3. Streamlining processes

3.1
During the early stages of this inquiry, the Committee heard evidence about visas and related processes that could be streamlined to better support industries and businesses to recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Regulatory burdens and uncertainty

3.2
The Committee received evidence on some aspects of the application process for visas. Mr Cecil Bass, a migration agent, characterised the skilled migration program as ‘a lottery’, noting that it is ‘very difficult to engage with’ multiple layers of bureaucracy.1
3.3
The Motor Trade Association of South Australia and the Northern Territory (MTA) discussed feedback from their members, which indicated that:
…while they are keen to engage skilled overseas workers, their experience with employer sponsored skilled migration visas is that the process is complex and fraught with red tape. Many of our members running small and medium sized businesses are time poor, have a lack of access to practical information and they may not have the financial resources to access advice or support from migration lawyers, who are often used by our members who have previously employed skilled migrants.2
3.4
Dr Peter Cull of ICT International made similar comments, stating that after submitting an application:
There is no transparency in the system whatsoever. I feel it’s like a lottery. One day perhaps we may get an envelope in the mail that will tell us we have been successful and that the applicant can now come, or not – no different from buying a lottery ticket.3
3.5
Dr Cull discussed the difficulties he encountered sponsoring a skilled worker from Brazil, and how this imposes on his business:
How can you manage a business if you've got no transparency for skilled staff? This skilled person will lead to at least two or three local people being able to be employed because of the sales he would generate from Brazil… The problem in getting the person here is not money. The problem is the lack of transparency and the inability to have any knowledge of what is happening within the system, despite believing, with our local immigration person, that we have conformed with and done everything correctly.4
3.6
The South Australian Department for Innovation and Skills noted that:
Currently, the barriers, risks, costs and timeframe to sponsor skilled migrants outweighs the benefits for many regional employers, and this is evidenced by the drastic decline in employer-sponsored visa grants in recent, pre-COVID years. This needs to change urgently if the migration program is to enable businesses to access the skilled workers needed to facilitate economic growth.5
3.7
Even in cases where a labour agreement is in place, the Committee heard that administrative requirements were still hampering the capacity of businesses to fill skills gaps. For instance, the Restaurant and Catering Association (RCA) stated that:
The Restaurant (Fine Dining) Labour Agreement (RILA) is currently one of seven industry-specific labour agreements in place, alongside dairy, fishing, meat, minister of religion, on-hire and pork. RCA believes that the effectiveness of the RILA has been severely undermined by the heavy administrative and financial burden imposed on employers seeking to access the agreement.6
3.8
In RCA’s view:
…the use and effectiveness of the RILA would be significantly enhanced, should the requirements of the agreements be simplified. The current burden placed on restaurants means that only a handful of businesses with sufficient time, resources and sophistication in their administrative systems are able to participate in this labour agreement.7
3.9
The complexity of the current administrative requirements is causing widespread confusion, according the Business Visas Pty Ltd. They stated that:
Everyone’s confused currently, from large companies to small, from individuals to legal professionals, to case officers. The skilled migration visas are a Frankenstein of ill-conceived and poorly-implemented policies, with Labour Agreements, Designated Area Migration Agreements, Industry Agreements and Regional Agreements all overlaid on top of skilled independent, state-sponsored programmes.8
3.10
Business Visas suggested simplification of the entire process, beginning with the number of visa categories available.9
3.11
Business Visas gave evidence on opportunities Australia has missed out on due to changes in eligibility requirements and the impediments faced by businesses in planning for the future:
A large multi-national company with an Australian subsidiary had lodged a Nomination for an Asian HR professional with the task of spending twelve months here developing systems and procedures to incorporate Australia better into its “Asian Talent Hub”, so that Australians could be more readily considered for, and appointed to significant management and leadership roles in the Asian region. This would in turn have benefited the Australian subsidiary immensely.10
3.12
Business Visas continued with this example:
The occupational category in which she was nominated was removed. Furthermore, part of her brief was to prepare an analysis for locating a new permanent Regional Training Centre in Sydney that would provide specialist training for professionals in the Japan, Asia-Pacific and South East Asian regions, and be purpose-built if necessary. As the occupation of Training Officer was removed from the approved list, she concluded at an early stage that Australian visa rules were not conducive to this proposal, and the regional training centre was eventually established in Singapore instead.11
3.13
Business Visas gave another example involving a French-owned global supplier seeking to improve the performance of an Australian subsidiary with over 1000 Australian employees, who had lodged an application for an employee. However:
After lodgement, the immigration policy changes were suddenly introduced to apply retrospectively. We explained to a largely incredulous Company that the occupation of Policy and Planning Manager was no longer eligible for sponsorship, and the application had to be withdrawn and reworked in another occupational category.12
3.14
A similar situation occurred with a specialist apprenticeship training organisation:
The above change was also a big factor in the decline and eventual demise of a specialist apprentice training company in Sydney, who were no longer able to sponsor specialist Trainers from the UK with proprietary knowledge. They had previously trained over 1,000 Australian apprentices in their industry. They entered administration in 2019.13
3.15
Visa applicants have expressed similar frustrations about the impact the constantly moving visa conditions has on years of hard work to meet the eligibility requirements for their visa.
3.16
One applicant told the Committee that while they had ‘fully adhered to what the migration policy required’, policy had ‘started to tighten’ in such a way that the points required to be invited to apply for their visa increased. These changed delayed this applicant’s ability to apply for the relevant skilled visa.14
3.17
VETASSESS told the Committee that ‘although Australia has historically fared well, a pandemic is no excuse for complacency. Quite the opposite.’ If the same level of uncertainty prevails, it will have detrimental effect on Australia’s attractiveness to migrants:
Migration policies and practices in Australia and in competitor countries have a discerning influence. As Australia cut its permanent migration program in recent years and the planning level for skilled migrants fell commensurately, prospective migrant interest initially waned. The number of applications VETASSESS received for assessment fell from 2017. Since COVID-19, applications have been in freefall.15
3.18
AMES reinforced the challenge Australia faces being internationally competitive given the current unpredictability of the migration program:
AMES clients’ experiences are that, compared to countries such as Canada, Australia’s program can be inflexible and has tougher eligibility requirements, for example, the age limit of 45 on all primary visa applicants. These requirements may jeopardise Australia’s chances of sourcing critical skills needed in the COVID-19 recovery. Delivery of certain programs, such as subclass 189 has been unpredictable and inconsistent which may lead migrants to consider other countries which have clear, consistent guidelines and offer regular invitation rounds.16

More flexibility in visa conditions

3.19
Healthcare emerged as sector where greater flexibility to address skills shortages was required. Ramsay Health Care Australia (Ramsay) provided evidence to the Committee that the Temporary Skill Shortage visa (subclass 482) is ‘currently the most suitable visa for us to enable quick migration of staff into Australia’, or to ‘provide full-time work rights to foreign nationals already in the country on visas with restricted work rights’.17
3.20
However, in order for it to be more effective in assisting to address skills shortages in the healthcare sector, Ramsay recommended that, in the subclass 482, 457 and 494 visas, conditions be amended to allow visa holders the flexibility to work in both alternative roles or for alternative employers during declared disasters or pandemics.18
3.21
The Committee also received evidence that the restrictions placed on employer sponsored skilled visas may not work effectively in some industries.
3.22
For instance, according to the Housing Industry Association (HIA):
Current skilled migration programs are based on a model whereby an employer sponsors an employee. The residential building industry, particularly in new housing and renovation work, operates by allowing a builder to engage specialised trade contractors at each stage of construction. It is uncommon for a builder to engage skilled trade workers on a direct, employer-employee basis.19
3.23
HIA continued:
Builders and trade contractors largely comprise small businesses for which the process of engaging in overseas recruitment and visa sponsorship is too complex and time consuming. Furthermore, the obligations for an employer to provide long-term employment presents a significant risk to small businesses in an industry that is highly cyclical.20
3.24
Just as in the healthcare sector, the building industry is facing significant skills shortages which will affect the economic recovery, particularly with the HomeBuilder package used to stimulate the economy. According to HIA:
…all trade categories are now under pressure, having been well placed just three months ago. The reason why is clear: the increased demand for new homes from the HomeBuilder program has generated what was intended—a flow of work that will place the industry on a strong footing to remain active, despite the pandemic's impacts most likely still being felt for another 12 months. With this influx of work occurring at a time when both international and internal borders are either closed or in a state of uncertainty, this means that each state and territory is now working to meet demand with the workforce that it has.21
3.25
HIA outlined the trades facing particular pressure:
…the trades that have the most acute shortages tend to be the wet trades, so it's looking at bricklaying, tiling. At the moment we're looking also at carpentry, which is one of the trades where we've seen relatively acute shortage. Roofing is the other one and plastering is quite acute as well.22
3.26
HIA elaborated on the effect skills shortages then have on the recovery:
…any pressure on supply of labour or a shortage of labour ultimately then flows through to a cost conversation… you may have situations where prices will rise for those skilled trades, so the cost to the customer, which is passed through by the builder, can then rise.23

Responsiveness of skills lists

3.27
Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Australia’s skilled visa program was underpinned by the three skilled occupations lists:
Short-term Skilled Occupation List (STSOL): a short-term stream of up to two years or up to four years if an International Trade Obligation applies.
Medium and Long-Term Strategic Skills List (MLTSSL): a medium-term stream of up to four years, which can be renewed multiple times and incorporates a pathway to permanent residency.
Regional Occupation List (ROL): a regional stream, which is only available to those employers in rural and regional Australia and has a pathway to permanent residency.24
3.28
These lists are informed by the Australian and New Zealand Standard Classification of Occupation (ANZSCO), which ‘provides information on the skill level of jobs, qualifications and/or experience needed to work in occupations’.25
3.29
Several submitters raised ANZSCO as failing to meet the current needs of skilled migration. For instance, Mr Bass argued that it is no longer relevant, overly bureaucratic and rigid.26
3.30
The Migration Institute of Australia (MIA) raised two issues with the use of ANZSCO to underpin skilled migration lists. Firstly:
A fundamental problem with using the ANZSCO for skilled migration is that [it] was never intended for that purpose, it was developed as a tool to facilitate the international comparison of occupational statistics and to provide a basis for the standard collection and dissemination of occupation data.27
3.31
Secondly, according to MIA ANZSCO has not kept up with changes to jobs in the workforce:
…although minor updates have occurred within the listed occupations, no occupation has been added, deleted or changed since 2003.28
3.32
The Department of Education, Skills and Employment (DESE) made comment on the way skills lists are updated:
To assist Australia meet its labour market needs, comprehensive labour market analysis is undertaken and views are sought from across industry, employers, unions and individuals to prepare advice for the Australian Government on where skilled workforce needs exist. Only occupations for which migration is the appropriate solution to that shortage, are placed on a skilled migration occupation list, deeming them eligible for skilled migration.29
3.33
The National Skills Commission (NSC) was set up in 2020 to provide intelligence on Australia’s future education, skills and jobs and to drive long-term improvements across the skills system.30
3.34
DESE characterised the NSC’s role as ‘ensuring that Australia’s skilled migration occupation lists reflect the skills needs of the Australian labour market’, by providing ‘labour market analysis that informs advice to the Government on the workforce needs of the Australian economy and labour market’, including the skilled migration occupation lists.31
3.35
MIA was critical of the number of occupation lists that inform the migration program, stating that ‘there are simply too many’.32
3.36
MIA continued:
You've got multiple lists coming out from the department. The states and territories have their lists. There are some other lists which are down at the local government areas. Everyone is after different occupations. The process is a bit archaic these days.33
3.37
EY made a similar argument, noting that updating the skills lists would be important for helping businesses recover from the economic effects of the pandemic:
The Skilled Occupation Lists more generally should also be revised in response to the needs of business. This must be implemented in a timely and transparent manner to enable business to prepare for border reopening.34
3.38
In its submission, EY elaborated on the impact the skills list processes had on business:
The periodic but irregular reviews of the Skilled Occupations Lists that have occurred since 2017 results in uncertainty for business. A fair, transparent and predictable system would provide business with the confidence to recruit and plan for recovery.35
3.39
EY recommended that the Skilled Occupations Lists be promptly amended, following consultation with business, ‘to ascertain skill shortages required for economic recovery’ and ‘restore business confidence now and enable business to plan for pandemic recovery’. EY further recommended that ‘review of the Skilled Occupation Lists revert to a predictable biennial cycle’.36
3.40
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the STSOL, MLTSSL and ROL were not updated in March 2020, and were put aside due to the limitations on entry to Australia. The Priority Migration Skilled Occupations List (PMSOL) was introduced on 2 September 2020 to guide the Department of Home Affairs (Home Affairs) on the critical skills that should be prioritised during the pandemic. According to the NSC, this list:
…allows small numbers of sponsored skilled workers to enter Australia to supplement the skilled workforce needs of sectors that are critical to the recovery of the Australian economy from the COVID-19 pandemic.37
3.41
Home Affairs discussed the role of the PMSOL:
There are currently 18 occupations on the PMSOL. It’s composition reflects the advice from the NSC and other Commonwealth departments. The PMSOL will be temporary and prioritisation of these occupations will change as Australia recovers from the pandemic. The NSC continues to monitor the impacts of COVID-19 upon the Australian labour market and skills needs as they evolve and new sources of data emerge.38
3.42
Currently, the PMSOL includes:
Chief Executive or Managing Director
Construction Project Manager
Mechanical Engineer
General Practitioner
Resident Medical Officer
Psychiatrist
Medical Practitioner not elsewhere classified
Midwife
Registered Nurse (Aged Care)
Registered Nurse (Critical Care and Emergency)
Registered Nurse (Medical)
Registered Nurse (Mental Health)
Registered Nurses not elsewhere classified
Developer Programmer
Software Engineer
Social Worker
Maintenance Planner39
3.43
Some submitters told the Committee that despite higher unemployment and the introduction of the PMSOL, businesses are facing large scale skills shortages. For instance, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry (ACCI) stated:
The New South Wales business conditions survey in December 2020, so we’re really only talking a couple of months ago, indicated that almost half of businesses in New South Wales are currently experiencing a skills shortage.40
3.44
EY similarly found, following the conduct of a survey of stakeholders, that 58 per cent of respondents ‘reported that business had skilled vacancies that they were unable to fill locally and that could not be undertaken remotely’.41
3.45
The South Australian Department for Innovation and Skills (DIS) noted that the PMSOL may not be an accurate reflection of current urgent skills shortages:
The South Australian Government has heard from regional employers who have been waiting well over the published Department of Home Affairs processing timeframes for visa grants for the skilled overseas workers. These skilled workers have been pushed down the queue because they are not on the PMSOL, yet these workers are still critical for the growth of regional businesses and industry.42
3.46
The Committee for Adelaide echoed concerns about skills gaps and labour shortages being unaddressed, particularly in regional and rural areas, which have been exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the Committee for Adelaide’s view, there should be an immediate effort to prioritise visas ‘for industries that have a genuine need for workers’.43
3.47
Similarly, the Northern Territory Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade (DITT) was critical of the way the skills list had been applied by Home Affairs. Specifically, it raised the Northern Territory Designated Area Migration Agreement, under which the list of eligible occupations are negotiated annually.44
3.48
The DITT noted its concern that ‘adverse decision are being made’ by Home Affairs, despite applications for skilled migrant visas being endorsed by DITT, and despite the list of eligible occupations ‘being derived from comprehensive labour market analysis’.45
3.49
According to DITT, this is ‘causing businesses stress, contradicting the purpose of the DAMA and impeding COVID-19 economic recovery’.46 DITT recommended that:
In order to maintain confidence in the program, we submit that the Designated Area Representative is consulted before an adverse decision is made.47
3.50
The Committee also received evidence that some specific sectors and industries are facing critical skills shortages, and are not able to access overseas workers via the PMSOL.
3.51
For example, ACCI stated that ‘even businesses heavily impacted by the [COVID-19] crisis, including tourism and particularly hospitality, are reporting severe shortages of chefs.’48
3.52
RCA provided evidence to the committee of the pre-COVID shortages the hospitality industry was facing:
Our pre-COVID estimates were that by May 2023 our industry would be somewhere between 77,000 and 123,000 individuals short for the positions that were available.49
3.53
These shortages were exacerbated by the pandemic. RCA explained to the Committee the unique challenges the industry faces in the recovery phase and creating jobs for Australians:
We expect that by the end of COVID, when JobKeeper expires and the end of the financial year arrives, about 10 per cent of our sector of ABNs will have closed. You're looking at about 5,000 empty shopfronts that can't be reopened by a TAFE or VET student, or someone who's graduating with a cert III or cert IV in commercial cookery or hospitality. It will take an experienced skilled professional who will then subsequently hire, on average, about 20 people.
3.54
RCA linked these possible closures to the shortage of skilled migrants available to work in the industry:
…up to 12,000 chefs and front-of-house managers were skilled migrants. Many, if not all, of those individuals [left Australia] and so many of our members are telling us that they have had to close during certain parts of days—Monday and Tuesday lunch and dinner. In many cases they don't expect they will reopen on those extra days until some type of skilled migration returns.50
3.55
RCA explained to the Committee that under the current conditions, 5,000 hospitality businesses will have closed by 30 June 2021:
…according to IBISWorld and our estimates, by 30 June 2021 around 5,000 businesses in our segment of the sector will have closed due to COVID. At the same time because so many individuals who normally worked in hospitality have left Australia—that's working holiday, international students and skilled migrants—that almost all of the industry is reporting to us that they are short-staffed, and many in the industry are reporting that they are currently closed for some day-part or some days of the week because they're short-staffed, so it's a double problem. It's a problem with staff in the existing businesses, but it is a wider problem that there will be a lack of skilled individuals to reopen those 5,000 or so businesses in accommodation and food services that need to reopen for the industry and our segment of the industry to fully recover. And you can't do that with fresh graduates from TAFE or VET. In order to restart those businesses, you need highly skilled individuals that are not in Australia.51
3.56
In Western Australia, data provided by the ACCI showed that while 33 per cent of businesses were facing a shortage of skilled workers, 52 per cent of resource sector businesses ‘identified skilled labour shortages as their largest barrier to growth over the coming year’.52
3.57
The Association of Mining and Exploration Companies (AMEC) noted that mining ‘is one of only seven industries in Australia where employment grew in 2020, to eclipse employment levels pre-COVID-19’.53
3.58
However, AMEC told the Committee that the pre-COVID-19 resource constraints in terms of access to labour had been exacerbated by the pandemic, and that in order to help alleviate these constraints, more mining industry occupations should be added to the PMSOL.54
3.59
Following consultation with business stakeholders, EY also identified a list of occupations which would support pandemic recovery if businesses were able to recruit from overseas. EY grouped these occupations into five categories:
Resources Engineering Infrastructure
Professional Services and Financial Services
Health
Information Technology
Logistics and Procurement55
3.60
While some occupations within EY’s list of categories currently appear on the PMSOL, EY recommended that the NSC conduct ‘a quick targeted consultation process with business to ascertain immediate skills shortages required for economic recovery’, with a view to expanding the PMSOL immediately ‘as an interim measure as the border restrictions ease’.56
3.61
The Committee received numerous submissions from maritime organisations, with Maritime Industry Australia summarising the shortages in the industry:
Maritime organisations are competing against each other to hire from the relatively small pool of qualified Australians who are able to work. With the forecast shortage of seafarers, being 560+ by 2023, and only 42 Engineer Officers and 33 Master and Deck Officers in training as at 2018, this presents a real problem for Australian employers.57
3.62
DL & LT Pty Ltd, one of the members of Tuna Australia focused on the impact these shortages will have on Tuna Australia members alone:
Currently there are around 25 vacancies on boats run by Tuna Australia Members. … If we cannot man vessels according to the law, the result will be direct job losses of over 300, not to mention job losses in administration, processing, marketing, maintenance, and service industries in regional areas.58
3.63
The Australian Hotels Association (AHA) also outlined extensive shortages of skills across their membership:
In a recently conducted nationwide survey of AHA members, 73% of responses reported that their business is suffering financially because of a shortage of skills. 56% of responses reported labour and skills shortages in the cook occupation (ANSCO Code 351411), while 66% of surveyed members reported shortages in the chef occupation (ANSCO Code). Across NSW alone, TAA estimates a labour shortage in accommodation hotels of 3247 workers.59
3.64
AHA noted the effect this would have on the industry:
It will be impossible for the hospitality to return to its pre-COVID levels of revenue and productivity while the supply and availability of skilled labour remains so constrained.60
3.65
ProWay Livestock Equipment, a manufacturing business based in Wagga Wagga in New South Wales, raised its specific concerns about accessing skilled workers with the Committee. It noted that it faces a shortage of metal fabricators, and would employ five immediately if possible to do so. It further noted that employing an additional five fabricators would lead to an additional $5-7 million in turnover for the business,61 and the employment of between eight and nine additional Australians.62
3.66
ProWay told the Committee that metal fabricators had been removed from the relevant skills list in 2019, and were not listed on the PMSOL. ProWay explained the effect this has:
The only applicants that we can really consider at the moment as being relevant to what we do are mechanical engineers. Our business can only service a certain number of mechanical engineers. We’ve done that and that’s been successful, so we’re appreciative that they are on the critical list, and it’s worked. The problem is that, obviously, mechanical engineers can’t pick up a welder and do a skilled trade in that aspect.63
3.67
Similarly, DIS stated that another ‘pressing example is Diesel Mechanic’, which is not currently listed on the PMSOL, despite being ‘part of the supply chain that supports agriculture, food production, energy, mining, transport and logistics industries’, all of which have been identified as critical sectors for pandemic recovery.64
3.68
The Australian Veterinary Association (AVA) noted ‘severe veterinary workforce shortage’ within the profession
In my time in the profession I have never seen something of this magnitude in terms of the lack of veterinarians available and the recruitment issues that we've got. This shortage of veterinarians in the workforce is definitely more acute in the regional and rural based communities. Although it has been a chronic problem across Australia, it has definitely been exacerbated by COVID and the restricted migration and inability of Australian vets to return home over the last 18 months. This poses a significant risk to Australia's way of life, our biosecurity and our economy.65
3.69
The AVA went on to outline the extent of the veterinarian workforce shortages.
…I've looked at a very popular classified ad site in Australia called Kookaburra Veterinary Employment which currently has 700 vacancies for vets. I've never seen so many. I'm currently looking for 420 permanent vets; the Australian Vet Association has 177 vacancies on their website; plus people are also advertising on LinkedIn, industry websites and Facebook. It would be very conservative to say that right at the moment we need about 1,500 vets for permanent work in Australia.66
3.70
The AVA elaborated on the possible effects this shortage could have:
The impact that this workforce issue is having is on future sustainability of our workforce. Veterinary practice owners are struggling to fill vacancies in their hospitals, despite advertising widely and for very long periods of time. This is not only occurring in rural areas but increasingly in urban practices. There is a very, very real risk to Australian animal biosecurity through service restrictions to these communities in regional food production areas and a cessation of services—complete shutdowns—to some farming and agricultural communities because of the lack in number of veterinarians.67
3.71
Furthermore, the AVA told the Committee that it was already severely impacting veterinary professionals:
In practice we're seeing burnout of our veterinarians at the coalface; they're under-resourced in manpower. We've seen declining mental health and suicide, which is a huge problem in our profession. Lack of staff and high case loads are leading to burnout and declining mental health. They're having to do extra and longer shifts, and many of those veterinarians are choosing to walk away from the profession, from servicing and from working as veterinarians because of these mental health issues and the stress that they're under.68
3.72
As a result of these concerns, the AVA recommended ‘the immediate placement of veterinarians onto the PMSOL and the fast tracking of visas’.69

Entry of skilled migrants

3.73
A related issue that was raised in evidence was the ability of skilled visa holders to enter Australia after the granting of visas. Australia’s international borders have been closed since March 2020 to all except Australian residents and citizens and, since September 2020, a limited range of skilled occupations.
3.74
Australian International Skilled Recruitment Services (AISRS) stated that, in terms of entry to Australia, priority should be given to existing visa holders who were unable to enter Australia due to the COVID-19 pandemic.70
3.75
The AISRS argued that both skilled workers and Australians should be prioritised for entry to Australia and quarantine places on arrival over other categories of traveller who have been granted entry, such as sports and television personalities.71
3.76
According to AISRS:
It is important that these visa holders be given priority to return to Australia: from an employer perspective, they paid significant funds to the Australian Government for a skilled visa holder for their business for a period of 4 years. For most businesses, the costs were over $10,000 for each skilled visa holder: ie $2,975 for the employer nomination and visa application charge and $7,200 for the SAF. Employers have been denied these skilled visa holders, who the Australian Government had deemed essential to their business, by virtue of granting the visa. Further, these visa holders are ready to assist the Australian businesses and the broader community with the economic recovery.72
3.77
Business NSW echoed the call for the entry of skilled migrants, noting that ‘quarantine caps and caps on the number of flights are also restricting Australia’s ability to access skilled migrants’. Business NSW stated:
Business NSW has received reports of employers assisting skilled migrants to gain travel exemptions who are then unable to book a seat on a flight as there are not enough seats allocated to skilled migrants. Quarantine and flights caps should be increased for workers with critical skills and especially those on the PMSOL, potentially with separate arrangements to returning Australians.73
3.78
In order to address this issue, Business NSW recommended the development of a separate quarantine and flight cap stream for skilled migrants.74

Responsiveness of processing

3.79
In its submission, MIA discussed the need to ensure ‘a ready advance supply of suitable migrants to bolster and grow the economy’. It stated that:
There is no guarantee post-COVID that this previous supply of willing migrants will remain available or that they will continue to find Australia an attractive destination.75
3.80
As such, MIA told the Committee that:
Australia must be able to pivot immediately to restoring and increasing migration levels as soon as international border reopen. There are immediate adjustments that can be made within the context of the future of work in Australia and economic recovery from the pandemic to ensure this can occur.76
3.81
To achieve this, MIA argued for a reconsideration of the processing priorities within Australia’s skilled migration program. It noted the need to ‘secure the pipeline and restore the annual entry levels of skilled migrants’ to ensure sufficient supply.77 Specifically, MIA recommended that:
Migration program numbers be substantially increased for at least the next three years to address the shortfall in Net Overseas Migration during the COVID pandemic period;
That employer sponsored visa classes be given priority processing to enable migrants with employment to enter Australia immediately [when] border restrictions are eased.78
3.82
According to MIA, ‘Australia possesses a ready supply of skilled migrants already onshore’, in the form of international students, graduates and Temporary Skills Shortage (TSS) visa holders. MIA recommended concessions to provide skilled applicants the opportunity to move visas with more flexible and increased work rights, as it could assist in aiding COVID-19 pandemic recovery.79

Processing times

3.83
The Committee received a range of feedback on the time taken to process a number of skilled visa classes.
3.84
The MIA noted that some TSS holders are facing difficulties in having applications processed in a timely manner:
Onshore Temporary Skills Shortage (Subclass 482) visa applicants and holders are waiting extended periods of time for processing including nominations to simply change employer, a process that pre COVID generally took a week. Applicants for Australian Government Endorsed Event (AGEE) Subclass 408 AGEE ‘COVID’ stream visas are only being approved for those with critical occupations or current employment, leaving many applicants without work rights and the means to support themselves. Those applicants with occupations on the skilled migration lists should be granted visas with work rights to allow them to re-enter the labour market.80
3.85
The Committee received evidence from visa holders who are filling critical skills shortages in regional Australia, some of which are on the PMSOL, and yet they have been waiting months, if not years for their permanent residency to be granted.
3.86
One visa holder working as a registered nurse in aged care in a regional area, whose occupation is on the PMSOL, has been waiting since May 2019 to get an outcome on her 190 visa application.
I am Registered Nurse in Aged Care sector working in regional area, my reason for submitting petition is to show my disappointment with the migration system. As we all know aged care sector or even all sectors in nursing specifically with registered nurses are struggling to get RN. I am working so hard to give holistic care to the residents as we are always short of RN’s and care staff, paying tax etc , but even though I have 85 points for 189 visa and 85+5 points for 190 (NSW) still no hope for 190 or 189 at this stage, waiting since May 2019, having superior English, Natti, experience, partner points has done everything thing to get maximum points, Even migration site shows My occupation is in PMSOL list, it makes me feel like failure where I cannot see bright future though I am a skilled worker, it’s impacting my mental health and personal life. As I have invested so much time , money and worked hard still no ray of hope…81
3.87
A Social Worker, whose occupation is on the PMSOL and who has met all the requirements, has been waiting on an outcome on permanent residency since September 2019.
I have submitted my Expression Of Interest for Permanent Residency in September 2019 and have completed all the necessary tests outlined by the DHA for the immigration purpose. I have secured the maximum point that a Social Worker can achieve which is 85 points on the 189 Skilled Independent and 90 points on the 190 State nomination. I have completed the skill assessment as a Social worker from the Australian Association of Social Worker and as a Welfare worker from the Australian Community Workers Association. Even though Social Work occupation is listed on the PMSOL list, I have not been invited at all.82
3.88
Another visa holder explained how the Department’s processing times are constantly fluctuating, providing significant uncertainty as to when decisions will be made.
The current processing times of the 887 visa is 21-26 months, increasing from 10-15 months in October 2020. The decision was made despite thousands of 887 applicants had signed petitions on reducing the 887 processing times directly to parliament and change.org. The 887 visa processing times skyrocketed from 7 months to 21 months in 2019, putting the applicants in uncertain and desperate situations.83
3.89
Other visa holders explained that despite meeting all the conditions for permanent residency, they are still waiting to be granted permanent residency. One visa holder applied for permanent residency in October 2019, however is still waiting for an outcome.
As we are currently holding a Temporary Work Visa (subclass 485), and that I work in a skill-nominated technical field, I am eligible to apply for permanent residency in Australia – given my eligibility, I submitted my Expression of Interest (EOI) for a skilled migrant permanent visa (subclass 189) back in 29 October, 2019. Ideally, we would have been invited to apply for the permanent residency visa by now, but due to COVID-19, hardly any invitations have been issued since April 2020. This is highly alarming for us, as we have very limited time remaining on our visa, and if we don't receive our invitations by this year, it will not only jeopardise my ability to continue my permanent role, my wife will have to forfeit her dream of completing her PhD and my step-son won't be able to continue his secondary education from one of Victoria's finest institutions.84
3.90
Visa holders elaborated on their lost productivity and how these delays are hindering their contribution to Australia’s economic recovery because of the constant need to ensure they are meeting the visa requirements:
…many have found their time spent in vain as they’ve reached the highest mark they could score, and yet they have been unable to move forward in this queue pending invited. In the meantime, they will have to face many due dates: English and community credential language (or NATTI translation and interpretation) testing results are both due to update in three years, PY certificate is valid 4 years from the start date. people planning ahead have obtained all scores from these only to find out they have to take another test. Most crucially, a 485 visa will expire in 2 years’ time. Temporary migrant employee, like me, are under extreme pressure looking after work and visa status at the same time. Personal time is hardly “personal” with about 2 hours on visa-related affairs every day. Taking another test, applying for certificate extension, or applying for another visa are all feasible, but they come at a cost of so many people spending extra time, money and energy that they could have saved for developing their career, study or personal life.85
3.91
Another visa holder commented on the mental, social and economic impacts the visa processing delays and inconsistencies have had:
The uncertainties and extensions of the processing times have deleterious social, economic and mental impacts on us. University entrance, home loans, and other life necessities are put on hold.86
3.92
MIA also noted that the processing times associated with the Business Investment and Innovation Program were acting as a disincentive for businesses to visa applicants:
The current process is that they come on a provisional four-year visa and fulfil their obligations by starting a business investment. Then they can move to a permanent visa. That's a two-stage process. The processing time frame is about 2½ years. That's very off-putting, particularly if people want to move their money onshore and start a business opportunity. They may have to wait two years, unless they can find another visa to come out to Australia and then apply onshore.87
3.93
MIA contrasted these timelines with those in other countries:
For places like Canada and England, the visa processes take between two and three weeks for these people to go into the country or they're provided with another visa that allows them to go into the country and start their business while they wait for the process. They're usually direct permanent visas.88
3.94
Similarly, MIA compared the processing timeframes for a range of skilled visas to those in comparable countries. In particular, it noted that:
Canadian temporary working visas processing times vary according to country of origin, although a good example is provided by the processing times for citizens of India (also a popular source country for Australia), which currently stands at six weeks and independent permanent residency within six months.89
3.95
In contrast, MIA outlined the following processing timeframes for a range of Australian skilled work visas:
Temporary Skills Shortage visa (subclass 482) – up to 9 months;
Skilled Independent visa (subclass 189) – up to 17 months;
Skilled (State/Territory Nominated visa (subclass 190) – up to 10 months;
Skilled Regional (State/Territory) Nominated visa (subclass 491) – up to 9 months; and
Skilled Employer Sponsored Regional visa (subclass 494) – up to 8 months.90
3.96
Mr Chuhn Hung Goh provided data supporting the increase in processing timelines over the last 18 months, sourced from Department of Home Affairs documents. Specfically, Mr Goh noted, in relation to the Skilled Regional (Permanent) visa (subclass 887):
The visa processing time has been increased significantly from 6-8 months in 2020 to 20-26 months as of January 2021 due to few case officers assigned. There are currently at least 4,944 applications on-hand… as of November 2020. Only one case officer is assigned per day to process the visa since November 2020 and during the following 6 months or more.91
3.97
Mr Goh stated that, by speeding up the processing of this visa class, the post-COVID-19 pandemic recovery can be assisted not only through greater investment in real estate, business and job creation, but through allowing off-shore applicants to re-enter Australia as permanent residents and assist in filling skills shortages.92
3.98
To explain these increased processing timeframes, MIA put forward two reasons:
…the annual cap on migration program numbers… and apparent deficiencies in Department of Home Affairs resources including visa processing staffing levels, staff training and technological systems.93
3.99
MIA elaborated on Home Affairs staffing levels and systems:
The staffing levels within the Department of Home Affairs immigration and citizenship sections have been progressively decreasing and although continuous global processing was introduced, queues and processing times have blown out across all visa classes. Similarly, the introduction of continuous processing, where applications are no longer processed individually by a case officer, has seen an increase in poor decisions and increased errors in processing. Errors slow the migration process as they take time to be rectified or force applicants to take their cases to the Administrative Appeals Tribunal for adjudication.94
3.100
To address this, MIA recommended a substantial increase in resources at Home Affairs devoted to reducing processing times and addressing historical backlogs of applications.95

Pathways to permanence

3.101
MIA saw value in TSS visa holders being provided concessions allowing them to apply for permanent skilled migration in cases where they have qualifications in occupations on the STOL. MIA noted that:
Many of these visa holders will have spent in excess of four years living and working in skilled occupations and contributing to this economy by the time Australian borders reopen.96
3.102
Business Visas gave an example of someone whose departure from Australia because of the lack of a pathway to permanency will affect Australian jobs but also have flow on effects to 600 small family companies:
A marketing executive who has developed new export markets in China for primary agricultural produce using a mixture of online ‘daigou’ channels and wholesale distributor partnerships that have raised export sales by 600% in 3 years, is no longer able to renew her 482 visa onshore under current policy, or apply for permanent residence. Her departure will effect not just the Australian employees of the company involved in packaging and distribution, but the Australian regional growers and suppliers – over 600 mostly small family companies.97
3.103
Business Visas gave another example of a skilled migrant who has turned an Australian business around in just three years, however has no pathway to permanency:
The Australian subsidiary of an industrial supply company is desperate to hold on to their sponsored Marketing Manager from the overseas parent company, as she has led a turnaround from loss-making to profitability in the three years she has been here. However, she does not wish to remain here as a temporary resident, as she is unable to obtain a housing loan, or make long-term plans with her family. Otherwise, she would be happy to continue her career in Australia.98
3.104
The Australian Industry Group suggested that a lack of a pathway to permanency is a significant hindrance to attracting migrants in certain occupations
On the issue of the skills list, the thing that comes up most frequently with us is the short-term skilled migration list and the fact that you can't become a permanent migrant from that list, and that really is a huge barrier. I know that list doesn't have the highest levels of skills, but quite a number of the skills that Julie has mentioned would come into that short-term skill list. We're in a global marketplace for these skills and we're disadvantaged by the fact that we can't offer a pathway to permanent migration through that.99
3.105
ACCI suggested now is the time to reinstate a pathway to permanency during the economic recovery
This is the time, I think—even for a period of 12 months, or a period that the government would set—to say that all skilled occupations should have a pathway to permanency.100
3.106
ACCI reiterated how a pathway to permanency makes Australia an attractive proposition to the best and brightest:
The pathway to permanency for a temporary skilled migrant, in terms of the attractiveness to come here and in terms of attracting high talent, if we're competing in a global marketplace, is critically important.101
3.107
Fragomen explained to the Committee the importance of permanent residence in remaining competitive and maintaining Australia’s attractiveness to global talent:
In the competition for global talent, having a clear, simpler and more certain pathway from temporary residence to permanent residence will improve Australia’s attractiveness. The pathway to permanent residency should be predictable, transparent and reliable - such that the potential migrant has a reasonable degree of certainty as to the ability to gain permanent residence. A three-year period holding a Temporary Skill Shortage visa (subclass 482) with a sponsor/employer, or occupation list changes that impact that permanent pathway, may dissuade skilled talent who seek to reside permanently in Australia.102
3.108
RCA elaborated on the effect temporary migration has on the ability for an industry to recover and create jobs for Australians, stressing the need for a pathway to permanency to fuel to the recovery from the pandemic:
Well, the real question is: do you want temporary business openings, or do you want permanent business openings? Anecdotally, if someone is going to be here for only two years, they're not going to invest the hundreds or thousands or millions of dollars or seek to move here if there is not a path that gives them a guarantee. If they are going to come to Australia to reseed an industry that was the hardest hit during COVID, which is well published, there needs to be a pathway to permanent residency for individuals who are willing to come to Australia, much like the migration that happened, say, after World War II, to help us to recover—and to cover one of the largest, by unit, industries in Australia.103
3.109
According to Mr Andrew Low, Chairman of the Australian British Chamber of Commerce, a lack of permanency creates disruption that prevents skilled migrants, who would make an ongoing contribution to Australia in areas where there are significant skills shortages and potential for growth, from taking up the option to come to Australia in the first place.
There is an expression that the challenge of the two-plus-two TSS visa prevents some of these people being willing to come to Australia. Often those sorts of people have families of school age, and they need to consider the disruption of schooling if there are some doubts about their ability to have a path to permanent residency or citizenship.
We can see also that, for a number of these people with computer science and other skills, once they go through the process they continue to contribute to economic activity as permanent residents. We would put it to the committee that temporary skilled workers cover temporary needs but also allow a 'try before you buy' for both the worker and the host country and therefore improve the impact of our permanent migration intake.104

Committee comment

3.110
In the short time available to it, the Committee has not been able to outline all of the evidence it received in the interim report.
3.111
However, the evidence discussed above strongly indicates that there are a range of urgent matters that require immediate attention to improve the ability of business to access skilled migrants.

Regulatory burdens and uncertainty

3.112
It is clear from the evidence received that many businesses consider the administrative requirements of the skilled migration program to be overly complex, lacking transparency, and difficult to navigate. This lack of transparency creates particular difficulty for employers who cannot get on with their business without the relevant skilled workforce.

Recommendation 3

3.113
The Committee recommends that the Department of Home Affairs be required to provide greater transparency on where employer sponsored visa applications are in the queue.
3.114
In light of the need for employers in Australia to access a reliable source of labour, the Committee will consider further administrative requirements associated with skilled visa applications in the final report.
3.115
One key issue that requires immediate adjustment is the mobility of overseas labour in certain industries. In order to achieve a more flexible response to labour shortages created by the COVID-19 pandemic, adjusting visa settings for skilled migrants entering and already in Australia with skills in industries such as healthcare, housing construction and agriculture which currently have significant skills shortages but whose work often requires movement between employers or between roles for the same employer, provides a better outcome for both the individual migrants and their employers.

Recommendation 4

3.116
The Committee recommends that the visa conditions for sponsored skilled visa holders working in industries that require migrants to work for different employers or to undertake multiple roles with the same employer to meet practices of the industry, be adjusted to allow them to work for multiple employers without making applications for new visas.

Responsiveness of skills lists

3.117
The Committee received a large volume of evidence indicating that both the pre-September 2020 skills lists and the PMSOL are not an accurate reflection of the skills and labour needs of employers in Australia. Many peak bodies, other advocacy groups, and businesses put forward recommendations for additions to the PMSOL.
3.118
All of these recommendations make a strong case about the need for additional skilled workers. As examined in Chapter Two, while the evidence presented to the Committee is that the preference for the business is always to employ Australians before committing to the cost and complexity of seeking overseas workers, in many cases it is simply not possible to find suitable Australians to undertake the work.
3.119
Whether this is due to a lack of suitably trained candidates or other factors, the resultant skills gaps are the same. Filling these gaps is necessary if Australia hopes to make the fastest recovery from the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic.
3.120
The Committee notes significant evidence of skills shortages in Australia, the buoyancy of the employment market and the recent spike in job ads compared to 12 months ago. The Boosting Apprentices Commencement Wage Subsidy has created 100,000 new apprenticeship and trainee opportunities in five months indicating the desire of business to take on apprentices to fill some of the skills gaps if given the appropriate support.
3.121
The Committee is not in a position to recommend all of the specific professions that require the most urgent inclusion on the PMSOL, however it has made some initial suggestions based on compelling, quantifiable evidence presented to the Committee.
3.122
In the Committee’s view, an urgent review of the occupations listed on the PMSOL must be undertaken to add occupations that are facing severe skills shortages. This review should include consultation with stakeholders.
3.123
More generally, the Committee received evidence that the pre-September 2020 skills lists - the STSOL, MLTSSL and ROL – are often not reflective of the skills needs of employers and businesses. Given the scale of change that has occurred since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, it seems likely that these lists will be even less reflective of the skills required to support economic recovery.
3.124
The Committee believes that the process of reviewing these lists should commence as early as possible. This would prepare the skilled migration program to be more responsive once international borders reopen, and would allow for the priority processing to assist in addressing the areas of greatest need as quickly as possible.

Box 3.1:   Matter for further consultation

Another way of making the skilled migration system more responsive to labour market needs might be to dispense with the skills lists altogether and create a demand driven employer-sponsored migration program with appropriate integrity and labour market testing measures. The Committee would welcome submissions on this concept and other ideas on how to make the skills lists more dynamic and responsive to labour market needs for the final report.
3.125
The Committee has received significant evidence about the shortages of Chefs, Veterinarians, Café and Restaurant Managers and Seafarers. The committee has greater confidence in making recommendations that these skilled occupations should be added to the PMSOL immediately because stakeholders have quantified the skilled labour shortages that exist.
3.126
There are other occupations where the Committee had received evidence from multiple submitters that shortages exist, however the Committee hasn’t received quantified evidence of the nature of those shortages.

Recommendation 5

3.127
The Committee recommends that the Priority Migration Skilled Occupation List be expanded urgently to include Chefs, Veterinarians, Café and Restaurant Managers and Seafarers.

Recommendation 6

3.128
The Committee recommends that the Department of Home Affairs conduct an urgent review of the Priority Migration Skilled Occupation List, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, with a view to expanding the number of occupations to better reflect the urgent skills shortages in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic recovery. The Department should give particular consideration to civil engineers, electrical engineers, motor mechanics, cooks, carpenters, electricians and other roles in the hospitality, health, trades, agriculture and manufacturing sectors.

Recommendation 7

3.129
The Committee recommends that the Short-term Skilled Occupation List, the Medium and Long-term Strategic Skills List and the Regional Occupation List be reviewed as soon as practicable to ensure that the lists most accurately reflect Australia’s employment challenges as the economy emerges from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Entry of skilled migrants

3.130
The Committee heard substantial evidence that while employers would prefer to employ Australians because of the costs, time and red tape involved in bringing skilled migrants from overseas, many businesses are facing significant skills shortages, preventing them recovering from the pandemic and growing their businesses.
3.131
The Committee recommends that the Government take steps to assist businesses trying to access skilled migrants to enable them to continue to grow their businesses and employ more Australians.

Recommendation 8

3.132
The Committee recommends the Government reserve places on flights and in quarantine for skilled migrants.

Responsiveness of processing

3.133
The Committee received evidence about increasingly long processing times associated with the full range of visas, even prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. This evidence came from a wide range of sources, including businesses, peak bodies, migration agents, and even skilled migrants themselves. It is also borne out by documents released by the Department of Home Affairs.
3.134
In order to support COVID-19 pandemic recovery, the increased processing times for skilled visas must be addressed, and processing times decreased. As this issue cuts across the full range of skilled, business and global talent visas, the Committee examines this issue further in Chapter Four.

Recommendation 9

3.135
The Committee recommends that:
The Department of Home Affairs improve visa processing times for employer-sponsored visas because of the labour market needs during the COVID-19 pandemic economic recovery; and
The Department of Home Affairs expedite the processing times for skilled visa holders who have remained onshore in relevant employment seeking a subsequent skilled visa or permanent residency visa.

Pathways to permanence

3.136
Permanent residency is a big attraction for the skilled migration program.
3.137
Not only is Australia an extremely desirable place to live but our systems work, we are governed by the rule of law, we’re one of the world’s oldest continuous democracies, there is no social unrest and we have done well in the health and economic response to COVID-19 which has made us a highly attractive place to live.
3.138
For highly skilled people who are in demand globally, having a pathway to permanent residence gives options for skilled migrants and their family to make a longer term commitment to the work they are undertaking in Australia.
3.139
It also gives them peace of mind and potential productivity gains because they are not constantly thinking about the uncertainty of what they will do when their visa comes to an end.
3.140
While there is a need for temporary skills shortages to be filled in our economy and not every skilled migrant will want to remain in Australia , the lack of permanency is a disincentive for some skilled migrants to come to Australia in the first place.
3.141
At this time in our history, when skilled migrants may be having another look at Australia, given its successful response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it is more important that we give people more reasons for choosing Australia including the prospect of permanent migration.
3.142
This is especially true of entrepreneurs and venture capitalists discussed in Chapter 4.
3.143
Despite employer-sponsored migrants directly meeting a labour market demand, having better employment outcomes than other visa categories and employers investing a significant amount of money in bringing the migrant to Australia, employers of TSS visa holders have no way of retaining employees for longer than 4 years. This is a disproportionate disadvantage to employers and employees dependent on the TSS for skilled labour.

Recommendation 10

3.144
The Committee recommends that all employer sponsored visa holders be given a clearer pathway to permanency.

  • 1
    Mr Cecil Bass, Hitchcock and Associates, Committee Hansard, 2 March 2021, p. 1.
  • 2
    Motor Trades Association of South Australia and the Northern Territory, Submission 40, pp. 4-5.
  • 3
    Dr Peter Cull, ICT International, Committee Hansard, 2 March 2021, p. 7.
  • 4
    Dr Peter Cull, ICT International, Committee Hansard, 2 March 2021, p. 7.
  • 5
    South Australian Department for Innovation and Skills, Submission 76, p. 2.
  • 6
    Restaurant and Catering Association, Submission 50, p. 2.
  • 7
    Restaurant and Catering Industry Association, Submission 50, p. 2.
  • 8
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 8.
  • 9
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 8.
  • 10
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 5.
  • 11
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, pp. 5-6.
  • 12
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 5.
  • 13
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 5.
  • 14
    Name withheld, Submission 28, p. 2.
  • 15
    VETASSESS, Submission 42, p. 15.
  • 16
    AMES, Submission 58, pp. 2-3.
  • 17
    Ramsay Health Care Australia, Submission 67, p. 2.
  • 18
    Ramsay Health Care Australia, Submission 67, p. 2.
  • 19
    Ms Kristin Brookfield, Housing Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 8.
  • 20
    Ms Kristin Brookfield, Housing Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 8.
  • 21
    Ms Kristin Brookfield, Housing Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, pp. 8-9.
  • 22
    Mr Geordan Murray, Housing Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, pp. 9.
  • 23
    Ms Kristin Brookfield, Housing Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 9.
  • 24
    Select Committee on Temporary Migration, Submission 78, Department of Education, Skills and Employment, p. 5.
  • 25
    Department of Home Affairs website, Skilled occupation list, <https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/working-in-australia/skill-occupation-list> accessed 1 March 2021.
  • 26
    Mr Cecil Bass, Hitchcock and Associates, Committee Hansard, 2 March 2021, pp. 1 and 6.
  • 27
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 30.
  • 28
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 30.
  • 29
    Select Committee on Temporary Migration, Submission 78, Department of Education, Skills and Employment, p. 5.
  • 30
    Mr Adam Boyton, National Skills Commission, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 42.
  • 31
    Select Committee on Temporary Migration, Submission 78, Department of Education, Skills and Employment, p. 5.
  • 32
    Mr John Hourigan, Migration Institute of Australia, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 26.
  • 33
    Mr John Hourigan, Migration Institute of Australia, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 26.
  • 34
    EY, Submission 71, p. 4.
  • 35
    EY, Submission 71, p. 4.
  • 36
    EY, Submission 71, p. 4.
  • 37
    National Skills Commission website, Skilled Migration Occupation Lists, <https://www.nationalskillscommission.gov.au/consultation/skilled-migration-occupation-lists> accessed 1 March 2021.
  • 38
    Department of Home Affairs, Submission 16.1, p. 6.
  • 39
    Department of Home Affairs website, Priority Migration Skilled Occupation List, <https://immi.homeaffairs.gov.au/visas/employing-and-sponsoring-someone/sponsoring-workers/pmsol> accessed 1 March 2021.
  • 40
    Ms Jenny Lambert, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Committee Hansard, 24 February 2021, page. 1.
  • 41
    EY, Submission 71, p. 2.
  • 42
    South Australian Department for Innovation and Skills, Submission 74, p. 2.
  • 43
    Committee for Adelaide, Submission 80, p. 3.
  • 44
    Northern Territory Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade, Submission 29, p. 4.
  • 45
    Northern Territory Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade, Submission 29, p. 4.
  • 46
    Northern Territory Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade, Submission 29, p. 4.
  • 47
    Northern Territory Department of Industry, Tourism and Trade, Submission 29, p. 5.
  • 48
    Ms Jenny Lambert, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Committee Hansard, 24 February 2021, page. 1.
  • 49
    Mr Wes Lambert, Restaurant and Catering Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 3 March 2021, p. 15.
  • 50
    Mr Wes Lambert, Restaurant and Catering Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 3 March 2021, p. 15.
  • 51
    Mr Wes Lambert, Restaurant and Catering Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 3 March 2021, p. 18.
  • 52
    Ms Jenny Lambert, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Committee Hansard, 24 February 2021, page. 1.
  • 53
    Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, Submission 30, pp. 2.
  • 54
    Association of Mining and Exploration Companies, Submission 30, pp. 2-3.
  • 55
    EY, Submission 71, pp. 2-3.
  • 56
    EY, Submission 71, p. 4.
  • 57
    Maritime Industry Australia, Submission 55, p. 5.
  • 58
    DL and LT Pty Ltd, Submission 34, p. 1.
  • 59
    Australian Hotels Association and Tourism Accommodation Australia, Submission 56, p. 2.
  • 60
    Australian Hotels Association and Tourism Accommodation Australia, Submission 56, p. 2.
  • 61
    Mr Paul Gianniotis, ProWay Livestock Equipment, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 16.
  • 62
    ProWay Livestock Equipment, Question on Notice, 1 March 2021.
  • 63
    Mr Paul Gianniotis, ProWay Livestock Equipment, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 16.
  • 64
    South Australian Department for Innovation and Skills, Submission 74, p. 2; see also Australian International Skilled Recruitment Services, Submission 75, p. 6.
  • 65
    Dr Warwick Vale, Australian Veterinary Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 33.
  • 66
    Dr Mark Eagleton, Australian Veterinary Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 34.
  • 67
    Dr Warwick Vale, Australian Veterinary Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 33.
  • 68
    Dr Warwick Vale, Australian Veterinary Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 34.
  • 69
    Dr Warwick Vale, Australian Veterinary Association, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 34.
  • 70
    Australian International Skilled Recruitment Services, Submission 75, p. 7.
  • 71
    Australian International Skilled Recruitment Services, Submission 75, p. 7.
  • 72
    Australian International Skilled Recruitment Services, Submission 75, p. 7.
  • 73
    Business NSW, Submission 52, p. 7.
  • 74
    Business NSW, Submission 52, p. 7.
  • 75
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 15.
  • 76
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 15.
  • 77
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 15.
  • 78
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 15.
  • 79
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 16.
  • 80
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 16.
  • 81
    Name withheld, Submission 20, p. 1.
  • 82
    Ms Richa Aryal, Submission 5, p. 1.
  • 83
    Name withheld, Submission 26, p. 1.
  • 84
    Mr Syed Moin Iqbal, Submission 7, pp. 1-2.
  • 85
    Name withheld, Submission 25, p. 2.
  • 86
    Name withheld, Submission 26, p. 1.
  • 87
    Mr John Hourigan, Migration Institute of Australia, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 28.
  • 88
    Mrs Bronwyn Markey, Migration Institute of Australia, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 29.
  • 89
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 17.
  • 90
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 17.
  • 91
    Mr Chunh Hung Goh, Submission 2, p. 1.
  • 92
    Mr Chunh Hung Goh, Submission 2, p. 2.
  • 93
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 18.
  • 94
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 18.
  • 95
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, p. 19.
  • 96
    Migration Institute of Australia, Submission 82, pp. 16-17.
  • 97
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 6.
  • 98
    Business Visas Pty Ltd, Submission 38, p. 6.
  • 99
    Mr Tony Melville, Australian Industry Group, Committee Hansard, 1 March 2021, p. 22.
  • 100
    Ms Jenny Lambert, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Committee Hansard, 24 February 2021, p. 2.
  • 101
    Ms Jenny Lambert, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Committee Hansard, 24 February 2021, p. 4.
  • 102
    Fragomen, Submission 61, p. 11.
  • 103
    Mr Wes Lambert, Restaurant and Catering Industry Association, Committee Hansard, 3 March 2021, pp. 15-16.
  • 104
    Mr Andrew Low, Australian British Chamber of Commerce, Committee Hansard, 3 March 2021, p. 11.

 |  Contents  |