1 / 8

Bradley So, Lawyer, Queen City Law Rita Worner, Lawyer, Queen City Law

Capped Family Policy Changes: Comments from the Immigration Industry. Bradley So, Lawyer, Queen City Law Rita Worner, Lawyer, Queen City Law. Topics Implementation of the New Policy Why the Sudden Change? Fairness and Natural Justice Comments and discussion Objectives

fadey
Télécharger la présentation

Bradley So, Lawyer, Queen City Law Rita Worner, Lawyer, Queen City Law

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Capped Family Policy Changes: Comments from the Immigration Industry Bradley So, Lawyer, Queen City Law Rita Worner, Lawyer, Queen City Law

  2. Topics Implementation of the New Policy Why the Sudden Change? Fairness and Natural Justice Comments and discussion Objectives Economics vs Consistency Removal of the Sibling Category Pros and Cons Comments and discussion New Parent Category Pros and cons Comments and discussion OVERVIEW

  3. IMPLEMENTATION • Background • Announced 10 May 2012 • Closed 16 May 2012 • Failed Policy • Why the sudden change? • Cost • Prevent large numbers of last minute applicants in order to keep processing times manageable • Allow applications that had already been sent prior to announcement to be received and lodged

  4. IMPLEMENTATION • Fairness and Natural Justice • Sufficient notice • Legitimate expectation • Remedy • Absolute Discretion • Supreme Sikh Council of New Zealand v Minister of Immigration • Goddard J: • “The plaintiff is seeking to be put back in the position that it would have been had the Parent and Sibling and Adult Child Categories not been closed. The reality is however that they have been closed, with the result that there are presently no relevant residence categories in existence pursuant to which any Parent and Sibling or Adult Child residence application could be received and determined. • The categories have been closed in accordance with the Minister’s lawful powers to do so in exercising his discretion under the Immigration Act 2009. This, there is no status quo to be preserved, let alone a position to be improved or enhanced by mandatory direction of the Court.”

  5. OBJECTIVES • Objectives of the Family Category • Strengthen families and communities • Contribute to NZ’s economic transformation and social development • New Policy • Inconsistent? • Factors to consider • Cost • Economic Benefits and other contribution • International obligation – NZ’s reputation • Comments and Recommendations • Open forum

  6. SIBLING & ADULT CHILD CATEGORY • Pros • Increase cap for SMC • Expected to save $6 million in Government benefits • Fraud • Free up resources • Cons • Reputation • Increase lower quality applications under other categories • Turn away SMC applicants • Competitive advantage • Recommendations and Discussion • Retain policy with higher qualifications

  7. New Parent Category – Tier 1 • Pros • Fiscal Savings • Attract and retain contributing migrants • Resolve the centre of gravity issue • Backlogs • Improve settlement outcomes • Competitive advantage • Cons • Fiscal cost – health, supperannuation • Reputation? • Parents with dependent not eligible • Not in line with citizenship requirements • Recommendation and discussion

  8. New Parent Category Tier 2 • Pros • Consistent with objectives • Cons • 7 years? • Economic benefit • Cost of implementation • Recommendation and discussion • Remove policy

More Related