Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Joint Standing Committee on Migration, I'm pleased to present the second report in its inquiry into the efficacy of current registration regulation of Australian migration agents and education agents.

Report made a parliamentary paper in accordance with standing order 39(e).

by leave—Again, I would like to thank the secretariat—Pauline Cullen, the committee secretary; Emma Banyer, inquiry secretary; and Tanya Pratt, office manager—for the way they conducted the inquiries and for the professionalism they have always demonstrated dealing with me and my colleagues, and I know the opposition members feel the same way.

This inquiry was also referred to the committee by the Assistant Minister for Home Affairs on 14 March 2018. The inquiry focused on two particular issues—the integrity associated with the Malaysian ETA visa holders and issues concerning migration and education agents in Australia.

Corrupt and dishonest people operating here in Australia and Malaysia are targeting Malaysians wishing to work in Australia. These individuals are exploiting Australia's visa system and exploiting visa applicants with promises of work in Australia. There are also individuals who apply for an ETA under false pretences.

The committee acknowledges that the majority of ETA holders are compliant. However, it appears from the evidence that a disproportionate amount of Malaysian ETA visa holders are using the ETA visa as a means to find a way around our visa system. The committee heard that a significant amount of Malaysian ETA visa holders, upon arrival in Australia, are applying for a protection visa, obtaining work rights and exploiting the appeals process to stay in Australia for as long as eight years.

Over the last three years, the cost to the Australian taxpayer of the appeals process has been over $46 million.

To combat this, the committee has recommended establishing a fast tracked application and merits review process for Malaysian nationals on ETA visas who apply for a protection visa. In actual fact, this will apply to all those who apply for protection on ETA visas.

Can I just make a very important point here? In 2016-17, there were 26,247 Malaysian nationals who applied for protection so that they could remain in Australia. On the court appeal, only 168 have required protection. Once lodging a protection application, they are using the court system at a cost to the Australian taxpayer of $50 million. All they want to do is stay in Australia and by the time they are finished with the appeal system it can take up to eight years.

The government inquiry made recommendations to fast track these decisions and to not go through the Administrative Appeals Tribunal but instead use the Immigration Assessment Authority, which does not hold hearings and determines decisions based on documentation and within six weeks. To me, this is a very practical way of saving taxpayers' money and solving the issues. But, instead, the Labor members have put in a dissenting report, saying they'd rather see taxpayers fork out millions of dollars and allow overstaying Malaysian nationals who've falsely applied for protection visas to continue to remain in Australia for up to eight years.

The inquiry also examined the efficacy of migration and education agents in Australia, responding to concerns from the community about actions of some migration and education agents.

The committee acknowledges that the majority of agents are professional and provide an outstanding service but evidence of misconduct and fraudulent action by registered migration agents and education agents was apparent and the impact on their victims was significant.

Throughout the inquiry process, the committee heard evidence about agents taking advantage of vulnerable consumers. Witnesses told stories of migration agents:

Victims suffered considerable financial loss as a result of misconduct and fraudulent actions by registered and unregistered migration agents. The biggest concern throughout our inquiry was always the unregistered agents.

Some education agents had provided unlawful immigration assistance to international students regarding visas, sponsorships and permanent residence—they're simply not allowed to do that—and in some cases education agents were not passing on money to education providers.

One organisation reported that they had experienced regular instances of international students who had fallen victim to education agents. A lack of regulation enables them to operate without consequences as the relevant authorities have limited powers to take any action against them.

It is important that we protect the interests of migrants and international students in our visa system who are vulnerable to exploitation such as we saw during this inquiry. We need to consider mechanisms designed to take appropriate enforcement action against agents engaged in fraudulent or misleading practices.

The following key recommendations in this report are aimed at improving consumer protection and ensuring that Australia's registered migration agents and education agents are truly world-class providers of immigration and education assistance.

The committee's key recommendations for Australia's migration agent profession include a review of the current registration requirements for migration agents and proposing that all new migration agents be required to complete a period of supervised practice.

The committee also recommends for the education industry a range of recommendations designed to maintain scrutiny and protection. The recommendations include that education providers ensure that education agents are fully qualified before entering into a written agreement and that written agreements be reviewed once a year to ensure agents have completed a suitable number of professional development activities every year.

It is vital that Australia protect the integrity of its immigration system. The recommendations in this report will help protect the integrity of our visa system and maintain its credibility.

On behalf of the committee, I would like to thank those who participated in the inquiry, by providing submissions and attending the public hearings. Their input and insights greatly assisted the committee in shaping the recommendations contained in the report.

I would also like to thank the deputy chair for her contribution to this inquiry and my committee colleagues for their efforts throughout the inquiry process.

I commend the report to the House.

See this speech in context