World

Kiwis in Australia say Home Affairs seems to have fast-tracked 'redundant' $4000 visas

18:15 pm on 17 May 2023

By Melissa Maykin

Some Kiwis in Australia are asking whether their permanent visa applications were fast-tracked only months before they were not required for them to become citizens. Photo: 123RF

New Zealanders in Australia have accused the Department of Home Affairs of a cash grab, saying their permanent visa applications appear to have been fast-tracked just months before it was announced they would not be required to become citizens.

From 1 July, Kiwis on Special Category visas who have lived in Australia for the past four years can apply directly for citizenship without becoming permanent residents first.

While many New Zealanders, including Rob Knox, were thrilled about the announcement, they said they also felt blindsided after spending thousands of dollars on a visa that would soon be redundant.

Knox said he decided to apply to become a citizen after realising during the Covid-19 pandemic he "lacked many basic rights" in Australia, despite having lived there with his Australian wife and children for 10 years.

For example, he said if he had been required to return to New Zealand at the time, he would not have been able to automatically re-enter Australia.

So, in May last year, Knox paid about $2000 to engage a migration agent to help him apply for a $4115 permanent resident visa - known as the Skilled Independent visa (subclass 189).

According to the Home Affairs website, 90 percent of applications take 25 months to process, and Knox's agent had estimated his would take about 19 months.

He was therefore surprised when it was approved in just eight months, on 19 January.

But three months later, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese unveiled a new direct pathway to citizenship, making it easier for about 350,000 Kiwis living in Australia to vote and access government services such as the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS).

"Clearly, [the government] just wanted that money to go in because if we had been given a heads up from our immigration lawyer or the department to say, 'Something's changing,' we might not have done it," Knox said.

"There was no update. There was no communication. It's just ridiculous.

"[It would] be really interesting to find out [how] much money have they pocketed fast-tracking [the visas]."

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Hipkins chat after a Citizenship ceremony in Brisbane. Photo: AFP / Pat Hoelscher

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and New Zealand Prime Minister Chris Hipkins chat after a Citizenship ceremony in Brisbane.

But a spokesperson for Home Affairs said the government first flagged potential changes in July last year, and then paused applications on 10 December "while it considered future migration and citizenship pathways for New Zealand citizens in Australia".

The spokesperson also said the decision to prioritise visa applications from New Zealanders was announced in last October's budget and was "consistent with its broader commitment to clear visa backlogs across the board".

But several Kiwis who spoke to the ABC about the issue said they spent countless hours meticulously compiling supporting documents and meeting other criteria so they did not want to abandon the application process without knowing what would happen after the pause.

Meanwhile, Knox said the 10 December announcement "slipped through via an update on the website".

"There was no attempt to notify applicants," he said.

Kiwis spent thousands 'unnecessarily'

Knox said he paid the final instalment of $3290 for his visa in late January when he received notification that his visa had been granted.

Combined with agent fees, he said it was an expensive exercise.

"What I've ended up with is a PR (permanent residency visa) for 85 days, which I paid $6000 for, that is basically redundant. There's no use whatsoever," Knox said.

"I think someone knew on the 10th of December that they were going to close it down."

Fellow Kiwi Tom, who did not want to use his real name to protect his identity, said he applied for his visa in September and it was granted just four months later in January this year.

"It now appears that the expediting of visas was a means to generate additional revenue prior to the April 2023 announcement," Tom said.

"The government should have paused all applications when serious discussions were being held about the future of the 189."

He said he was hopeful of getting his money back but had been unsuccessful.

"At no stage did they offer a refund … or tell me that the visa would become redundant," Tom said.

"I've spent thousands of dollars unnecessarily in a time of economic hardship."

A Home Affairs spokesperson said there were only "very limited circumstances in which a visa application charge may be refunded".

'Reset the clock'

Australia has long been accused of treating New Zealand residents unfairly.

Tensions reached boiling point at a joint press conference in Sydney in 2020 when former New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern grilled her then-counterpart Scott Morrison over the issue.

Albanese's announcement last month of the new direct pathway to citizenship was seen as a major win for New Zealand, which has spent years protesting the Howard government's decision in 2001 to establish a "Special Category" visa for New Zealanders in Australia.

That Special Category visa allows New Zealanders to stay in Australia but restricts their capacity to access some government services and payments.

Lobby group Oz Kiwi fought hard for the reforms and chair Joanne Cox said they went "further than we even hoped".

"They have basically reset the clock to [before] the February 2001 arrangements, which is quite amazing," she said.

Regarding the concerns of those who had recently spent thousands on the permanent resident visa, Cox said there were signs that changes were imminent.

"If I was applying for a new visa, and suddenly they closed applications on that visa pending a review, my ears would prick up and I'd be saying, 'Why are they doing that? What's it about? Is it going to [be abolished]?'" she said.

Tom said he wished the government had been more forthcoming with information when it was considering changes.

"I'm disappointed and disheartened in the process and feel that I've been left financially disadvantaged by poor communication from the government."

- ABC