![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
|
|
Print Preliminary Pages (PDF 570KB) | < - Report Home : Chapter 1 - > |
August 2007
Canberra
© Commonwealth of Australia 2006
ISBN 978-0-642-78956-3 (printed version)
ISBN 978-0-642-78957-0 (HTML version)
Foreword
Committee Membership
Terms of reference
List of abbreviations
List of recommendations
Inquiry process
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 457 visa eligibility requirements: key issues and improved procedures
Chapter 3 457 visa compliance arrangements, communication and program administration: key issues and improved procedures
Additional comments
Appendix A – List of submissions
Appendix B – List of witnesses
Appendix C – List of exhibits
Appendix D – Ministerial announcements on temporary business visa program
Appendix E – 457 eligibility requirements and sponsorship undertakings
Appendix F – Major sub-group occupations for ASCO levels 1-9
Migration, in its many forms, has made an important contribution to the economic development of Australia and the creation of a diverse, vibrant society. In recent years, the Australian Government has increased significantly the level of temporary skilled migration in response to critical skills shortages throughout Australia. In my own state of Western Australia, the mining boom has led to increased demands for skilled workers, and in many cases this need can only be met by overseas workers. The situation in Western Australia is replicated in other industry sectors throughout Australia.
A range of business visas facilitate the entry of skilled workers to fill positions on a temporary basis. Of these, the 457 visa has gained considerable public attention, largely through reports of abuse1 of the visa and those workers brought to Australia under its auspices. While few would deny the skills shortages facing Australia due to a strong economy and historically low levels of unemployment, public support for temporary business visas has the potential to be undermined by abuse of the system. The Committee therefore decided to examine the adequacy of eligibility requirements and the effectiveness of monitoring, enforcement and reporting arrangements for these types of visas. The integrity of the system needs to be protected and strengthened and, with it, public acceptance of the need for temporary skilled workers from overseas to meet proven skill shortages in key industry sectors. Employers also need to be reminded that access to skilled temporary workers is a privilege, not a right. Abuses of the system should and will be met by strong penalties and withdrawal of their access to this type of labour.
Bringing in skilled workers from overseas, however, is not a long-term solution to the skills shortages facing Australia. Training Australians, and providing them with job opportunities, has to have highest priority. Employers must demonstrate a commitment towards training an Australian workforce, rather than relying on accessing skills from a global, but at times limited, pool of workers. One of the prime components of the temporary business visas is the need for employers to demonstrate a commitment to training of Australians, and the Committee saw this as of fundamental importance in examining the use of such visas.
While there is a need, from the viewpoint of business, to have such skilled workers identified and brought to Australia as quickly as possible through streamlined processes, that must also be weighed against the need for sufficiently rigorous checking of the credentials and background of these workers. As events in recent weeks have shown, the Australian public would also expect that overseas workers are thoroughly assessed to determine if they might pose a security risk to this country.
I would like to thank all of the groups and individuals who made submissions to the inquiry and appeared at public hearings as it was essential that the Committee hear first hand the experience of both employers and workers utilising these visas. I would also place on record my thanks to all members of the Committee who approached this inquiry in a bipartisan way. Discussion at times was vigorous, but all came from a perspective of wanting the best possible system for Australia.
Don Randall MP
Chair
Chair |
Mr Don Randall MP |
Deputy Chair |
Senator Helen Polley (from 7 December 2006) |
Members |
Senator Andrew Bartlett |
|
Senator Alan Eggleston |
|
Senator Linda Kirk (to 6 December 2006) |
|
Senator Stephen Parry |
|
Mr Laurie Ferguson MP |
|
Mrs Julia Irwin MP |
|
Mr Michael Keenan MP |
Hon Dr Carmen Lawrence MP |
|
Dr Andrew Southcott MP |
Secretary |
Ms Joanne Towner |
Inquiry Secretary |
Dr Kate Sullivan |
Senior Research Officers |
Ms Zoë Smith |
Ms Julia Searle (from 11 June 2007 to 18 July 2007) | |
Administrative Officer |
Ms Melita Caulfield |
On 6 December 2006 the Joint Standing Committee on Migration adopted the following inquiry:
Inquiry into eligibility requirements and monitoring, enforcement and reporting arrangements for temporary business visas
ANZSCO |
Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupations |
ASCO |
Australian Standard Classification of Occupations |
COAG |
Council of Australian Governments |
CSWP |
Commonwealth/State Working Party |
DEST |
Department of Education, Science and Training |
DEWR |
Department of Employment and Workplace Relations |
DIAC |
Department of Immigration and Citizenship |
DIMA |
Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs |
DIMIA |
Department of Immigration, Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs |
ETA |
Electronic Travel Authority |
IELTS |
International English Language Testing System |
IOO |
Immigration Outreach Officer |
JSCM |
Joint Standing Committee on Migration |
MCIMA |
Ministerial Council on Immigration and Multicultural Affairs |
MIA |
Migration Institute of Australia |
MSL |
Minimum Salary Level |
OH&S |
Occupational Health and Safety |
OTD |
Overseas Trained Doctor |
OWS |
Office of Workplace Services |
RCB |
Regional Certifying Body |
RWA |
Regional Workforce Agency |
Section 1(b) of the Resolution of Appointment of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration states:
Annual reports of government departments and authorities tabled in the House shall stand referred to the committee for any inquiry the committee may wish to make. Reports shall stand referred to the committee in accordance with a schedule tabled by the Speaker to record the areas of responsibility of each committee, provided that:
(i) any question concerning responsibility for a report or a part of a report shall be determined by the Speaker; and
(ii) the period during which an inquiry concerning an annual report may be commenced by a committee shall end on the day on which the next annual report of that Department or authority is presented to the House.2
The Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA) Annual Report 2005-06 was tabled in Parliament on 18 October 2006. The report makes reference to the administration of the temporary business visa program. 3 Given the ongoing cncerns about the use of such visas, the Committee adopted an inquiry into this matter on 6 December 2006.
The inquiry was advertised in The Australian on 13 December 2006 and letters were sent to over 200 organisations and individuals with a possible interest in the matter. The Committee received 89 submissions, 22 supplementary submissions and 36 exhibits. Details are at Appendices A and C to this report.
Public hearings were held in Melbourne (14 March 2007), Brisbane (16 April 2007), Perth (30 April 2007), Sydney (16-17 May 2007), Canberra (1 June 2007 and 13 June 2007) and Cairns (3 July 2007). Details of witnesses are at Appendix B.
The Committee appreciated the detailed input it received from a wide range of interested groups and individuals.4
The report consists of three chapters. Chapter 1 provides an introductory overview of the temporary business visa program and clarifies issues pertinent to the Committee’s terms of reference. It also outlines the Committee’s focus on the Temporary Business (Long Stay) visa (subclass 457)—Standard Business Sponsorship and Labour Agreements—and provides a summary of the Committee’s findings on some other temporary business related visas.
Chapter 2 covers a range of key issues relating to the eligibility requirements of the 457 visa program, particularly concerning minimum salary and skill requirements and regional concessions to those requirements. The central role played by the Australian Standard Classification of Occupations system in defining what constitutes a ‘skilled’ occupation under the program is also discussed. Other topics include Regional Certifying Bodies, labour market testing, and English language and training requirements. The chapter concludes with a discussion on the on-hire and recruitment industry and its interface with the 457 visa program, and on Labour Agreements as a mechanism to address identified skills shortages in Australia.
Chapter 3 discusses the important area of monitoring, enforcement and reporting under the 457 visa program. This area is essential to reinforcing the integrity of the program and ensuring public confidence in 457 visas, while still meeting the needs of business for streamlined arrangements. Other matters discussed include Commonwealth, state and territory collaboration in compliance; an improved mechanism for 457 visa holders and others to report alleged breaches of program requirements; and clarification of the ’28-day’ rule for visa holders to find a new employer sponsor.
The chapter also looks at communication processes under the program—in particular, communication between the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) and employer sponsors, visa holders and other stakeholders—and how this area might be improved. The chapter concludes by looking at issues relating to DIAC’s administration of the program—most notably, 457 visa processing times, which was raised as a major area of concern during the inquiry.
As set out in the terms of reference, areas where processes can be improved are identified throughout these chapters.
… asked the Ministerial Council on Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (MCIMA) to identify and implement cooperative measures to ensure the effectiveness, fairness and integrity of the temporary skilled migration arrangements, including appropriate and consistent minimum standards.5MCIMA also met on 14 July 2006 and established a Commonwealth/State Working Party (CSWP) on Skilled Migration to develop recommendations to COAG. MCIMA agreed that the CSWP would:
… consider and report back on measures within the 457 visa category to better:
A range of Commonwealth/State agencies are represented on the CSWP, which has to date met on four occasions to develop a draft report to COAG … The report is currently being updated and is expected to be considered by COAG senior officials in late February 2007 for release for consultation with key stakeholders. A report will then be finalised for COAG consideration.7
In June 2007, DIAC also provided the Committee with a document, entitled ‘Temporary entry and employment of skilled migrants’, containing discussion points developed by the CSWP ‘for the purpose of consultation with key stakeholders’.8 The Committee heard that, earlier in April, the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship had invited some 130 key stakeholders to provide written submissions on the discussion paper and that 45 submissions had been received in reply.9 At the time of drafting this report, there had been no further updates on the COAG process.
The proceedings of the COAG/CSWP review are classified as COAG-in-confidence and, as such, were not made available to the Committee. Accordingly, several key contributors to this inquiry (such as DIAC and the state/territory governments) commented that they were unable to provide detailed input to the Committee and/or comment on any issues that COAG might be looking at:
The attached Commonwealth submission seeks to address the JSCM inquiry’s terms of reference to the extent possible, but without going into matters being considered by the COAG inquiry.10
In light of input to date, and the confidential nature of the Council of Australian Governments related proceedings, the Queensland Government believes that it would be inappropriate toe comprehensively address the full breadth of issues within this submission.11
On 23 January 2007, the Prime Minister announced the appointment of the Hon Kevin Andrews MP as the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, replacing Senator the Hon Amanda Vanstone in that role. At this time, the Prime Minister also announced that the existing Department of Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (DIMA) would become the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC).
As this change occurred during the period of this inquiry, some of the evidence to the Committee referred to DIMA rather than DIAC. This report refers consistently to DIAC but references to DIMA in quoted material have therefore been left unchanged.
On 26 April 2007, the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship announced changes to skilled temporary visa laws, including new civil penalties for employers who breach the law, greater powers for DIAC and the Workplace Ombudsman (formerly the Office of Workplace Services) to investigate employers, faster processing of applications for some employers and a higher English language requirement to be eligible for a skilled temporary visa. On 26 June 2007, the Minister announced specific details regarding the higher English language requirement for the visa.
A number of these changes require an amendment to the Migration Act 1958. Accordingly, the Migration Amendment (Sponsorship Obligations) Bill 2007 was introduced into Parliament on 21 June 2007. The bill proposes new enforcement and sanction provisions by way of civil penalties if an approved sponsor breaches their obligations under the program and allows for the cancellation of approval as a sponsor or barring of a sponsor where an obligation has been breached. At the time of finalising this report, the proposed legislation was still before the Parliament.
Appendix D provides details of each of these announcements.
1 | For more information, see Table 3.2 in Chapter 3 of the report. Back |
2 | Committee website, http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/mig/resolution.htm. The Resolution of Appointment is the source of authority for the establishment and operations of the Committee. The Resolution of Appointment for the 41st Parliament was passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on 18 November 2004. Back |
3 | DIMA, Annual Report 2005-06, Canberra, 2006, p. 37, p. 54 and pp. 84-86. Back |
4 | Because of variations in pagination style among the submissions received, footnote references in the report refer to the page number of the pdf copy of the submission, as published on the Committee’s web site. Similarly, page references in transcripts are to the document as it appears electronically, not as it may appear in hard copy, because of variations in printer drivers. Back |
5 | Council of Australian Governments Communique, 14 July 2006, http://www.coag.gov.au/ meetings/140706/index.htm#temporary. Back |
6 | Ministerial Council on Immigration and Multicultural Affairs, ‘457 Visa’, 14 July 2006—see Commonwealth Government, Submission No. 33, p. 16. Back |
7 | Commonwealth Government, Submission No. 33, p. 16. Back |
8 | DIAC, Exhibit 26, p. 1. Back |
9 | Mr Parsons, DIAC, Transcript of Evidence, 1 June 2007, pp. 68-69. Back |
10 | Commonwealth Government, Submission No. 33, p. 1. Back |
11 | Queensland Government, Submission No. 65, p. 1. Back |
Print Preliminary Pages (PDF 570KB) | < - Report Home : Chapter 1 - > |