不知道建议是否可行，提出来大家讨论利弊。
众志成城才有希望！观望只有失望！
看了一下parliament的网站，AOS新政还没列入参议院审议的日程，估计还在众议院那里扣着。下一次参议院开会表决的时间是5月9日（尚未知道是否会讨论表决AOS新政）。目前似乎并没有太多人知道这件事，该让更多的参议院议员听到我们反对的心声法案才有可能被否决。建议：
1.将参议院议员的邮箱都逐个发一遍（特别是反对党），扩大知情力度。要知道去年的移民法案、4020法案不能通过都是因为反响太大且不合理才快速否决。快速被否决的办法就是反对声音大，造成舆论影响。
2.在parliament 的Facebook 以及twitter上留言，直接反映我们反对法案通过的心声，并建议把petition的链接发上去，集众人之力，让议会看到反对之多。
3.必须注意的一点：写信的侧重点集中在法案本身的不合理不道德之处，不能攻击政府。（1）标准与之前相比一下翻倍，调整幅度过大不合理；（2）没有新政过渡期，已递交的移民申请不应该收到新政影响。虽然immigration department和centrelink是两个部门，但由于移民条件之一就是要做AOS测试，这个关系是连带的，不能割裂来看。很多人是因为递交时是满足要求才申请的。原标准实施多年均只有轻微浮动，所以这样巨大的改动是不可预见的，不应该由已递交的申请人来承担责任；（3）收入要求提高到三年来满足，没有任何梯度，设置得不合理。很多人目前有条件满足新政，但历史收入是否应按当年标准审理。
以下有参议院议员的列表及联系邮箱：
https://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/03%20Senators%20and%20Members/31%20Senators/contacts/los.pdf?la=en
众志成城才有希望，观望只有失望！强权面前不能退缩。为了父母共享天伦，要尽力才不遗憾！
评论
其实身边很多人都或多或少听到了消息，但是很多人就是事不关己，高高挂起！
评论
同意!有时候真的就是国人不团结才会被人欺负。
评论
同意，还有同学收到回复说可以给shadow minister of immigration Shayne Neumann 写信， 邮件 [email protected]
我一上班就先写了邮件了
评论
我已经写给Shane了
也给当地反对党议员和反对党领袖都写信了
评论
站起来 不是应该 坚决抵制 如此反我国 的澳国 吗
评论
其实透过结果看根源，才能找对角度，更有说服力。
现在西方国家，包括澳洲经济都不怎么样，勒紧腰带过日子。 以前经济好的时候，门槛很低，父母来了后就有各种福利和住房补贴，无论在澳洲的子女缴多少税，甚至一分不交只有现金收入也是一样待遇。 后来引入了付费，且大多福利要延迟到多年以后。 就是政府开支越来越吃紧的原因，事实上任何一项centerlink的补助，都在收紧。腰包不鼓，自然就没以前大方。 回到问题，AOS担保只所以提高，和收费提高不同，更多的是考虑一个大的家庭，是否有为这个社会做了一定的贡献。
家里老人在公园认识一个老太太，80多了，自己有两个儿子在中国。 她姐姐的大女儿20年前结婚来澳，然后不久就介绍二女儿结婚来澳，自然老太太的姐姐姐夫也就符合资格来澳。 老太太自己有慢性病，不知道国内怎么做的证明，说国内独居且国内无任何真系亲戚照顾， 以姨的身份来投靠，也给批了。 基本整个大家庭，现在都是政府养着，外甥女都是做着现金的工，老太太还定期给国内两个老儿子寄钱。 不过老太太还懂得感恩，一说起澳洲政府就都多么多么好。
放眼望去，这样的例子到处都是，并不只对华人，各个族群都非常多，越是穷的国家的背景，比例越多。 所以什么族群论等等都站不住脚，简单讲就是政府没以前腰包鼓了，所以从人权的角度讲，或许还有些说服力。
评论
顶，隔壁帖子里有邮件模板
评论
http://www..com.au/bbs/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1413042&mobile=yes
模板参考这里
评论
我同意政府可以合理调整政策或门槛，但是不能粗暴执行。因为申请人是根据政府当时提出的条件自己评估了自己的情况才决定是否走父母移民的道路，并因此改变了许多人生，职业，家庭的规划。不能申请的时候给人一套标准，申请后随意将条件翻倍，这不合理也不公平。
政府如果觉得现行法律有漏洞，引来太多米虫，可以修法。比如像这次提高担保人收入要求，或是还可以评估父母的经济条件，评估子女的资产都可以理解，但不能半途强行变换规则。
而且新的规则也并不合理。一个人申请父母要8.8万，夫妻申请两对父母要23-24万。而且父母也有手有脚，有自己的养老金，如果政府要算到这么精确，确保所有人不够资格领补助，为什么不能算上他们的收入。
评论
移民法规和条件，是否可以每年调整并且立即生效，这是个很具体的法律问题，是否和其他法律不同，大家可以咨询周围的律师朋友。
政府提高到8.8万的出发点，应该是考虑这个工资下每年缴的税，大概能提供一个老年人政府每年需要补贴的费用。 也说明过去政府设置门槛低，更多的是出于人道考虑，而不是经济上考量。
老年人在自己的国家服务一辈子，养老本应该是本国的考虑，如果本国没有保障，子女就应该付出一些。 比如一些欧洲国家的父母，更多的是定期来访问一阵，而不是移民过来。
澳洲平均缴税的工资就6万多了，如果子女不能缴一定的税，凭什么让澳洲社会来补贴呢，尤其还要让双方4个父母都过来。
同理于私人医疗保险，或许能看得更清晰。 如果每个人都想方设法，买香菇红枣，按摩回扣，用完保险就退等等，拿回超过自己保费的金额，结果就只有一个，保修公司调整条款，或者每人都增加保费。
所以回到问题，跟政府谈判说以前为什么大方，现在不大方了，这站不住脚。
如果从移民法规和条件是否可以立即生效，另外人道和人权政府是否还要维护，更有说服力。
评论
刚刚看了细节，8万7是一个担保人，担保两位老人的工资要求。担保一个老人是5万8。 其实8万的税，还是涵盖不住政府为两位老人的费用
评论
整理了一下邮箱地址，方便之后的朋友发邮件
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
senator.o'[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected];
[email protected]
评论
8万8是单身的人，有配偶的是12万。
评论
确实是这样的，和政府算账肯定是行不通的。政府收紧政策的原因我相信大家完全能理解，至少我觉得很理解。因为入不敷出肯定是不能持久的。
以前的经济担保人收入要求确实要求很低。这个担保人收入要求，和移民政策和移民局的要求其实是一体的。
移民局有自己的费用，也是曾经调整过的。但是移民局的任何新政策都不对现有的申请人生效的。
其实最让大家措手不及和最不能理解的肯定是这个生效时间。虽然调整额度也很夸张（以前担保父母4万五，现在要12万。夫妻担保4位父母以前9万，现在23万多），但如果提前公布，新的申请人就算现在工资不够，哪怕去多做一份工作，辛苦一点有的人也可以达标。有的打算马上要小孩的也可以决定要不要拖一拖。或者就不买投资房不要负扣说等等的。实在感觉没戏的人，也无谓去浪费几年时间苦等。那些浪费的申请费都不算什么，是一家人的规划被破坏了，时间和机遇被耽误了。
所以大家可以从这些角度去投诉也许更有用。
评论
提议新政策可以理解，但是出政策不能搞突然袭击不然会带来居民对未来前景的负面判断。
评论
写了个petition to senate 的联署信模版，有没有谁知道怎么放到网上让大家签名，这样发邮件的朋友可以把联署请愿信作为附件发给参议员，想让哪个愿意帮我们present到参议院的参议员动用disallowance motion，联署请愿信可以作为参议院开会时的支持材料：
The Total Number of Petition Signature：
Senator's Signature：
To the Honourable President and members of the Senate in Parliament assembled:
1. The petition of the undersigned shows:
1.1 Background Legislation Information
On 26 March 2018, the Minister for Social Service Dan Tehan has introduced a legislative instrument to amendment the financial criteria for Assurance of Support in which all Australian Citizens and permanent residents who wish to spouse their overseas parents or relatives to come to Australia under a relevant visa program have to meet. The legislative changes / instruments come into effect almost immediately from 1 April 2018.
(The legislative details can be found here: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/F2018L00425)
1.2 The new changes compared with the previous criteria
The new changes compared with the previous criteria are summarised as below:
(1) Significant Uplift in Income Thresholds - taxable income requirement of assurer(s) are almost doubled up from the previous requirement:
Example 1: a single non-married individual now requires A $88,291 to be eligible for AoS for both parents, whereas according to ABS figure, a full-time adult average weekly ordinary time earnings is A$1,567.90 or A$81,530.80 per annum. This demonstrates the unreasonableness of such dramatic income test change. Please note the previous standard for this scenario was approximately $46,875.
Example 2: a married couple with 1 child is the highest % of family composition, whereas Median Weekly Income of Family is A$1,734, or A$90,169 per annum. This is way less than the AoS income test of A$120,664.93 should they want to sponsor one pair of parents.) Please note the previous standard for this scenario was approximately $61,756.44.
Example 3: An adult assurer with a kid to provide assurance for one parent has to have taxable income for at least $58,860.94 annually (previous required amount only a little bit over $30,000). If this assurer has married or has a de facto partner the income requirement will be significantly increased to $88,291.41 annually regardless of whether or not this partner or spouse is willing to be jointly included into the assurance of support, and the calculator does not consider if the partner has income or not.
(2) The income evidence under the new legislative instrument is now required to be provided for three years (last two financial years plus the current financial year). Previously the years required to meet the income test was two years.
(3) Longer period of evidence to be provided - under current new requirement, the requirement of taxable income for assurer(s) has been almost doubled when comparing with the previous AoS criteria, and the years required to meet the requirement has increased from 2 years to 3 years.
(4) All three years income (two historical financial years and the current financial year) have to meet the new criteria without considering the income increase level.
(5) There is no transition period for the existing immigration applicants - the applicants who have submitted immigration applications but did not receive the notice from the immigration department to lodge their AoS application with Centrelink before the 1st of April, 2018 have also been affected and they are required to meet the criteria under the new legislation instrument. The 143 parent visa applicants who have recently been requested by the Immigration Department to complete an AoS test actually lodged their immigration applications three years ago.
Though the Immigration Department and Centrelink are two separated departments, however, this legislation amendment issue cannot be only regarded as an independent issue raised by Centrelink. That’s because passing an AoS income test has always been a mandatory requirement to acquire a parent visa and the AoS test is only required to be done at the final stage of the application upon receiving the Immigration Department's request. Such dramatic change has a significant impact should the visa application have been made 3 years ago, as the sponsor should have known whether they would be capable of assuring for their parent(s) when they submitted the application.
1.3 Who Will Be Affected by This Amendment
All Australian Citizens and Permanent Residents who have submitted or consider to submit the following visas:
(1) an aged dependent relative visa
(2) a contributory parent or contributory aged parent visa
(3) a parent or aged parent visa
(4) a remaining relative visa
(5) a humanitarian entrant visa under the Community Support Program
1.4 Our Petition / Demands
(1) A transition period to be given to those existing immigration applicants who summited their immigration applications prior to the release of the new legislative instrument (come into effect since 1 April 2018). In short, we request the existing immigration applications to be exempted from the new legislative instrument.
(2) Changes are understandable but should not be made with such a significant amount without prior notice. We request that the taxable income requirement of the assurer(s) to be changed back to the previous level or to a level slightly higher than the previous standard instead of doubling up the previous amount.
(3) Historical income evidence should be assessed in accordance with the previous standard as the historical taxable income of many assurer(s) of the existing immigration applications have met the previous income criteria set by Centrelink for AoS test. The applicants could not foresee the significant AoS changes when they submitted the applications as the previous AoS criteria had lasted for many years without massive changes. The existing applicants should not take responsibility for the failed results caused by the new legislation.
2. Our petitioners ask/request that the Senate:
Many of existing sponsors of the parent visa(s) have been lived in Australia for years as hard working taxpayers. The change of the AoS legislation is really stopping us from reuniting with our parents and it has disappointed many of us who love Australia and want to stay to work for the country for long term.
We demand that the Federal Parliament to strike down the new amendment to AoS income requirement. We demand the AoS criteria to be remained the same as before or at least the new legislation should be changed by referring to Section 1.4 Our Petition/Demands which are listed as above.
No. Petitioner Name Email Address
1 Arissa Wong [email protected]
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
...
评论
lz辛苦了
评论
非常赞同你的观点，收紧政策没毛病。新规定没有任何缓冲期太过分了。
评论
顶帖！
评论
有网友在change上发了petition可以上去签到支持
https://www.change.org/p/ministe ... arent-visa-petition
评论
petition已经有5000多人了，大家加油。我也已经转发到FACEBOOK，让更多其他族裔的人看到。
评论
看到change 上的petition，5000+ 真是很不错的反响，感到安慰的是看到不少来自非华裔的支持和留言。只是有点出于担心这个投票网站不够官方正式，所以在参议院网站查看到民众可以直接发petition 到议会的链接，但必须经由一位参议院议员帮忙present。https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Petitions/~/link.aspx?_id=6EA3F092B640468F8CB6AD3F23F2EACA&_z=z
如果大家发了信给议员，没有收到回复，是不是因为参议员缺乏规范的数据支持？如果有这样联名的请愿信函会不会更好。
有必要大家可以签名，积累到一定数量以后，任何想要发邮件的朋友都可以作为支持文件递交。
也可以作为写信的模版供参考～
当然，认为目前最重要是保持持续的热度，引起更多民众的知情，还有参议院议员的支持。社会舆论会给政府施加压力，也是我们可以不被动等待而争取主动的渠道。将我们的投票成果发 YouTube、facebook、Twitter点子很赞！
评论
https://www.facebook.com/saynotoAOSchange/
这是新政群里朋友做的facebook page. 请大家like and share
评论
看了下 让土著旗永久飞扬在harbor bridge上面有84000多支持
AOS刚破5000......
大家这样发，估计AOS都成垃圾邮件过滤的关键字了
评论
https://www.change.org/p/ministe ... amp;utm_term=302014
这个是链接，请大家继续支持
评论
84000不是从5000涨上去的么？
评论
是的，只是我个人觉得这样让大家发邮件方法方式可能不是特别好。我觉得更多应该是组织联盟，联系华人议会议员，凑钱做电视报纸广告。
那么多华人商会哪里去呢？为什么没有华人领袖支持？
靠大家每天轰炸议员邮箱？没有任何意义的，我想任何一个合格的系统管理员早就已经设置号规则，过滤AOS相关信息，直接进垃圾邮箱或者直接被拦截了。根本无法送达议员，，议员不会也没有时间看的。只能机械收到一个回信而已。
还是老一套对中国政府的思路，在西方社会可能并不是那么管用。
评论
无利不早起啊，而且可能觉得参加抗议会招惹是非吧。那些华文自媒体煽情夸张的本事都哪儿去了。。。
评论
那个是时间长一些吧 aos这个才几天人数还在增加
澳洲中文论坛热点
- 悉尼部份城铁将封闭一年，华人区受影响！只能乘巴士（组图）
- 据《逐日电讯报》报导，从明年年中开始，因为从Bankstown和Sydenham的城铁将因Metro South West革新名目而
- 联邦政客们具有多少房产？
- 据本月早些时分报导，绿党副首领、参议员Mehreen Faruqi已获准在Port Macquarie联系其房产并建造三栋投资联