681 澳洲移民政策大轉向

上週內政部長奧尼爾發表了對移民政策的檢討報告書, 認為要改變過往以計分為主的技術移民制度。她認為這制度, 令到不少人把留學看成為移民的第一步, 導致澳洲吸納了大批無法滿足澳洲社會需要的新移民, 對解決澳洲人材荒沒有作用。而且過去數年給留學生全面工作權利, 更把留學簽證變成廉假低薪工作簽證,進一步剝削留學生。即時的改變是提升外地勞工簽證的最低工資要求至每年7萬元, 並且提供更簡便的途徑, 讓短期勞工成為永久居民, 滿足澳洲社會的需要。

這政策的改變, 最受影響的是來自中國及南亞的留學生。不少中國學生, 通過唸更多、更高水平的學位、更好的英語水平、大一點的年齡, 來增加自己申請移民的分數,最後成為澳洲永久居民,用報告書的描繪成是堅持 (persistence)。報告書表示這些移民, 並未解決澳洲需要的人材荒。而南亞的留學生, 不少長期報讀私人學校的低質職業課程, 只上課十多小時, 卻每周工作五、六十小時, 填補了澳洲人不願意從事的低收入工作, 沒有提升澳洲的生產力。

奧尼爾表示這一個改革, 可能會令到留學出口減少及移民數目下降, 但她認為這是對澳洲長遠發展最好的選擇。不過, 這樣的轉變所帶來即時對經濟的影響, 奧尼爾並沒有作出評估。

一直以來,不少中國家長都把送孩子來澳洲留學看成為家庭投資。以三、四年留學開支投放數十萬元在孩子身上, 以房養學, 先讓他們取得移民資格, 可以享受澳洲福利, 同時間通過房地產升值, 更可以獲取投資回報。最後自己也可以通過子女申請, 成為變相的退休移民, 多了一層保障。澳洲過去這二十年來, 中國來的移民大幅增加, 受這政策影響極大。

要是留學與移民脫鈎,必然令到這如意算盤不容易敲得響, 中國留學移民巿場將會改變。在推出這政策時, 相信澳洲政府要仔細評估對澳洲經濟的影響。

不過, 這確可能是會提升澳洲社會能吸納更多願意投入澳洲生活的新移民的機會吧。

周偉文 社長

Drastic change in Australian immigration policy

Last week Home Affairs Minister Clare O’Neil released the government’s review report on immigration policy with an overhaul of the point system for skilled migrants. She said the system makes people see studying just as a stepping stone to migration. That may end up immigrants not actually meeting our labour force need. And allowing overseas students to work part-time on low-pay jobs extensively is not really in their interest.

The immediate change is to raise the minimum annual wage of overseas working visa to $70,000, and to make it easier for temporary workers to apply for as PR in serving the labour market.

The policy change is to impact most on students from China and South Asian countries. Many of the Chinese students aim to get more PR merit points through higher educational standard, better English and mature age – that’s “persistence’ mentioned in the Report. The Report quoted them as immigrants not solving labour shortage in Australia. For students from South Asia who mostly study in private vocational training schools, they study for 10+ hours but work for 50+ hours per week. They are filling up many low-pay jobs but not really enhancing the national productivity.

O’Neil admitted this policy change could dampen our education export and migration intake, but this should be in the long-term interest of the nation. But she did not want to make an assessment on the economic impact that might result from the change.

Many Chinese parents have been sending their children to study in Australia as an investment. By spending hundreds of thousands dollars on overseas study for a few years with properties acquired, their children can obtain PR status, enjoy Australian welfare benefit, get good investment return from real estate… and at the end can come over as retired immigrants through family reunion with their children. Thus, the number of Chinese immigrants surged over the past 20+ years under this policy.

If overseas studying cannot lead to immigration, market for Chinese overseas students would not be the same. The government must be mindful of the economical consequence.

For sure this nevertheless can help Australia in attracting more immigrants who are willing to play an active role in the society.

Mr. Raymond Chow, Publisher