Permanent parent migration should be eliminated to give migrant families certainty over their future if the government is unwilling to include parents of adult Australians as family, according to a report.
Including parents of adults as “immediate family” for visa purposes would mean another 20,000 to 30,000 older migrants to Australia each year, according to ‘The Parent Conundrum’, a report commissioned by the Scanlon Foundation Research Institute.
Its author, journalist Peter Mares, argued the government should “have the courage to say an outright no to permanent parent migration”.
Mares added his conclusion was based on a “realist political assessment” where both sides of politics seem uninterested in increasing the number of parent visas to match demand.
“Maintaining a low annual intake of parent visas only serves to prolong the current ‘chaotic dysfunction’ which serves neither Australian families nor the national interest,” Mares said.
“Getting rid of permanent parent migration altogether may sound harsh, but at least it provides families with certainty so that they can plan their lives and accommodate themselves to reality, rather than banking on false hopes.”
If the government ends permanent parent migration, other policy options in the ‘Parent Conundrum’ report included:
- increasing the annual parent intake to 20,000 to address a backlog of cases (and in fairness for those already in the queue),
- fully refunding upfront payments made by families who withdraw due to the wait times,
- phasing out the 870 temporary long-stay visa for a new multi-entry temporary visa, and
- increasing Australia’s humanitarian intake to 27,000 places annually with a set timeline.
The eponymous parent conundrum is described in the report as a tension between the “heart-felt desire of first-generation migrant families to bring parents and grandparents to live with them in Australia” and the “economic considerations regarding the long-term national interest that lead swiftly to a conclusion that parents are not the kind of migrants Australia wants or needs”.
Several skilled migrants quoted in the report spoke of the stress and cost of trying to bring their parents to Australia.
One migrant quoted in the report was ‘Nam’, a pseudonym for privacy reasons.
Nam’s father lives in south-east Asia alone following the death of Nam’s mother and brother.
While the father is in good health at 78, Nam told Mares they were nonetheless concerned about the $47,955 needed for a parent visa, as well as the Home Affairs website’s advice the wait time is 12 years for a new contributory visa.
“Now I feel that I may lose my dad as well in this process,” Nam wrote.
“Sometimes I get panic attacks and anxiety because of the visa processing time.”
Mares advised against implementing a lottery system, similar to Canada and New Zealand.
“Tens of thousands of families will enter the draw, but only a handful will come out winners. The rest will keep trying year after year, hoping to get lucky,” Mares wrote.
“They are still essentially stuck, living if not in a queue, then in a disordered heap, sustained by misplaced hope, given the odds, that their ticket will come up in the lottery.”
Scanlon Foundation Research Institute CEO Anthea Hancocks said the report was commissioned in light of the current parent migration gridlock.
“Our goal was to facilitate a balanced discussion on migration policy that balances the economic considerations with the fundamental value of family unity,” Hancocks said.
Any feedback or news tips? Here’s where to contact the relevant team.