Senate debates

Tuesday, 8 May 2012

Questions on Notice

Immigration and Citizenship (Question No. 1540)

Photo of Michaelia CashMichaelia Cash (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Immigration) Share this | | Hansard source

asked the Minister representing the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship, upon notice, on 8 February 2012:

(1) Following a letter dated 17 March 2011 from the Minister to the Member for Forrest, which stated that 'My Department, together with a number of other Government agencies, is currently reviewing the issues faced by individuals remaining in Australia long term as temporary residents. In this context concerns raised by Retirement visa holders, and possible options for resolution, are being given due consideration':

(a) has any continuing work been undertaken by the department in relation to this matter; if so, can details of this work be provided; and

(b) what further work is planned by the department.

(2) Has the department accepted the feasibility of any of the 'alternative scenarios' of the Australian Government Actuary (AGA) report into the estimated costs of 410 retirement visa holders gaining a pathway to permanent residence; if so, which scenarios.

(3) How has the AGA report been used since its publication to 'help inform Government discussions', as mentioned in a letter from the department to British ExPat Retirees in Australia (BERIA) in June 2010.

(4) What feedback has the department received on the issue of permanent residence for 410 retirement visa holders from 'other Government agencies, retirement visa holders and their representatives, including organisations such as BERIA', as mentioned in a letter from the department to BERIA in June 2010.

Photo of Kate LundyKate Lundy (ACT, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting for Industry and Innovation) Share this | | Hansard source

The Minister for Immigration and Citizenship has provided the following answer to the honourable senator's question:

(1) (a) Yes, my Department is continuing to contribute to work on this issue with a range of other agencies as any decision to alter arrangements for long term temporary residents may have significant cost implications across portfolios. Decisions regarding this matter would need to be considered by Government in a budget context. As the work is continuing I am unable to provide details of the Department's work.

(b) The Department will continue to work with other agencies to advise the Government on this matter.

(2) The Department would not presume to question the professional opinion of the Australian Government Actuary (AGA) by making judgements about the feasibility or otherwise of the alternative scenarios costed.

The report summarises work undertaken by the AGA to develop a model of the potential direct costs to the Commonwealth of providing permanent residence to Retirement visa holders after 10 years on the visa and discusses the various assumptions used in developing this model. As stated in the report, various scenarios were included in order to demonstrate the sensitivity of outcomes with slightly different assumptions in relation to health cost inflation and mortality.

(3) As indicated in a letter sent to BERIA in June 2011, this report was one of many sources of information used to inform discussions about development of a pathway to permanent residence for these visa holders. For example, this report enabled staff in my Department to develop a better understanding of the factors to be taken into account in developing a costing, the basis for various assumptions and the relative sensitivity of outcomes to changes in these assumptions.

(4) In addition to an alternative costing model developed by BERIA the Government did receive some feedback from Retirement visa holders and their supporters concerned at what they perceived as issues or deficiencies with the report. For example, concerns were raised over not including scenarios which used various alternative assumptions regarding the take-up rate of permanent residence. This was, however, considered unnecessary as indicative figures could be calculated using the modelling outcomes without the need for this work to be undertaken by the AGA.