|
马上注册，结交更多好友，享用更多功能，让你轻松玩转社区。
您需要 登录 才可以下载或查看，没有帐号？FreeOZ用户注册
x
恐慌的逼近和逼近的恐慌（六）
2009年11月13日澳移民部长伊文斯接受
ABC采访的录音、英文原文、中文翻译
2009年12月30日星期三
唐林律师行
2009年11月13日，澳大利亚联邦政府移民与公民部部长、执政党工党上议院领袖Chris Evans伊文斯就光受关注的普通技术移民审理积压的问题接受了澳大利亚广播公司（Australia Broadcasting Corporation, ABC）电台记者Peter Mares的采访。唐林律师行认为，这一第一手材料的访谈录有助于读者明白改革纲要文件出台的背景。也有助于更多人的认清真相。唐林律师行特别把它翻译出来。
一、录音录音。
二、英文原文。
Peter Mares: While public attention has been focused on asylum seekers arriving in boats in recent weeks, fundamental changes to Australia's skilled migration program have gone almost unnoticed.
The changes affect tens of thousands of people, many of whom are distressed and angry. Having shelled out thousands of dollars in costs and fees to apply to migrate to Australia, they've now been told that it will be years before applications are even looked at.
Affected applicants within Australia must wait until at least the end of 2011 before their cases are processed; migrants applying from overseas must wait until at leas the end of 2012.
As we reported two weeks ago on The National Interest, their cases are on indefinite hold because of new priority processing arrangements put in place by the Immigration Minister, Senator Chris Evans, who joins me now from Perth. Senator Evans, thanks for your time.
Chris Evans: My pleasure.
Peter Mares: How many people now have their cases on hold?
Chris Evans: Look I don't agree with most of the characterisation of the introduction Peter. They're not on hold, what people do is they apply for permanent migration to Australia, and they're assessed, and we determine based on the needs of Australia, and our priorities, who gains permanent migration. We operate a scheme in support of the national interest, so people may well be facing longer waits in some occupation, and of course others are getting quicker treatment if they're in the occupations which are necessary for the growth of our economy. So I don't actually agree with the characterisation you put in your introduction.
Peter Mares: Well your Department's put out some information when you made changes to priority processing on 23rd September this year, and in those changes it says to people they will have to wait if they're onshore applicants, and they're not on what's called the Critical Skills List, and they're not sponsored by an employer, they will wait until the end of 2011 before their application is processed at least. And applicants from offshore will wait until at least the end of 2012 before their applications are processed. Now if that's not being on hold, I don't know what is.
Chris Evans: Well they've always had to wait. We determine the size of the migration program. Quite frankly, if we decide it's going to be 10,000 people next year, they might be waiting for 20 or 30 years. The point is, we're trying to give them an indication, on the current policy settings, and current levels of migration, about when they're likely to have their application considered. But applying to migrate to Australia doesn't give you a right to migrate to Australia.
Peter Mares: Understood. But when people applied they had a fair understanding of the length of time it would take; they were told nine, perhaps twelve months was the amount of time. These are people who have amassed the 120 points on the Skilled Migration test for migration to Australia on the points level; they are qualified to migrate to Australia, they were given every indication that Australia wanted migrants, that it was welcoming migrants, they paid fees of $2,000 to $2,500 to apply to come to Australia. They've been asked to do health checks and police checks, so they've paid thousands of dollars in migration agent fees, thousands of dollars perhaps, or hundreds of dollars in getting medical certificates and getting their qualifications assessed, and you're saying to them they might wait 20 or 30 years now.
Chris Evans: What I'm saying to you Peter is that while I know you're sympathetic to their cause, it's not an accurate description of what occurs. The situation is, and has been for many years, we have more people apply for migration to Australia than places available, and the Australian government reserves the right to set the annual migration intake. Now what we've seen in the last year or two in particular, is a large increase in people seeking to migrate to Australia, out of countries that are often having economic downturns, and when we had our own downturning economy, we reduced the size of the migration program. So that's going to have an impact on waiting times. All we do is try and predict for people when they're likely to be processed. Now I accept that people pay fees etc. and I've actually asked my Department to have a look at whether we can't do something in terms of people who've paid fees and application fees and then seek to discontinue their application because I do think the current system doesn't do well in that area. But we're not going to take in more migrants to this country if we don't think they're going to have good economic outcomes, or they don't meet the national interest of Australia, and while there may be people in the queue and they may be impacted, I'm not going to make a decision that says We're driven by the number of people in the queue as to how many people we allow to migrate to Australia.
Peter Mares: Let me come back to my first question then, and re-phrase it: how many people are now in that queue?
Chris Evans: We think at the moment I think there's about 30,000 onshore and about 105,000 offshore, but of course we get applications every day so the -
Peter Mares: So the queue's getting longer.
Chris Evans: Yes, it may well be. Obviously the last figures I had was about 30,000 onshore and 105,000 offshore. But people make a decision about whether they choose to apply, and obviously they take their chances in a sense, that we might run a bigger migration program next year if the economy was on the up, and that might see people get through more quickly. Equally, if the recession was to bite more deeply, we might run a smaller program, and that would lengthen people's wait.
Peter Mares: People of course do take their chances, but they were given indications about how long it might take, and many people have already been in the system 18 months, and some were at the top of the queue, they had case officers assigned, they were asked for the final health checks, these are people offshore. In other words, they were a couple of weeks away from a visa on all normal indications. Now they're told they're back at the bottom of the queue. I mean you can understand - I mean do you make an apology to those people for what's happened?
Chris Evans: No, I don't apologise. I mean I accept that there are some cases where people feel aggrieved, and they've not fared well out of the changes, but you've got to have a cut-off date. If you make a change, you've got to make a change on a certain date, and what we did is, we said 'We want to better prioritise which skills come into the country. We can't to actually do it in the national interest. What we had is, under the previous system, we had hairdressers being processed in front of doctors and engineers, because of the date of their application, when we were crying out for medical professionals. And when I came to government, I just thought this is crazy, we're not prioritising the people we need, we've got a queue based on, if you like date of application rather than based on the needs of Australia. And we are trying to reconfigure the system to get a more rational system in place. The Critical Skills List is part of that, but there's a range of other changes being planned which will change some of the fundamentals of the system.
Peter Mares: I'm sure most people would agree that the situation wasn't in the national interest to have hairdressers processed ahead of doctors, but the reality is that the government continues to use permanent migration as a carrot to attract international students to our education system. That connection is still there, but that's part of the issue. And secondly, why didn't the government simply say 'We don't want any more hairdressers, we have enough, we're not accepting any more applications.' You are still taking applications for hairdressers and cooks and so on.
Chris Evans: That's right, Peter, but we've also made it clear that we're reviewing the MODL -
Peter Mares: This is the Migration Occupation on Demand List, which lists things like cooks and hairdressers on which you get points to pass the migration test to come to Australia.
Chris Evans: That's right. So what we've announced is that we're reviewing that methodology. There's some discussion governments out, people are responding to those, and government will make a decision in the next couple of months about how we might restructure that, and that will obviously have an impact, because again, I don't think the system has been serving us well. If you look at the numbers of people who've come in to the country under the Skilled Migration program in recent years, we had an over-representation of accountants, hairdressers and cooks. And I think that's just an irrational outcome driven by the education links, and I've made it very clear I think the link between education and migration has been far too strong, and that there ought to be more consideration of broader national interest.
Peter Mares: So do you agree with Kelvin Thompson, your backbench colleague who said on this program he thinks that link should be removed, in fact we shouldn't offer migration as a carrot to attract international students to Australia?
Chris Evans: Look I think we've got to get the balance better adjusted. What we've got to balance is that we want international students to come and study here, and we want to have some of them stay and become permanent residents, because we need their skills. What we don't want is a situation where people taking courses in Australia drives our migration program. And at the moment, Kelvin's right to point out that the balance is wrong, and I've been talking about this for some time, and we're looking to make adjustments. But I don't think his solution is the answer; I think getting the balance better is the solution.
Peter Mares: Coming back to an issue raised before, the fact that these people, the people in the queue, feel very aggrieved about the amount of money they've spent on these applications. You suggested you will offer a refund, you'll consider offering a refund to any migrant in this queue who says 'Well I'm pulling out because I can't wait five years, or however long it might be.'
Chris Evans: No, Peter I don't want to overstate it. What I was I've asked the Department to have a look at how the current system works, because I think it is the case that we keep accepting applications from people who may never qualify and I think we've got to be able to do better than that. And I've asked them to look at alternative systems, and that would help us deal with the fact that people are paying money when they may not be much chance of making it, if you like, and I've also sought to see if we can't have better systems so that people aren't paying that money upfront. But we're certainly not in the position at the moment to offer refunds, in fact the legislation prevents it.
Peter Mares: Right. Because there's another problem here, and that is that you could have people applying simply because they know the queue is so long, you could have foreign students graduating from Australia's universities who have no real strong skills that Australia needs, probably not much chance of migrating successfully, but who will apply in order to get a bridging visa that may keep them in Australia for three years or more with work rights.
Chris Evans: Well that may well be the case, and that's one of the problems that I'm highlighting. And at the moment I think you're trying to have it both ways, but -
Peter Mares: Well I'm pointing out that there are various indications of this. I mean you said -
Chris Evans: Yes, well that's why, Peter, we've got the review of the MODL because that will impact on the points people earn and will if you like, help make that adjustment that people who are able to get those extensions are people who have a reasonable chance of a permanent migration outcome.
Peter Mares: But while you're doing that, why not put up the 'Closed' sign, and say, you know, 'Back in a year. We won't accept any more applications until we work out who we actually want because we already have more than enough for the next several years'?
Chris Evans: Well you were just sort of criticising me for having changed the rules and cut people off -
Peter Mares: No, I'm not criticising you for using administrative process, that is delays in processing, rather than making a substantial decision in making -
Chris Evans: Well it's not delays in processing Peter, that's -
Peter Mares: It is.
Chris Evans: No, it's not a delay in processing, it's of prioritising: us determining who comes -
Peter Mares: So you're speeding it up by -
Chris Evans: No we're making a rational choice on behalf of Australia. We're saying we want a demand-driven system, not a supply-driven, not to accept people in the order in which they applied, whether they've got the skills we need or whether they've got good prospects of employment. But for us to try and target our schemes so that we bring in the people with the skills that we need, and your arguments is effectively to say I ought to prioritise hairdressers over doctors.
Peter Mares: No, no quite the opposite, Minister, my argument is this: you should say we are prioritising doctors and engineers and the people we need, and we're saying to others 'Don't bother applying; there is no place for you.'
Chris Evans: But that judgment is one based on the size of the migration program and their points results. And what I'm saying to you is in terms of the points results for each applicant, we're viewing the MODL, which will impact on some of those people, but we can't stop people applying, and I don't think saying 'The doors are closed' is the right answer. As I say, a lot of this depends on the size of the migration program, and at the moment we're still running a very large migration program, but not as large as we intended to last year. It's affected by the economy, and our applications are affected by the economies of other countries. People are more likely to apply if their own countries' economy's gone downhill, for instance, we've seen a lot of Irish applications in recent years as the Irish economy went bad. So I don't think we need to tell people not to apply, but we do need to try and give them an indication, which we have been, is that with certain skill sets they're unlikely to be processed in the short term.
Peter Mares: Minister, thank you very much for your time.
Chris Evans: My pleasure, Peter.
Peter Mares: Immigration Minister, Senator Chris Evans. To give us your thoughts on this issue, click the Have your Say button on our website or call the feedback line by dialling 1300 936 222.
三、唐林律师行的中文翻译。请以英文原文为准。唐林律师行对不同翻译引起的歧义不负责任。
移民部长回应积压顾虑
Peter Mares: 当公众的注意力被最近发生的坐船来到澳大利亚，寻求避难的人们所吸引时，澳大利亚技术移民政策的剧变几乎并不被人们所关注。
这些变化影响了几百万人，他们中的一些人绝望、愤怒。他们花费了成千上万元澳币的成本、费用申请移民澳洲，现在竟被告知他们的申请将会在几年后才能被看到、审理。
在澳境内，受影响的申请人必须等着，至少要等到2011年年底，他们的案子才有可能被审理。境外的移民申请者至少要等到2012年年底。
正如我们于两周前在《国家利益》的报道中所述，他们的案子在被无限期的搁置，因为移民部出台了新的优先审理政策，今天，移民部长Chris Evans先生，应邀参加我们的节目现场。感谢您能从百忙之中抽空来参与我们的节目。
Chris Evans:荣幸之至。
Peter Mares: 目前有多少人的移民案子被搁置呢？
Chris Evans: Peter, 我不同意您介绍中的大部分的定性说明。那些案件并不是被搁置，申请人所做的事是他们永久移居到澳大利亚，他们需要被评估，我们需要基于澳大利亚的需要和优先性作出决定，谁能获得永居的资格。我们启动、运作一个计划是为维护国家的利益，因此，从事一些职业的人也许会面临更长时间的等待，当然，其他的一些人如果他们所从事的职业是我们经济发展必要的、急需的，那么他们的案件会得到更快的处理。所以，我实际上并不同意您的介绍中的一些措辞。
Peter Mares: 那么，在今年的9月23日，移民部所出台了一些在优先审理方面的政策变化， 这些政策变化告诉人们，如果他们是在岸申请人，职业也不在所谓的紧缺职业列表上，且没有雇主做担保，他们将别无选择的等待，至少要等到2011年年底，他们的案件才可能被审理到。离岸申请人则至少需要等到2012年年底，他们的案件才可能被审理到。如果这不叫做搁置，我不知道这是什么。
Chris Evans: 他们一向是需要等待的。我们决定移民计划的规模。非常坦白的讲，如果我们决定明年将审理10,000人，那么他们很可能会等上20年或30年。重点是，我们正在努力给他们提供一些迹象，让他们了解在现行的政策下，目前的移民规模下，他们的案子在什么时候有可能会审理到。但是，向澳大利亚递交移民申请并不是赋予他们移民澳大利亚的权利。
Peter Mares: 理解。可当人们递交申请时，他们对审理时间已有了一定的了解。那时，他们被告知时间为9个月，也有可能12个月。他们已经通过了技术移民120分的分数测试水平；他们有资格移民澳大利亚。种种迹象告诉他们，澳大利亚需要移民者，他们是受欢迎的移民者，他们支付了澳币2,000元到2,500元去申请移民到澳大利亚。他们也被告知做了体检、无犯罪记录证明，他们因此花费了几千元的澳币支付给移民代理机构，为获得医院体检证明，为让他们的资格通过评估，花费了可能上百、上千元，现在你们告诉他们要等上20年或者30年。
Chris Evans: Peter, 我想告诉你的是，我知道您同情他们的遭遇，但你对现实情况的描述是不恰当的。实际的情况是，这么多年来，申请移民到澳大利亚的人已经超过了我们的限额，而且澳大利亚政府有权决定每年移民的纳入人数。尤其，在过去的一两年内，我们所看到的是，因自己所在的国家面临一些经济萧条而寻求移民澳大利亚的人数大大增加了。当我们也面临我们国家经济萧条时，我们减少了移民项目的规模。因此，这将在等待时间上产生一些影响。我们能为他们所做的是试图预测他们的移民案子什么时候有可能被审理到。我承认一些人们支付了一些费用等等，实际上，我也问过我们移民部看看对于那些支付过一些费用和申请费然后又终止自己申请的人们我们是否可以做些什么？因为我的确认为目前的体系在这方面运作的并不好。但如果我们认为这些移民者不能带来好的经济效益，或者他们不能满足澳大利亚国家利益的需求，我们将不准备吸纳更多的人来到这个国家。即使现在有些人也许在排队，也许会受到影响，我也不打算做出这样的决定说我们要受正在排队的人数的影响来决定我们允许多少人移民澳大利亚。
Peter Mares: 那么让我们回到第一个问题，我重新措辞：有多少人正在排队呢？
Chris Evans: 我们认为，现在，大约在岸申请人为30,000人和离岸申请人有105,000人。但是，当然，我们每天都在收到移民申请，所以，这个……..
Peter Mares: 所以，这个队伍正在越排越长。
Chris Evans: 是的，也许正是这样。显然，我所知道的最近的数字就是大约在岸申请人为30,000人和离岸申请人有105,000人。是否选择申请是由人们自己决定的，显然他们在某种程度上正试图碰一下运气。如果明年经济好转，我们也有可能明年扩大移民计划的规模，人们也可能会更快的获得批准。同样的，如果经济更加恶化、萧条，我们或许将规模缩的更小，那将延长人们的等待。
Peter Mares:人们确实是在碰运气，但是他们也确实被告知他们需要等待多久，许多人已经在这个系统中等了18个月，而且一些之前已经在队伍的前面了，他们的案子也已经分到签证官了，他们应要求也做了最后的健康检查：这些人是一些离岸的申请人。换句话说，所有正常迹象显示他们离拿到永居签证只有几周的时间了，但现在他们被告知他们又排在了队伍的最后。我的意思是说您能理解——我是说您会向那些人对所发生的事情道歉吗？
Chris Evans:不，我不会道歉。我是说我承认有些案件的申请人会感到很委屈，在机会上他们的确遭到了不平等的待遇。但是，你必须有个时间点。如果你要做改变，你就必须确定在某一日做出改变。而我们所做的，就像我们所说的那样“我们想把技术移民的优先顺序排得更好”。我们实际上是从国家利益来考虑。在以前的体系中，我们曾遇到过这种情况：当我们急需医疗人员时，根据递交申请的时间的先后，发型师排在医生、工程师的前面而被审理了。但是在我就任时，我就觉得这简直太疯狂了，我们优先审理的人并不是我们所急需的人才，排队是基于递交申请的时间而不是基于澳大利亚的需要。我们正在试图改变这种体制，并以更为理性的体制取而代之。紧缺职业表就是基于这种考虑，但是仍然有许多其他的改变正在计划中，这些都将改变这个体制中的一些基础原则。
Peter Mares:我确定，大部分的人们都同意，优先审理发型师而不是医生的这种情况并不是基于国家利益考虑，但现实是，政府继续利用永久移居澳洲作为诱饵来吸引更多的国际留学生加入我们的教育体系。这种关联仍然存在，但这也是这个问题的一部分。第二，为什么政府不直接说，“我们不需要更多的发型师，我们现有的已经足够，我们不再接受任何更多的申请。”而您们仍然在接受发型师、厨师等等申请人的申请。
Chris Evans: 是的，Peter, 但是我们也已明确表示过，我们将重新审视MODL。
Peter Mares:这是移民职业需求表，它罗列了一些像厨师、发型师的职业，通过这些职业，可以获得分数以通过移民分数评估来到澳大利亚。
Chris Evans:是的。因此，我们已经声明我们正在重新审视那套方法。政府部门已经进行了一些讨论，人们也已经对此作出一些回应。同时，政府将在几个月内作出决定，我们怎样重新安排，那显然也将会带来一定的影响。因为，我不认为现在的这个体系在很好的为我们服务。如果你看一下近几年内通过技术移民来到这个国家的移民者的人数，你会发现会计、发型师和厨师的人数很多。我认为那仅是教育联系的驱动下获得的一个非理性的结果。我已经非常明确表示过，我认为这种教育与移民之间的联系太强了，我们应该更多的考虑到更为广泛的国家利益。
Peter Mares: 您的同僚Kelvin Thompson曾表示，他认为这种联系应该消除掉，事实上，我们不应该将之作为诱饵来吸引国际留学生到澳大利亚学习，您同意他的观点吗？
Chris Evans: 我认为我们应该更好地平衡二者的关系。我们想要调整的是我们希望国际留学生来这学习，我们希望他们中的一些人留下来成为永久居民，因为我们需要他们的技术。我们并不希望这样一种情形出现：就是用在澳留学驾驭移民项目的发展。Kelvin指出目前的这种平衡是错误的，他是正确的，我也曾经谈论过这方面，我们也一直希望做一些调整。但是，我认为他的方法并不是这个问题的答案，我的观点是改善、调整其中的关系才是解决之道。
Peter Mares:那让我们回到之前提到的一个问题，现在的情况是，这些人们，这些正在排队的人们对他们在申请上的花费非常气愤。您曾建议您们将退费，对正在排队的申请人因为等不起5年或者更长的时间而想要退出的，您们会考虑将为他们退费。
Chris Evans:不，Peter, 我不想夸大此事。我曾呼吁移民部审视目前的体制运转情况，因为我认为我们是一直在不停地接受递交的申请，可能一些人的资格并不具备，我们应该能够做的比现在更好。我建议他们审视一些替代性的体制，这些替代性的体制可能有助于我们解决目前这些人交了钱但没有多大机会申请成功的现状。我也曾寻求一种方式，看看如果我们不能建立更好的体制的话，人们就可以先不用预付费用。但是目前的状况是我们不能退费，事实上法律也是不允许的。
Peter Mares:的确如此。因为这还存在另外一个问题，那就是，尽管这些毕业于澳大利亚大学的外国留学生并没有澳大利亚需要的很强的技术能力，甚至知道自己根本不可能移民成功，但他们也会递交申请，因为他们知道排队的人很多，他们可以通过过桥签证，使他们获得在澳大利亚三年或者更长的工作时间。
Chris Evans:也许存在这种情况，这也是我所强调的问题之一。目前，我认为你们希望两全其美，但是-----
Peter Mares: 我要指出的是这个现象是有不同的表现方式的，我是说您提到-----
Chris Evans: 是的，Peter，这就是我们为什么要重新审视MODL的原因，它会影响到人们能得到的分数，它还可能有助于我们做出这样的调整：让那些有机会获批的人才可以通过申请获得延长在澳居住、工作的时间。
Peter Mares: 但是当您们在这样做的时候，为什么不挂出“关门”的标志。举个例子说“一年后再来。在此期间我们不再接受任何的申请，直至我们找出什么样的人才是我们真正想要的，因为我们收到的申请足够以后几年的审理了”？
Chris Evans:您有点指责我改变政策、阻碍了一些人——
Peter Mares:不是的，我不是在指责您是运用行政手段使程序上搁置，而不是作出实质性的决定在——
Chris Evans: Peter, 这不是程序上的搁置，而是——
Peter Mares: 这就是程序上的搁置。
Chris Evans:不是，这不是程序上的搁置，是一种优先处理，我们来决定谁先——
Peter Mares: 所以，您加速审理是通过——
Chris Evans: 不，我们正在代表澳大利亚作出一个理性的选择。我们一直倡导需求驱动体制，而不是供应驱动体制，不是按照递交申请的顺序接受申请者，而不管他们所具备的技术是不是我们所需要的或者他们是否有个好的雇佣前景。但是我们是要试图锁定我们的目标，引进一些具备我们所需要的技术的人才，而您的观点正有效的说明我们应该优先审理发型师而不是医生。
Peter Mares:不，不，恰恰相反。部长大人，我的观点是这样的：您应该说我们正在优先审理医生、工程师和其他我们需要的人才，而告诉其他人们“不要来申请打扰我们了，我们已经没有位儿给你们来了。”
Chris Evans:但是裁决的做出是基于移民计划的规模和他们的分数结果。我想说的是，就每位申请人的分数结果而言，我们正在审视MODL，这将会影响到一些人，但是我们不能阻止人们申请，我也不赞同说“关门”的说法。正如我所说的，很多因素取决于移民计划的规模，目前，我们仍然拥有一个非常大的移民计划，但不是大到像去年一样的规模。这是受到了经济因素的影响，我们的申请也受到了其他国家经济的影响。如果人们所在国家的经济萧条了，那么这些人们就更希望申请。譬如说，当爱尔兰经济衰退时，我们收到了许多爱尔兰人的移民申请。因此，我不认为我们需要告诉人们不要申请了，但是我们需要试图给他们一些提示，正如我们所做的那样，告诉他们具备某些技术的申请人的案子可能不会在短时间内审理到。
Peter Mares:部长大人，非常感谢您的时间。
Chris Evans: Peter, 我非常荣幸。
Peter Mares:本期节目的嘉宾是移民部长Chris Evans先生。如果您关于本期话题有任何想法，请登录我们的网站，点击“我要留言”，或者拨打热线电话1300 936 222.ABC
[ 本帖最后由 唐林律师 于 1-1-2010 16:14 编辑 ] |
发表于 30-12-2009 17:06:54
收藏
赞
踩
楼主
