalence data to guide university policies and services. The president of the Australian Human Rights Commission, Gillian Triggs, said the findings would help address “the ad hoc nature of the understanding about the problem”. “Let’s get a real sense of what’s happening on the ground from students, and let’s use the evidence to inform university policy and to see whether those policies are meeting the needs of our students,” Triggs said. “We want nationally accurate data. I think each institution has attempted to deal with this issue in its own way, some better than others. There has been a falling back on this idea that the incidence of what is happening in universities is just a reflection of the incidence rate in the general community, or lower than that rate. “But the truth is we don’t know if that’s right or not. We don’t have the data.” The survey has been developed with input from experts from the Australian Human Rights Centre at the University of New South Wales, the Australian Bureau of Statistics, Roy Morgan Research and the Australian Human Rights Commission. The chair of Universities Australia, Professor Barney Glover, said universities had a “zero tolerance” policy on sexual assault and sexual harassment. “This survey will give us an even clearer picture of further work we need to do,” Glover said. “University leaders are determined to use the survey results to keep improving our responses and the support we provide to students who have experienced sexual assault or harassment.” Our Watch CEO, Mary Barry, said there remained a myth that “boys can’t help themselves, so it’s up to girls to avoid any unwanted sexual activity”. “A girl is likely to be held solely responsible if she is assaulted or raped, because she ‘didn’t stand up for herself’ or ‘was dressed inappropriately’.” Barry said. “This feeds into sexual stereotypes and rape myths, which unfortunately are internalised by girls as well as boys. The reality is that only rapists are responsible for rape.” A survey of 1,926 University of Sydney students published in May found one in four reported having experienced an incident of sexual harassment or assault as a student, and 6% of all respondents had experienced an incident on campus or at a university-related event.
The survey also revealed that only 18.9% of students who had experienced an incident reported it to anyone. In the same month, the journal of Wesley College, a privately operated residential facility on the campus, was widely criticised for naming female students with the “best ass”, “best cleavage” and as the “biggest porn star”. The college refused to cooperate with a campus investigation. Article Via Source New Zealand is so close to Australia, it seems weird that you need a passport to visit. We're basically the same country, right? Wrong. A new immigration survey suggests Kiwis living and working in Australia are profoundly unhappy with how they're treated here—in fact, their levels of cultural alienation and overall dissatisfaction with the Aussie Way of Life are comparable only to those of asylum seekers. Compiled from surveys completed by more than 10,000 people between September 2015 and February 2016, the Australia Today Report is the largest study of immigrants ever undertaken in Australia. The study assessed the sense of belonging felt by immigrants across eight visa categories, but New Zealanders stood out as a group who felt like the Australian experience hadn't stacked up to expectation. Of the NZ visa holders surveyed, 28 percent said their experience of life in Australia was more negative than they thought it would be. The only group who were more dissatisfied was asylum seekers settled in Australia. Their "unhappiness" levels stand at around 50 percent. New Zealand citizens have their own special status on the Australian immigration spectrum. Thanks to 1973's Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement, their passports guarantee them indefinite residence—although, crucially, not citizenship. NZ residents hold a Special Category Visa (SCV), which is automatically granted on arrival. Including New Zealanders, there were about 1.67 million temporary residents in Australia, as of June 2013. That's around 7.2 percent of Australia's resident population, which also includes permanent visa holders. But those numbers are declining. Between 2012 and 2014, New Zealand arrivals dropped by 51 percent from 41,230 people to 27,274. While there are a number of possible reasons for this, the survey suggests the fact that many New Zealanders are unhappy with how they're treated by Australians may be relevant. NZ residents reported the highest level of discrimination among the visa categories analysed. When asked to specify the aspect of life in Australia that they liked the least, 28 percent of Kiwis cited "racism and discrimination." In a sad anonymous testimony, one Kiwi respondent described how she was treated when shopping in an affluent Sydney suburb: "A few weeks ago my husband and I had the day off, we both had the day off and we decided we had to go [to the Castle Towers shopping centre]. Oh my gosh, the first time in years where I felt so—out of place, I felt like people were judging [us] because we were brown." Of course, it's not just New Zealanders who experience racism in Australia. A shocking (or is it?) 80 percent of South Sudanese immigrants said they'd experienced discrimination of this kind too. But it's not just overt racism. New Zealander SCV holders feel like they're being treated unfairly in many ways. Much of their resentment seems to stem from the fact that, although they must pay taxes, they're not allowed to vote or receive welfare benefits. Survey participants pointed out the problems faced by Kiwis who had been taxed in Australia for many years, but came unstuck upon losing their jobs and finding they didn't qualify for Centrelink benefits or employment assistance. What makes all this worse is that Australians migrating to New Zealand easily qualify for full citizenship there. For New Zealanders wanting to come here, the situation is much harder. What else are New Zealanders unhappy about? Well, they're not big fans of our government. Of the eight immigrant groups surveyed, Kiwis had the lowest level of trust in Australian political parties—just 10 percent of them trust your mates in the Labor and Liberal parties. Only 17 percent trusted the federal parliament, and only 27 percent trusted the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. That last stat might not be limited to New Zealanders. It's not all bad. New Zealanders grudgingly admit that living in working in Australia has some financial benefits. New Zealand Special Category Visa holders report it's easier to find a job here than in their home country, which is good, given the whole Centrelink thing. "The money's better and [the] job opportunities," one respondent said. "You'd do the same work back in New Zealand and it's pretty much double the money ... In comparison you wouldn't ... get far financially in New Zealand."
Interestingly, the survey declared that, despite the reservations of our rugby-loving residents, Australia is overall a good country for immigrants. While New Zealanders might not be feeling very Aussie, other cultural groups reported that they were living and loving the Australian Dream. When asked whether "Australia is a land of economic opportunity where in the long run, hard work brings a better life," 94 percent of residents who arrived here in the last five years agreed. This compares with 13 percent who arrived between 2001 and 2005, and 18 percent who arrived between 1991 and 1995. Article Via Source Brexiteers Are Kidding Themselves If They Think Australia’s Visa System Would Work in the UK8/25/2016 There’s a thing in politics I call the ‘Swedish Fallacy’, which is the mistaken belief that because Sweden seems like quite a nice place from across the North Sea, whatever policies it has must be worth copying, too. So you’ll see people on both sides cite some idea as the ‘Swedish model’ – which, as much as I like Swedish models, isn’t quite the same as saying it’s actually a good policy. Brexiteers do the same thing with the Australian points-based immigration system, a phrase now so well-worn it’s easy to forget that we already have a British points-based immigration system, and whose merits Brexiteers have done virtually nothing to prove. Alas, there is not much to it. In fact, what these people mean is that we should limit EU immigration by whatever means possible or necessary. The Australian points-based immigration system is just a way of dressing this up in the language of principle.
As Britain already has a points-based system, it wouldn’t mean a major change from what we’ve got already for non-EU citizens – but it still misses the mark. It won’t satisfy people who voted for Brexit to substantially cut immigration – and that’s a good thing, because cutting immigration substantially would be terrible for the British economy – but it’s far from the best system we could implement. First, numbers. Remember that we already have a point-based system for non-EU immigrants, so not much will change there. As Roland Smith has pointed out, MigrationWatch claimed before the referendum that Brexit could mean cutting net EU immigration by around 100,000 – bringing total EU and non-EU net migration down from 340,000 to around 240,000 a year, based on recent figures. Add to that the extra immigrants that virtually all Brexit campaigners said they wanted – the new curry chefs, the extra Australian and Canadian immigrants, the Indian engineers and programmers – and that 240,000 will start to creep up again. It’ll be different immigrants, but the actual numbers might not be much lower than they once were. The Australian system isn’t really meant as a general immigration policy – it’s for people who want to move to Australia without a job offer. If an Australian firm wants to hire you, you go through a different process, similar to what we already have in Britain. In total, only 38% of migrants to Australia go through their points-based system. And Australia has about twice as many immigrants as the UK does, in terms of share of population – 27% there compared with around 13% here. There’s no reason that we would have as open a system as them, but you do wonder what it is that people do like about the Aussie way of doing things. But remember that if our version was tighter than Australia’s, it would mean more restrictions on businesses ability to hire the workers they want and on families to stay together. The big problem with this approach is that it micromanages the needs of the economy. We don’t have a points-based system for car or food imports, because we realise that it’s absurd to think that the government knows how many cars, or what kind of cars, we need. But points systems do micromanage the labour supply: we need 1,000 more chemical engineers, 7,000 new au pairs and so on. That’s not the only way to control immigration. We could sell visas off – decide that we only want immigrants who are willing to pay £25,000 to be here, and let firms hire whomever they want if they’re willing to pay that cost. Or, better, we could require immigrants to take out third-party liability insurance that covers the costs of them overstaying, becoming a burden on the welfare state, committing crimes and so on – an option that would favour the most low-risk immigrants. These would be good ways to encourage high-skilled immigration without micromanaging it or losing control altogether. The big mistake is to think that we can costlessly cut immigration overall. The Australians Today report, which was based on a survey of more than 10,000 people, found most migrants were very satisfied with their lives in Australia but Kiwis and South Sudanese stand out as the two groups who feel the least sense of belonging and experience the most discrimination. Report author Professor Andrew Markus said many New Zealanders who hold Special Category Visas felt they were given a "harsh deal" in Australia, because they can live and work in Australia but are not eligible to vote, receive welfare, or other benefits. "At one level they should know what they're getting themselves into because it's very clearly explained to them," he said. "Nonetheless people feel resentment having worked in this country for years, paid their taxes, contributed to the community and then having difficulties and not being able to get Centrelink benefits. "They also resent the fact that an Australian going to New Zealand does qualify for full citizenship but if you come the other way, you don't." Professor Markus said the level of colour prejudice towards South Sudanese migrants was "off the scale", with a "disturbing" 80 percent of respondents saying they had experienced discrimination. Both New Zealand and South Sudanese migrants also reported low levels of trust, with Kiwis holding a very little trust in political parties (10 percent) and the South Sudanese reporting the lowest level of trust in the police (24 percent) out of any other group. Tensions recently flared on the streets of Melbourne when about 100 men of African, Islander and Caucasian appearance converged on the Moomba Festival and clashed with police. Muslim women more likely to face discrimination than man The survey, conducted by the Scanlon Foundation and Monash University, found a high level of negativity towards Muslims, with women twice as likely to face discrimination as men. Professor Markus said one of the most disturbing stories involved a Melbourne tram driver who refused to allow a heavily pregnant woman on board when he looked up and noticed she was wearing Muslim garb. "The tram stops and she leaves the curb to get onto the tram but the driver sees her and takes off," he said. "And as she looks up she sees the other passengers laughing. "These are the sort of disturbing things that are going on in Australia."
He said the woman was on her way to hospital for a check up but was so upset by the experience, she went home instead. Many of the Muslim respondents complained of being stereotyped and misrepresented by the media, who had little interest in actually talking to the community. "The reality of Muslim Australians is that Muslims in Australia are as diverse as the whole Australian population and often I find there's a lack of understanding that most of the Muslims in Australia are born in this country," Professor Markus said. Despite the survey results, Professor Markus said Australia was still one of the most successful countries when it came to integrating migrants, but he said there would always be rejection and intolerance. He said immigration was a difficult process and the survey found migrants were incredibly optimistic about their prospects when they first arrive in Australia but become less so as time passes. "In the first generation it's a struggle and in the first generation many find they cannot achieve their dreams, so it's more a question of the second and third generation and the way they make their way in Australian society," he said. Article Via Source Migrate to Australia paperwork and checking process is bound to be impacted by government plans to cut 300 jobs at the Department of Immigration and Border Protection. But Union chiefs claim that up to 800 jobs face the axe and that existing staff will have to cope with a far greater workload, leading to delays in processing visa and immigration applications. “The effect of planned jobs cuts has yet to be seen,” says Darrell Todd, founder of thinkingaustralia. “People involved in visa applications or who may be planning to migrate to Australia should contact their agent to find out if they are affected in any way”. Migrate to Australia: possible visa delaysThe government says it will reduce staff numbers by 305 with voluntary redundancies among middle management. The remainder of job losses will come from a hiring freeze and by not replacing staff that leave. The job cuts come as border control chiefs seek to manage a $116 million budget cut this year. Australia’s Community and Public Sector Union claims that up to 800 jobs will ultimately go across the department Rupert Evans, CPSU Deputy National President, says staffing cuts are “short-sighted” and will undermine border security. He says there is already over 1,000 fewer staff in the Department of Immigration and Border Protection than there was in 2012.
In the past four years the volume of international visitors has risen by 3.6 million. An extra 2.8 million visas are now being processed, 500,000 more freight and cargo items are being inspected and over nine million more parcels and items of international mail must be checked. Article Via Source Migrate to Australia where the economic outlook is strong and stock market revenues and profits are increasing. “While European countries remain mired in economic uncertainty Australia is powering ahead,” says Darrell Todd, founder of thinkingaustralia. “Australia’s AAA credit rating has been confirmed by global ratings agency Moody’s who say the country maintains its stable outlook. There’s no better time to migrate to Australia”. Moody’s say that the country’s proven economic resilience will endure; the country has a strong institutional framework and stronger fiscal metrics than other Tripe A rated nations. Migrate to Australia: economic outlookMeanwhile, while other countries have suffered as result of the UK Brexit vote, Australia has gained from Britain’s decision to leave the European Union. An increase in trade following the Brexit vote has given the Australian Securities Exchange a major boost. ASX profits have increased 7.1 per cent to $426.2 million for the year to June while revenue increased by 4.6 per cent to $908.3 million. The ASX has gained much from adopting new technology that harnesses market data to offer new products and services. This can help reduce risks and costs of implementing tough new regulations introduced in the wake of the global financial crisis. Listings on the ASX increased over the period, boosting listing revenue by 4.3 per cent to $149.4 million with the value of initial public offerings (IPOs) at $23.6 billion. ASX chief executive Dominic Stevens expects market volatility to continue this year with the US election result adding to fallout of the Brexit vote. But the ASX will continue to flourish he says.
“I have inherited a business in a very good shape and with a strategy that is focused on delivering positive outcomes for shareholders and customers”. Article Via Source Travellers arriving and departing from international airports in Australia face more strikes as immigration and border force staff undertake another round of strikes related to a long running pay and conditions dispute with the Government. According to the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) members who work for the Australian Border Force and Department of Immigration will take part on a 24 hour strike on 12 August and this could delay international travel. It is the first strike in the lengthy dispute since the Australian Government won a Fair Work Commission ruling preventing industrial action for three months on the basis that terrorists or criminals could exploit depleted staff numbers during a strike. The Department of Immigration and Border Protection (DIBP) has been notified that staff including Border Force officers will walk off the job from midnight on 12 August at international airports, ports and other sites around the country. Departing and arriving passengers on international flights are advised to allow extra time and be prepared for possible delays during the industrial action. CPSU national secretary Nadine Flood said, however, that staff working in intelligence and counter terrorism would not be affected but the strike action. She explained that CPSU members are committed to national security and safety and this CPSU action has been designed to ensure those are not compromised. The union has more than 50 agreed exemptions in place for areas such as counter-terrorism and intelligence officers. ‘This strike reflects the frustration that continues to grow across the Commonwealth public sector. These people have been fighting for more than two years now as the Turnbull Government’s sought to strip their rights, conditions and take-home pay,’ said Flood.
‘As with past strikes, the impact of this action is likely to vary from place to place, but may cause delays for international air passengers. Despite Border Force’s cynical tactics in the Fair Work Commission prior to the election, our members are 100% committed to national security and their action will not compromise the safety of passengers in any way,’ she added. Article Via Source |
Archives
October 2016
CategoriesGovt to review immigration numbers
![]() The Immigration Minister says the government will review the number of immigrants entering the country, but he does not expect the policy to change.
A record 69,000 people settled in New Zealand in the year to July. That broke a run of consecutive monthly gains that lasted 23 months and reached a high of 69,100. On a monthly basis, the number of people coming to live in New Zealand, or New Zealanders returning home fell slightly to 5600. The minister, Michael Woodhouse, told TVNZ's Q + A programme this morning the numbers for the new residents programme would be reviewed by Cabinet in the next month or so. At present it is set between 45,000 and 50,000. The planning range is set over a two-year period, which expired at the end of June. Mr Woodhouse said in most of the past 10 years there had been considerably fewer new residents than the current number. Labour Party leader Andrew Little had previously said there was a mismatch between immigration and labour market needs with workers being brought in from overseas to fill jobs while thousands of New Zealand labourers were unemployed. Real estate company Harcourts, meanwhile, blamed record immigration and poor planning for the country's housing shortage. Article Source: radionz |