5.1
This chapter considers evidence received by the committee about direct experiences of navigating the visa system, and is primarily based on the personal accounts of submitters. This chapter discusses issues relating to:
the communication of key information;
the transparency of messaging from the Department of Home Affairs (the department); and
the personal impacts of engaging with the family and partner visa system.
Communication and transparency
5.2
As outlined in chapter 2, there are multiple visas available under the Family and Partner stream. Throughout the inquiry, the committee heard that the system is complicated and challenging to navigate.
5.3
Many submitters discussed how this complexity is exacerbated by a lack of clear, consistent, and transparent communication. Disjointed communication can make it difficult for individuals to understand the requirements, eligibility, and processing timeframes, often causing distress for applicants. This lack of clear, timely and transparent communication has resulted in significant uncertainty for applicants, ultimately impacting trust and confidence in the system.
Transparency
5.4
The committee heard from witnesses and submitters that communication with the department often lacked transparency about how visa applications were processed and assessed. Ms Susan Kidd stated that irregular communication and consistency in messaging exacerbated the perceived lack of transparency with processing times:
Since being sent an automated message within the first few weeks of Eamonn's application being submitted there has been no other communication regarding his application. 9 months has passed so far and who knows what is actually happening to the application?
When trying to find out about the lack of communication we are told 'just wait' this is 'regular procedure' and that the application is still well within 'normal' processing time frames.
However, we know that other visa applicants have had their visas approved much more quickly. Where is the consistency and transparency in processing times?
5.5
Similarly, Ms Rachel Price argued that processing targets and timelines are not communicated effectively, resulting in a lack of transparency. This lack of transparency in turn fosters distrust in the process:
Apart from conversations with our lawyers, we have had no communication from the department. We don't know what processing centre we have been assigned to. We don't know where we are in the 'queue'. We don't have any idea of how long this will take. This is unacceptable. At any time, I have reached out to find information or researched what we should expect we face the same party lines; however, the data is at odds with what we are told. How can we trust what we are told in the copy and paste response when the evidence demonstrates otherwise?
5.6
Some submitters suggested that the opacity of the system creates the impression that application fees were being used to raise revenue, rather than being used to fund the processing of visas. Mr Lance Holder stated:
The financial cost of the application for the partner visa is considerable compared to applying for any other government service. I can understand the need to have a processing fee attached to help prove the commitment of the couples seeking to use the service. However the level asked for and the lack of any feedback would be unacceptable for any private industry. From an observer, looking at the amount raised through application fees compared to the amount of visas being processed the taking of application fees appears to be a revenue raising system rather than a method of covering costs incurred (which are likely to be significantly less than the application fees).
5.7
Ms Jenna Govan likewise submitted that Visa Application Charges (VACs) are out of proportion with the perceived functioning of the visa system:
The cost of the visa is one of the highest in the world. $7715 AUD plus fees for medicals and police certificates is an exorbitant amount of money so that we can live with our partner of choice, who will be working and contributing to Australian society. Generally, each year the visa processing fee goes up with no evidence of increased funding going into the processing system. For such high visa cost there should be a more fair and transparent way of processing.
Communication
5.8
Many submitters argued that processing delays combined with a lack of consistent communication has impacted the efficiency of the system and created substantial frustration for applicants. Ms Katerina Nestorovska noted that a bottleneck occurs for both applicants and the department when Request for Information (RFI) letters are received after key documentation expires. She expressed that delayed communication acts as the catalyst for this issue:
When you finally do receive communication from DHA, it is usually in the form of a s56 document or RFI. Because they have taken so long to open your file, many of your documents have expired in validity. As a result, they delay things even further and ask you to apply for a new Police Clearance Certificate (more money and time spent) and/or Medical Examination report (more money and time spent). Sometimes, they ask for documents you have already uploaded and are valid, but they haven't bothered to look. And to top that off, they give you 28 days to hand all of this in. They have sat idle on your file for up to, and sometimes beyond 12 months and then give you 28 days to submit.
5.9
One submitter noted a similar experience, describing the messaging around documentation expiry as delayed and contradictory:
We have been receiving contradicting messages from the Department of Home Affairs. On one hand they have mentioned that their recommendation is to provide as much documentation upfront as possible, but by the time our application is opened for processing it will be 2 years since the time of application and we will be asked to resubmit all documents that have expired.
5.10
Another submitter described how their persistent attempts to contact the department were unsuccessful, resulting in ongoing uncertainty:
During the whole process there was no communication from the department except for the RFI, all our follow ups went unanswered. And one time I made a phone call to the processing center where our application is being processed, I asked if I could possibly speak to someone who can help me about my application inquiry, the answer was an outright no. There was no way of communication. We just did not know who to contact to.
5.11
In one reported case, the complexity of the system had resulted in inaccurate advice being provided, which ultimately resulted in an applicant's children being ineligible to apply:
I have seen cases where sponsors received inaccurate advice about the actual implications of the Ministerial Directions. In one case, a client failed to lodge a partner visa application because he thought that he was entirely precluded from applying to sponsor his family as he was not a citizen. This was not correct and had he lodged as soon as he was eligible to sponsor his family, his oldest children would have remained eligible for inclusion in the eventual visa grant. Because he waited until after 2018 to lodge, his 2 oldest children were ineligible, leading to the break up of a close and loving family.
5.12
Dr Andrew Lowe commented that vague communication about processing timeframes inhibits applicants from developing a sense of confidence in the process. Dr Lowe observed that the system evokes feelings of being 'forgotten and ignored':
I first met my now fiancée, Richa Gupte in 2014 through a penpal website. Since then, we have not only met each other and both the sets of our parents in person but also have been engaged since February 2019. We lodged Richa's Prospective Marriage visa (subclass 300) in June 2019. Apart from the standard "your application has been received" email, the Department of Immigration has not tried to communicate with us. With zero communication that too after paying close to 8,000 AUD as the visa processing fee, we have been left to indefinitely wait for 20 months now. Both Richa and I feel forgotten and ignored.
5.13
Mrs Thi Le echoed these feelings, characterising communication from the department as 'de-humanising' for the applicant. She submitted:
The system has dehumanised and indeed destroyed many people as a result of noncommunication and ad hoc processing.
Migration Agents are seldom recognised for the important role they can play in assessing the veracity of the claims of applicants and communication between Migration Agents and assessing officers is now almost non-existent. There is no feeling of the partnership in processing which used to exist when the motto of the Department was "People are our business" as introduced under Departmental Secretary Andrew Metcalfe, or in days prior to that period, when officers and Agents worked together to ensure informed, fair and timely decisions.
5.14
In relation to improving communication strategies, one submitter recommended that the department implement an easily accessible framework for conveying status updates for individual applications. They suggested that:
Given the long waiting times there needs to be more communication from the department as it is unclear whether anything is being done with an application. Perhaps a solution is to provide a status as to which stage the application is currently at (on a scale of 1 to 5). We submitted my wife's PMV in January 2020 (which was converted to a 309 partner visa in September 2020) and didn't receive any response from the department until 30 November 2020 (a request for further information). Once received we responded within 2 days and then heard nothing until provisional 309 grant in March 2021. The request was unusual and asked a question about providing a marriage certificate to a partner whom my wife was never married.
Impacts of navigating the visa application system
5.15
Case studies are included throughout this report, drawing on the lived experience of navigating the visa system as told through the submissions to the inquiry. It is important to note that inquiry participants raised a multitude of concerns about engaging with the visa application system (such as waiting times and costs), however much of the evidence was underpinned by fundamental concerns about the family and partner visa system as a whole.
5.16
This section examines the impacts of extended periods of family separation, as well as how poor experiences in the visa application system can result in a disrupted sense of belonging and a loss of trust and confidence.
Consequences of extended waiting periods and family separation
5.17
The committee heard that the increasing complexity of navigating pathways to permanency, coupled with processing delays is having negative impacts on applicants' lives. A substantial number of submitters described how the considerable uncertainty about processing timeframes and extensive delays in visa application processing have prevented them from moving on with their lives and led to adverse effects on their mental, physical and financial wellbeing. One submitter described how the overall wait process impacted their relationship and ultimately his quality of life:
True to their word, we received our visa confirmation about 12 months from our application. 12 months of waiting strained our relationship greatly, and not being able to be together during that process was immensely painful. The experience could be described best as a year 'in limbo'. With endless melancholic skype calls, 'I miss yous' and tense evenings just waiting for the department to get through to us. Contacting the office regarding how well our application was progressing during the waiting period was a wasted affair. The office was not interested in our concerns.
The entire process was an excessively costly, over bureaucratic nightmare. Worst of all, most of the pain we experienced was completely unnecessary, and for me, became an important and embittering life lesson. The younger me was far less cynical and weary. The younger me felt he could trust public institutions. The younger me had faith in the notions of Australia being a fair and equitable country for all. Not anymore.
5.18
Another submitter, Miss Christelle Rageh, described the ongoing disruption that she was experiencing while she waited for the results of her partner's visa application:
I cry almost every night, I have experienced anxiety for the first time in my life at only the age of 25 I am afraid of leaving my house, I have lost friends due to avoiding all the outings that includes their partners, I try avoid such situations so I don't overthink about my own and avoid questions about our papers. It hurts me to see all my friends and family building their lives, getting married and sharing a home together when I cannot even get a hug from my partner.
5.19
Similarly, Mrs Jayne Sexton described how the situation was impacting her life, resulting in negative impacts on her mental health:
We have been living our lives in limbo for over a year and a half my mental and physical health had deteriorated due to the constant stress and anxiety caused by the never ending wait. I am seriously contemplating taking antidepressants to help me for my depression and anxiety. My son has suffered greatly and constantly asked when the only person he calls dad is coming back. How do you explain this painful process to a child?
5.20
For some, the protracted waiting times lead to delays in family planning. Ms Jade Stevenson submitted:
We are forever scarred by this experience, mental health implications due to the stress and separation will be long lasting and receiving professional support for PTSD and grief is currently being sought after. Furthermore, our financial status and independence as a young couple has been set back for many years to come, which will ultimately affect our future and plans for a family.
5.21
Ms Rachel Price described a similar experience, outlining how her mental health had been impacted and her life had been left 'in limbo':
I have struggled with my mental health. Never before have I experienced such levels of anxiety. This loop of paperwork is impossible to navigate and has taken its toll on my ability to function. I had to start speaking to a counselor and getting help for my anxiety and depression which is something I have never had to do in my life. On my 33rd birthday I had a total breakdown where I had to leave work and hide in my bed for the day. I was in such a hopeless place because I just couldn't see a way out of the impossible situation, I was extremely sad that I hadn't been able to get married or have a child and was heartbroken not to have my support network with me. Rejection after rejection, and failed avenues after failed avenues led me to question my sanity and the level of anxiety has become difficult to live with.
5.22
Mrs Sarah Watson explained that long-term separation from her family not only caused 'stress, anxiety, and heartache' but led her to consider leaving Australia permanently:
My ageing parents, like thousands of others, do not have time on their side. The separation is causing massive stress, anxiety and heartache on both sides. Whilst I understand the pandemic has a lot to answer for, the cloak and dagger approach to this is unfair. Had we known we were in for a 8 - 10 year wait, we would not have applied for this visa and looked for an alternative option. If we do that now, we lose the fees already paid and go back to the start of the queue. $5,555 isn't an insignificant amount of money.
My husband and I are reaching the stage where we are seriously considering leaving Australia for good, as we cannot see another way to ensure we can care for our parents when the time comes.
5.23
For some applicants, the experience of extended waiting times impacts their ability to access family support, as they are the only family member located in Australia. The Multicultural Youth Advocacy Network (MYAN) raised particular concerns about young people being cut off from their support networks for long periods of time:
Due to the forced nature of the refugee experience, young people are often separated from their families through circumstance, not by choice. Compounding the trauma of family separation, upon arrival in Australia, current policies and processes mean that young humanitarian migrants can remain separated from family members for years or sometimes indefinitely. Though the Australian Government does offer opportunities for family reunion, the current barriers to successful applications are high.
5.24
Regarding social integration, Tatiara District Council noted that separation not only comes at a personal cost but also prevents capacity building and integration in the community, highlighting:
The stress, worry and fear the men experience about their far away families impacts their ability to concentrate and retain information, and in turn decreases their capacity to engage in English language classes. They feel intense guilt, preventing them from becoming involved in community activities while their families remain in war torn countries.
This does not only impact capacity building and reduces integration opportunities, it also has a long-term effect on our new residents' ability to contribute to their full capacity to our community and economy.
5.25
The committee heard that separation from support networks and a reduced capacity to engage in the community often exacerbates the vulnerability of migrants. Liberty Victoria submitted that vulnerable groups with limited understanding of the rules will engage with the system, and experience psychological harm when their applications are rejected:
Further, it is our experience that many vulnerable refugees lodge partner visa and child visas to sponsor their partners and minor children unaware of these ministerial directions. In addition to the visa application charges that can total many thousands of dollars, the indefinite suspension in processing they experience can cause additional psychological harm to the sponsor in Australia and family members overseas.
Social disruption
5.26
The department stated that Australia owes much of its economic and social success to migration. It highlighted that migration is a key contributor to diversity and social cohesion, playing a crucial role in strengthening Australia's national identity.
5.27
Submitters raised the importance of continuing to build a national identity that is enriched by diversity. The National Ethnic Disability Alliance and Multicultural Disability Advocacy Association stated:
Many of our members have limited English proficiency at the time of lodgement or when they arrive in Australia, and even limited literacy in their own language. Australia has a long migration history with migrants from different parts of the world coming to Australia with little or no English. Generations of Australians have become citizens while still developing their English language skills and are a huge part of Australia's identity.
5.28
However, a study conducted by the Scanlon Foundation found that social relationships, shared cultural affiliations, and efforts from local stakeholders can promote feelings of belonging whilst restrictive visa processes can limit this. The Scanlon Foundation also highlighted that by disrupting a sense of belonging, complex visa processes can de-rail efforts towards maintaining social cohesion.
5.29
Mr Rhett McDonald echoed this view, stating:
[Temporary Protection Visas], [Safe Haven Enterprise Visas] and Bridging Visa holders' wellbeing is directly impacted by these extreme restrictions, given that, they carry the essential sadness of being separated from loved ones, this often manifests in a disrupted sense of belonging and intense lack of control and helplessness.
5.30
Family separation was cited by submitters as a key source of distress for migrants and refugees. The Human Rights Law Centre commented, in relation to extended periods of family separation:
It adds to distress in the remaining parent, further undermining their own mental health and parenting capacity, doubly disadvantaging children who then have not only lost a family member but may be impacted by persisting mental illness in the remaining adult or adults. In addition, their sense of themselves, who they are, where they belong and the story that they are part of can remain unresolved or be constituted around loss, rather than adaptation.
5.31
Ms Jaleh Johannessen also noted that young people separated from their parents, in particular, experience disruptions to their sense of identity:
Parents also play an important role in maintaining the family unit, family bond, and that crucial sense of belonging. This is particularly the case within the young migrant communities who often struggle for years to find an identity for themselves in their adopted country.
5.32
For some, the separation from their family can remain ongoing, without the prospect of a long-term reunion in Australia. Mr Rohulla Hussaini described the ongoing separation from his family that he experienced as a Temporary Protection visa (TPV) holder:
…my wife and daughter are not with me - they are in Afghanistan. I have never met or held my daughter. I do not know if we will ever be able to live together as a family. The Australian Government has given me a temporary protection visa that lets me stay in Australia but never bring my wife and daughter here.
I have been here for nearly a decade, but have only been able to visit my family twice. I haven't seen my wife Nooriya for two years. I was so excited when we found out she was pregnant - I bought so many baby clothes for Jasmine. But I couldn't travel last year, so I missed Jasmine's birth. I'm still waiting for the chance to meet her. Now she has grown out of the clothes I bought without ever wearing them. It was painful to look at that pile of clothes last year. Eventually I took them to the op shop.
5.33
Similarly, Australian Hazara Associations described the net impact that long-term delays and familial separation can have on new migrants:
M arrived by boat in Australia in late 2011 and got his permanent residency visa in mid2012. He submitted a partner visa application for his wife and three children aged 16, 13 and 10 in 2013. However, due to the Ministerial Directions, his family's application was put at a lowest priority for processing. He subsequently applied for his citizenship in 2016 and, as of May 2021, is still waiting to even sit for the required Citizenship Test. M has worked hard to support his family in a transit country and has spent thousands of dollars to visit his family every one or two years. However, the targeted delays have deteriorated his mental health and severely impacted his sense of belonging to Australia. M is deeply worried about his family. His oldest child is still in the application but M worries that the Department of Home Affairs may reject the child's visa application because, since 2016, the Department has excluded children from partner visas once they turn 23 years old (i.e., resulting in split family members).
Loss of trust and confidence
5.34
The department stated that maintaining confidence in Australia's Migration Program is essential for continuing to provide 'Australian businesses with access to skilled workers, establishing international connections and boosting the economy'. However, submitters to the inquiry expressed that they had suffered a loss of trust and confidence in the visa processing system.
5.35
Concerns were raised in relation to systematic issues that undermine the integrity of the application processes and create distrust of the process among the migrant community. One submitter explained:
We have planned our future by keeping in mind the information we found online about the partner visa application, purely because we trusted the Australian government. We expected Home Affairs to be a professional and well organised department.
We did not once expect to be put in such a horrible situation, such a long-lasting nightmare.
Had we known that after 19 months, my application was still untouched, had we known that the situation in this department is so out of control, we would have waited the decision out where we both had secure jobs and accommodation. We would have applied years earlier.
5.36
Another submitter, Mr Jeremy Hunt, described how the invasiveness and complexity of the application process had resulted in him feeling that his privacy had been breached:
…we continued with the application, to discover the process itself was a maze of excessive paperwork, statements, declarations, health forms. It required me to reduce the amount of shifts I was working just to give me enough time to organize the application itself, which took many months and an exorbitant amount of effort…The standard to which you must prove the relationship is legitimate is set extraordinarily high, and we ended up sending in copies of our personal messages to each other over the years as evidence of our apparent 'true love', which seemed to me as almost a breach of privacy.
I have described it to others as 'having your romantic relationship, your most intimate and personal emotional experience reduced to a collective of pieces of paper, for some collection of government staff to ponder at and make a judgement of authenticity'.
5.37
Many submitters had specifically lost trust in the equity of the application process, viewing the system as unfairly favouring certain applicants over others. Mr Lance Holden described the current system as a 'lottery of access', citing its opacity and expensiveness. Mr Holden said:
The most significant problem is that the process provides no guarantees on processing times. Applicants submit their application and then wait. There is no update on what processing centre it is currently in, what position it is in the queue or how close to be addressed by a human it is. Once a human starts looking at the process there is no requirement to conclude processing in a specific time. There are no details of the queue ahead of you application and the rate it is being cleared. This is the fundamental tension of the system and the greatest cause of angst for users. I'm not aware of any process that takes a very large up front payment with no guarantee of when a result will occur or what it is.
5.38
Mr Holden further stated that:
The process must be fair, it must be streamlined, it must put trust back on sponsers and it must be transparent in each application. Then instead of spending nights writing lengthy submissions against a process I'm trapped in I'd be spending nights wrapped in the arms of the one I love, something every Australian deserves the right to have.
5.39
Ms Tola Yusuf likewise stated that her negative experience with the process was 'a breach of trust and never a good conduct of exemplary leadership, [and] it places a doubt on the integrity of leadership'.
5.40
Echoing these concerns, Legal Aid NSW commented that a lack of justification for unsuccessful applicants damages the reputation of family and partner visa programs in the community:
The success or otherwise of an application under the RHSP appears arbitrary. We have assisted with Subclass 202 applications that have been refused multiple times, only to be resubmitted (without any additional information or change in circumstances) and then be granted. This, again, damages the integrity of the program. It also has an impact on the sponsors who have family member applicants with seemingly more compelling claims refused. In our experience, the gap that is left by the lack of proper reasons for the decision provided to unsuccessful applicants is filled with uninformed pseudo-legal information which circulates in the community and causes distrust and suspicion in both the process of migration and the rules that they are told underpin it.
5.41
Mr Rhett McDonald, a counsellor working with the Survivors of Torture and Trauma Assistance and Rehabilitation Service, provided a case study that illustrates how persistent systemic issues can result in a new migrant losing trust in the visa system, as well as facing significant disadvantage:
A client whose wife and child are awaiting their Partner Visa to be granted after lodging it in 2016 was sent an auto generated email from Home Affairs in 2021 requesting his family in Afghanistan obtain their biometrics tests within 28 days.
Given the short amount of time he booked them on a flight from Herat to Kabul to obtain the Biometrics. He became aware that some other people were receiving the same email and it may not be the correct information. He contacted Home Affairs in Australia and they said it was correct. He contacted Home Affairs in Dubai (where the application was being processed) and they informed him that the auto generated letter was sent in error and his family are not required to obtain biometrics. He had paid in excess of $1000 and his family had already flown to Kabul [to] honor the request of integrity checking.
Given they are ethnic Hazaras the travel was and continues to be very dangerous. They had to return to Herat. No apology was given and no automated correction of the initial email error was sent.