n 1 May 2018 the service fee payable to a number of Visa Application Centres (VACs) will increase.
Service fees payable to VACs in the following locations will be changing:
  • Indonesia
  • Vietnam
  • Russia
  • South Africa
  • Philippines
  • United Arab Emirates
To ensure you pay the correct fee please check the Office & FeesFinder, and the VFS Global website before submitting your application:
                      Source: New Zealand Immigration

Australia’s skilled migration system has helped us attract hundreds of thousands of highly qualified immigrants since 1988. But one side effect of the policy is that we seem to waste many of these skills.
Up to 40% of recent immigrants in Australia are over-educated (having more qualifications than necessary), making it hard for them to find suitable employment. This is almost four times the level of over-education seen in native-born Australians.
The problem could be a lack of coordination between Australia’s migration system and employment policies. The migration system is devoted to supplying immigrants for perceived labor market skill shortfalls but employment policies pay less attention to getting the most out of every immigrant.
As a result we can simultaneously have a skill shortage and qualified migrants who are unable to fill these positions. This often occurs because, for example, they do not have relevant Australian experience.
This is an issue not only for the migrants themselves - who are under-used as employees - but for the rest of Australian society as well. The government receives less tax revenue than it otherwise would have from the migrants, which in turn has implications for public funding, savings, consumption and investment expenditure.
Australia’s skilled migration program favours immigrants with particular characteristics - namely, they are young, university-educated, and English-speaking.
Australia still admits people who do not possess these characteristics, but in streams that are not directly motivated by economics – for example via family reunification or humanitarian visas.
The current system can lead to mismatches between the skills available in the market and those that employers actually need. One possible reason is the lag between the time employers inform immigration authorities about the skills they most need (or envisage needing in the future) and when migrants enter the labor market, which can be years later.
Addressing this gap requires tighter coordination between immigration and employment policies. But this is at odds with the current practice.
Australia’s skilled migration policy is currently informed by employers (who say what skills are needed) but ultimately focuses on population management. Whether new immigrants find adequate employment to use their skills to the full is the responsibility of a different area of government, if at all.
No Australian employer has an incentive to be the first in offering new migrants the local labour market experience they so critically need. This seems especially so for professional jobs that are subject to occupational licensing. For example, migrants get accredited shortly after settlement but if they cannot acquire relevant Australian experience they either delay entering their desired field or move into a different one.

Coordinating immigration and employment

Coordinating Australia’s immigration and employment policies could reduce some of this skill wastage.
For example, data on the employment outcomes of recent migrants could be compared to skill shortages identified by employers. This should be carried out jointly by an immigration-employment task force.
This would help to pinpoint the most serious cases of migrant over-education. The reasons could be identified (whether it is because of too many skilled migrants, skills of poor quality, or a lack of demand), and solutions developed.
Using these data, Australian immigration and employment policies could include targets related to migrants’ skills. Doing so would re balance the current focus of both immigration and employment policies so that Australia more efficiently uses all the resources we have available, and for which it competes internationally, as in the case of highly qualified migrants.
Since 1988, when the points-based system was introduced, Australia has been at the forefront of designing immigration policies that are attuned to the needs of the labour market. Immigration policy has focused on attracting migrants that could be immediately employed.
But the evidence shows we are wasting skills in levels similar to those of countries that do not implement selective immigration policies.
This suggests that immigration policy by itself is not the only tool responsible for migrants’ labor market outcomes. Better coordination between immigration and employment policies is needed if we want to use skills from abroad to fill gaps and become more productive.
no image
NEW YORK  — The Trump administration said Friday that it is ending special immigration protections for about 57,000 Hondurans, adding them to hundreds of thousands of immigrants from other countries battered by violence and natural disasters who are losing permission to be in the United States.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's widely anticipated decision not to renew temporary protected status for Hondurans means an estimated 428,000 people from several countries face rolling deadlines beginning late this year to leave or obtain legal residency in other ways.

Hondurans will have until Jan. 5, 2020, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen said.
President Donald Trump — who wants to curtail legal immigration and has been cracking down broadly on illegal immigration — and his supporters note that the protections were never meant to be permanent.
Immigrant advocates decried the move and contend that ending the status will drive people underground who have been establishing roots in the U.S. for years or decades, including having American-born children.
For Hondurans, the program known as TPS has been in place since 1999 after Hurricane Mitch devastated in the Central American nation the year before.
The administration says conditions in Honduras have improved, while advocates argue that it still hasn't fully recovered from the hurricane and is now plagued by rampant violence.
Trump, his opponents argue, is effectively adding tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people to the ranks of those in the U.S. without legal status.
Marta Connor, a 50-year-old union organizer in Southern California who has lived in the U.S. for decades and has three American-born children, said before the announcement that she wasn't leaving, regardless of the administration's policies.
"One thing I can tell you is I am not going to Honduras," she said, noting that many of the asylum-seeking migrants in a caravan that recently reached the U.S.-Mexico border are from Honduras. "If they are coming, why am I going over there?"
"There is no way I will go back," Connor said.
Around 437,000 immigrants hailing from 10 countries have had temporary protected status, a designation created in 1990 to allow people from countries affected by natural disasters like earthquakes or man-made disasters like war to have a short-term safe haven. Only a few thousand still have that status.
Those with it have generally been able to work and with permission, travel outside the U.S. and return.
Countries are added to the list as circumstances warrant, with renewals coming usually around every 18 months. While some countries have been taken off the list, others have stayed on it for extended periods, which critics say turns the program into default amnesty.
Under Trump, the Department of Homeland Security has terminated the program for Sudan, Nicaragua, Nepal, Haiti, and notably El Salvador, which accounted for more holders of the special status than any other nation.
They have been given deadlines to leave or gain legal status if possible, starting in November for Sudan and throughout 2019 for the other countries. Several groups are suing to stay in the U.S.
The protections have been extended for 6,900 Syrians who already have them, but the administration has said it won't take on new applicants. Decisions are upcoming for South Sudan, Somalia and Yemen, which cover fewer than 1,700 people.
Daniel Sharp, legal director at the Central American Resource Center in Los Angeles, said he doesn't believe most immigrants with the status will leave after setting down roots with U.S.-born children, jobs and homes.
"People don't want to go back to being undocumented, but I don't think you are going to see a ton of people returning to their countries of origin," he said.
El Salvador actually had the protections twice, the first time in the early 1990s until December 1994. It's estimated that about 150,000 people were covered then.
Cecilia Menjivar, a University of Kansas sociology professor, said that while exact numbers are unknown, it's clear many stayed in the U.S. when the program ended. Some got permanent residency through family sponsorship, but immigration law has changed since then that "there are fewer avenues for legalization," she said.
Ramba Regmi, 53, a native of Nepal who's been in New York City for close to two decades, doesn't know what she's going to do. She spent many of those years without legal status after overstaying a visa but got protections after an April 2015 earthquake in Nepal killed more than 8,000 people.
With the legal authorization the program provides, she was able to go from working in a nail salon to owning one, where she employs three people. She financially supports her husband and adult children in Nepal, which she says still hasn't recovered from the earthquake.
"I never thought this was going to end, so what can I say?" Regmi said after the government declined last week to renew protections for about 9,000 Nepalis. "This is very difficult."

                                                                                                              Source:Yahoo 

Tourism New Zealand and Immigration New Zealand have launched an extension of the Tourism Industry Partnership (TIP) Programme to facilitate faster processing of visitor visa applications for Indian leisure travellers.
Riding on the success of the previous partnership between Immigration New Zealand (INZ), Tourism New Zealand (TNZ) and key travel agents, the Tourism Industry Partnership (TIP) Programme has now been extended to leisure agents.
The previous programme was launched in November 2014 and focused on the business and incentive travel sector. It resulted in growth of incentive group trips worth NZ $ 22m in 4 years (FY14-FY17) with a 99 per cent approval rate.
With this new arrangement announced today, Indian leisure travelers will benefit from a more streamlined visa service, with a faster processing time of three days, compared to the previous online application processing time of 15 days.
                                                    Source:Journey To Australia
Indian and Nepalese nationals in New Zealand are being contacted by a person pretending to be from Immigration New Zealand. They are demanding money to be sent to them, in order to maintain or correct their immigration status in New Zealand. This is a scam.
Callers are posing as INZ staff and demanding payment from people to avoid deportation for various reasons, including incorrectly completing an arrival card and a failed police check.
The scammers are using a technology known as caller id spoofing scam that allows a legitimate phone number to appear when the call is actually being made from another number. 

How to recognise if the call is a scam

  1. The caller tells the person that there has been a problem with their visa or arrival card information.
  2. They demand they pay money into a Western Union account or face serious consequences, such as deportation.
  3. Often the caller have some details of the person they are speaking to such as their name, date of birth or address so the calls appear genuine.
  4. Their caller ID comes up with 09 914 4100 or 0508 558 855.
  5. They are targeting people from Nepal or India.

Important to know

Immigration New Zealand would never make demands for money such as this over the phone.
No matter how important the caller may sound, do not pay, report the call to the Police.

                                                                                          Source:Journey To Australia