The incumbent Turnbull Government does not seem to be too keen to welcome the alleged non-productive segment of the migrants to the country, including the parents, aged dependents, contributory parent and remaining family members if we go by this news report.

As per the report under discussion here, the administration in power in the country has silently made it tougher for the poorer migrant families to support their relatives, money-wise, in visa petitions.

The government has, reportedly, made a couple of major amendments to the assurance of the support scheme a plan tailored to keep new migrants away from welfare, via guaranteeing that their families have sufficient funds to support them in their early years in the country.

For those not tuned in, it is necessary to have a guarantor for some specific visa classes, comprising parent, aged dependent, contributory parent and remaining relative, even as the Home Affairs Department has an unrestricted power to necessitate it in other classes.

However, the late last month the administration reportedly changed the sum an assurer requires to receive. In the maximum of situations, the families of new migrants will require taking home over 200% of what was needed before.

For instance, in case a couple in Down Under wants to financially support their parents, as per the new arrangement, they will require earning a combined $115,475 per annum, in place of $45,185. And a single individual, keen to give an undertaking for their parents, will require grossing $86,606, in place of $45,185.40.

The changes will also considerably boost the amount families require to have as “security” – typically a bank guarantee – for new migrants in some particular visa classes from April 2019 onwards.

The administration also reportedly plans to start the 12-month assurance of support requirement for a segment of the nation’s humanitarian intake, via the community sponsorship scheme.

Criticizing the new development, the Australian Labor reportedly stated that it had obtained several complaints from the Chinese public about the amendments, and was livid they were made minus any sort of public proclamation or debate.

In a related development, the Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia also reportedly stated that it was extremely bothered about the new amendments. It claimed that the move will affect all family reunions irrespective of the place of origin.

It claimed that the extra costs will prove dear and result in a heavy financial burden on the families in Oz, adding family reunion improves successful settlement, stimulates social unity and propels economic affluence.

Yet another critic this time a migration agent, who reportedly works mainly with Chinese families—reportedly, alleged that the news has confused her clients and made them somewhat apprehensive.

Significantly, the changes did not necessitate legislation, were made on March 26 and came into force on April 1.

Criticizing the development further, a spokesperson from the Labor Party reportedly labeled the changes as “very concerning” and claimed her office had been bombarded with countless e-mails from the extremely irritated families especially from the Chinese society.

She alleged that it is not good form by the Turnbull administration to make an effort and sneak the said change through the Australian Parliament, minus any discussion or study or even a media release from the minister, adding it’s just not good enough.

However, rubbishing such claims a spokeswoman from the social services department reportedly claimed that the amendments were tailored to guarantee that the new migrants were in a position to take care of their needs in the country.

She claimed that the change will also certify that the nation’s social security system keeps on being bearable.

Reportedly, the assurance of support scheme has not been made up-to-date for close to 10 years. The amendments seek to align the income conditions with the income cut-off for the Newstart payments. The compulsory income for the sponsors depends on the figure of individuals acting as sponsors and the figures of migrants they intend to offer support to.

The plan is tailored to validate that sponsors may take care of the needs of both the new migrants & themselves. It is unspoken the latest conditions will not be applicable to the candidate who presented their petitions prior to April 1.