Recent Feedback
I was informed a few days ago as a Kiwi Living in Australia, I was issued with a 444 Visa, how can this be binding, I did not sign for this or even knew that I had obtained this, secondly as a company owner who employs Australians and pays taxes at the same rate, is it, a form of recrimination and does it abide to the constitution of Australia
Optional Information: State/Territory: Queensland
When did you become a New Zealand citizen, and when did you enter Australia to live?
I enetred Austalia on 1st Dec 2009 and I previous lived in NZ for 12 years, becomming a citizen in 2000
Then they might have made a mistake because you should have been issued with a Special Category Visa when you first entered Australia, not a 444. The 444 is a temporary visa for non NZ citizens.
This is not correct, as A New Zealand citizen, we are issued with a 444 visa comon name isXXXXX have checked this...if we not issued with the 444 Visa what visa are we issed with on entry, I have attached the govement web page, which confirms this
http://www.immi.gov.au/migrants/family/461/
About this Visa
The purpose of this visa is to allow non-New Zealand citizens to travel to and live in Australia with a New Zealand citizen family member who is a Special Category visa holder.
The Special Category (subclass 444) visa is a temporary visa automatically granted to New Zealand citizens who arrive in Australia who do not hold a permanent visa
I am sorry, I meant the 461 (not the 444). In any event, the SCV visa allow you to live, work, and reside in Australia indefinitely. But it is not a permanent resident visa.
Sorry
My question was not what Visa I may have, I asked is this Visa legally binding, understanding that as the holder I did not sign or signed to understand the condition the visia issued under, and as a tax payer do I have a case of discrimination, not be entitled to the same benifits as other tax payers
I asked is this Visa legally binding, understanding that as the holder I did not sign or signed to understand the condition the visia issued under, By voluntarily entering Australia you consented to the visa and its terms. And I do understand your argument that as a taxpayer you should have the same rights as Australians who pay taxes, but the fact of the matter is that unless you apply for a permanent resident visa and eventually become a citizen, you will always be a New Zealander in Australia.On the plus side, for the most part you have the right to lawfully live, work and reside in Australia indefinitely. Many people around the world would love to have that.________This website is revamping its feedback system, so if you have more questions related to this topic, or want to discuss it further, please reply before providing feedback.Also, if you're satisfied with the results of our chat, then I'll ask you to please provide positive feedback so that I will get credit for the time spent on your question.
I am now a permanent resident and have applied to become an Australian citizen, I asked the question on a bases of fairness, not because I personally have an axe to grind, however I do not agree that people who-ever they may be, should be treated differently, be this in Australia or any other country.... and should you invite a person and their skills to a country to use or explote, they should be give the same right do you not think.....taking this further not all 444 visa holder have a path to permanent residance...even if they whished to become a citizen. I am sorry for taking up your time, as I did not get a clear answer, your point about accepting entry is not binding in a commercial contact, not sure accurate your answer is, or should someone challange it it in a court what the out come would be....I use the assluym statement where people have right because the not or where not given due process....Thanks for very little
,I am now a permanent resident and have applied to become an Australian citizen, I asked the question on a bases of fairness, not because I personally have an axe to grind, however I do not agree that people who-ever they may be, should be treated differently, be this in Australia or any other country.... and should you invite a person and their skills to a country to use or explote, they should be give the same right do you not think.....taking this further not all 444 visa holder have a path to permanent residance...even if they whished to become a citizen. I am sorry for taking up your time, as I did not get a clear answer, your point about accepting entry is not binding in a commercial contact, not sure how accurate your answer is, or should someone challange it it in a court, what the out come would be....I use the assluym statement where people have right because they have not or where not given due process....Thanks for very little
Relist: Inaccurate answer.
I am sorry for taking up your time, as I did not get a clear answer, your point about accepting entry is not binding in a commercial contact, not sure how accurate your answer is, or should someone challange it it in a court, what the out come would be Okay, I will just cut to the chase here. The Australian Constitution exclusively gives some powers to the states, and some to the federal government. One of the powers given exclusively to the federal government is the power to govern immigration law.That means for all non-citizens coming to Australia, regardless of where they are coming from, the Australian federal government dictates the terms through migration regulations. So it is constitutional, and taking this to Court trying to claim otherwise would likely fail.In 1901 when the Constitution came into being, New Zealand was offered a chance to join Australia and be two of its states. NZ rejected the offer, and now its citizens are treated preferentially, but the path to Australian citizenship is still elusive for some Kiwis.________This website is revamping its feedback system, so if you have more questions related to this topic, or want to discuss it further, please reply before providing feedback.Also, if you're satisfied with the results of our chat, then I'll ask you to please provide positive feedback so that I will get credit for the time spent on your question.
Your advise or direction then flys in the face under laws international laws undertaken and ratified by Australia ......its legal obligations under the following articles of international law: Article 9 - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ratified by Australia – i.e.: legally binding) The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to social security, including social insurance.
Article 16: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ratified by Australia – i.e.: legally binding) Everyone shall have the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law. Article 26: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ratified by Australia – i.e.: legally binding) All persons are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to the equal protection of the law. In this respect, the law shall prohibit any discrimination and guarantee to all persons equal and effective protection against discrimination on any ground such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
- as described by the Committee on Economic, Social ,and Cultural rights in [37] of General Comment 19, The Right To Social Security E/C.12/GC/19:
37. Non-nationals should be able to access non-contributory schemes for income support, affordable access to health care and family support. Any restrictions, including a qualification period, must be proportionate and reasonable
Lastly, the fact that you suggest that the acceptance of entry, binds you to the conditions of entry.....may not be held up in law. Am I true to say that every other Visa has a section outlining the terms and condition at the base of this visa aplication you are asked to sign and date.....if this is the case why is a signature required....I also refer to the landing card, again question are asked and condition are spelt out, thes card require a date and signature.....a fine can not be imposed unless that card contains the signature and date...under law
I refer to the fedral govement plan to deport illegal persons entring Australia to another country.... the court held up the rights of these people...therfore the suggestion the goverment has assertive powers in migration law is again not correct ....
If you want a detailed opinion on this, then you need to engage a barrister to draft for you what lawyer's call a Legal Advice on Prospects. Basically this is a written legal opinion prepared by a barrister who practices Constitutional law, which researches case law, as well as the prevailing legislation - and then the barrister draws a conclusion in respect to whether you are likely to win your matter if you sue.Obviously, if you do want to press ahead, the first step will be finding a solicitor. Depending on where in New South Wales you reside I may be able to recommend a good solicitor who could help. Just let me know if you're interested.
Experience: I did my law degree at the University of Queensland
Thanks Alex your advise noted
I was happy to help. As someone who came to Australia as a non-citizen and worked my way through the visa process and eventually citizenship, I know too well how difficult and cumbersome the process is.
Thanks, I agree with you, however I do believe that the system should treat all with fairness. I was born in Africa which was labeled as a raciest country.....however that was easy to see.... Black on white...but not all agreed with it...including Australia and the people here, however I do see why people become very angry when they not treat as other but expected be charged thru taxes and leveys at the same rate to recieve a lot less. In my case I employ 17 Australians and 3 non Australians.....there was no mention of what was required when I brought a house or set up the bussiness, a year ago I became aware of the situation only because someone told me that we need permenant residance (if you have residence indefinitely this implies that you are perment).....I believe that if you have the right to settle in a country there has to be a path to which you can be accepted..... but for many there is no path and their futures are bleak...and many will not know really what situation they in until a need arises....I believe that before you enter Australia, you should be made aware of the process or if you have the right to live and work...you should have the right to make you situation permenant......
I believe that before you enter Australia, you should be made aware of the process or if you have the right to live and work...you should have the right to make you situation permanent. I agree with you. But I don't think fairness to the individual is what Australia's immigration policy tries to achieve. Rather its goal is to fill a skills shortage and pander to businesses who cannot find Australians to meet labour needs.The aspirations of foreigners, including those from New Zealand, are not foremost on the mind of Australia's immigration policy which tends to view them as an expendable resource they can send back when their usefulness is over.
I think if a lawyer want to make a vast amount of money he should set up a claim and invite people on the 444 visa for a fee of lets say 2000 to take up the claim within a very short time there would be a very large fund to take this further and would also make a name for himself as a lawyer