Where dose it say "it may be the case that DIMA is
thinking about giving transitional protection to people who have a
permanent residence visa granted before January 2007"
On another note though there is a new clause in new citizenship bill to
count up to 2 years on temp visa toward you citizenship.
Jim
gingerkitty wrote:
> > As I have said already, its your call. If it doesn't work for you -
> > that's fine. I'm not trying to compel you to apply for permanent
> > residency. I'm simply making it known that there are pathways
> > available for SIR visaholders to obtain p/r sooner than is more widely
> > advertised - and some will certainly be interested.
> >
> > Note also that you will be incurring costs such as medicals and police
> > certificates even if you take one of the "traditional" routes to p/r -
> > and I'd take issue with how you get to your costings (not sure why you
> > have even one week of hotel accommodation let alone a fortnight, when
> > typically 3 to 4 days outside Australia is sufficient), but each to
> > their own.
> >
> > Best regards.
>
> It was successful in my case. I was recently granted a 134 Skill
> Matching Visa.
>
> I took one of the routes that Alan is mentioning. I am still in the UK
> and I was already the holder of a SIR visa but when my occupation
> (welfare worker) came onto the occupations in demand list for SA in July
> 2005, I applied for state sponsorship (thinking I could apply for an
> STNI visa but this is not allowed) so instead I applied for the skill-
> matching visa with my state nomination.
>
> I applied in December 2005 and was granted my permanent visa in June
> 2006. When I got my passport back from the Aus High Commission in
> London, the SIR visa had been invalidated and the new permanent 134 visa
> attached instead.
>
> As regards to costs, yes I had to pay another visa lodgement fee (around
> =A3790) and pay for another set of medicals (around =A3220) and new police
> checks (=A310.) I already had my skills assessment from the AIWCW so I
> didn't have to pay for that again.
>
> The benefits for me are:
>
> 1. That I now have the leeway of 5 years to decide on what I want to do
> and and get myself sorted out etc. before having to commit to moving
> (whereas with the SIR visa I would have had to be in SA by last month,
> July 2006 to make the time deadline.)
>
> 2. It's easier to get a job if you have a permanent visa. Especially if
> you are looking for jobs with local government which I was intending to
> do. (Now I'm thinking of retraining in the legal field.)
>
> 3. It will be a lot quicker to get citizenship. In total, just 2 years
> (3?) as a PR if I have the 134 visa. With the SIR 495 visa, I'd need
> to spend 2 years in SA on the SIR, then a further 2 years (3?) to
> gain PR on an STNI visa after the SIR.
>
> Also, if the rumours are correct, it may be the case that DIMA is
> thinking about giving transitional protection to people who have a
> permanent residence visa granted before January 2007 (when the new 3
> year rules for PR are supposed to be being made law). ie. if you have
> been granted PR before Jannuary 2007 then whenever you actually move to
> Australia, you will only have to have 2 years PR to get citizenship. If
> I had gone ahead to Oz with my SIR visa, I would not get my PR until
> AFTER January 2007 and hence I'd likely be looking at 3 years PR before
> citizenship.
>
> All in all, I think it was money well spent in my case.
>=20
> --=20
> Posted via http://britishexpats.com
|