# New requirements for applying for Australian citizenship



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

Hi All,

So The PM has announced new requirements for applying for Australian citizenship. One of which is that Migrants will have to wait four years before they can apply for citizenship — instead of the one-year wait they face at the moment.

I want to get right and I hope I am wrong. So, if i have been in Australia for four years on a valid visa (not a PR visa) then I would need to wait another 4 years after I get the PR to be eligible to apply for citizenship? (i.e. will take a total of 8 years in this case)?


----------



## IndigoKKing (Jul 31, 2014)

abuhelwa said:


> I want to get right and I hope I am wrong. So, if i have been in Australia for four years on a valid visa (not a PR visa) then I would need to wait another 4 years after I get the PR to be eligible to apply for citizenship? (i.e. will take a total of 8 years in this case)?


Yes, that's correct


----------



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

IndigoKKing said:


> Yes, that's correct



Is this law something proposed or they already taken the decision?


----------



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

abuhelwa said:


> Is this law something proposed or they already taken the decision?


When is it going to be effective?


----------



## Jack.Sparrow (Jul 15, 2014)

These are proposed changes. They will only be applicable once Parliament accepts the proposal.


----------



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

Jack.Sparrow said:


> These are proposed changes. They will only be applicable once Parliament accepts the proposal.


The rationale behind the reforms regarding the English and citizenship test make sense because people who live in Australia should have certain level of English skills to integrate in the society and they should commit and embrace Australian values. 

However, the rationale behind the 4 years after the PR doesn't make sense to me. They say it is to make sure that immigrants commit and embrace Australia values. But if I lived here for 4 years not necessarily on a permanent resident visa rather on a temporary visa, that would be an enough period for the government to know whether I am a good or bad person so why to wait for another 4 years after getting the PR visa to be eligible for the citizenship?

What do you guys think? Do you think this will be accepted by the Parliament?


----------



## frowq (Aug 31, 2016)

I got my PR at the end of last year after being here for 8 years. Does anyone know if these changes will apply to everyone or only people who get PR after the changes take effect?


----------



## mnmedipa (Sep 9, 2016)

frowq said:


> I got my PR at the end of last year after being here for 8 years. Does anyone know if these changes will apply to everyone or only people who get PR after the changes take effect?


It applies to any new citizenship applications from April 20...Doesnt matter if you got PR before that day...You have to wait 4 years from PR date..


----------



## frowq (Aug 31, 2016)

mnmedipa said:


> It applies to any new citizenship applications from April 20...Doesnt matter if you got PR before that day...You have to wait 4 years from PR date..


Well that sucks doesn't it...
Not as much as it sucks for my housemate who's live was basically changed 2 days ago when they abolished 457 visa and her occupation from the lists together with her plans to get PR and build a life here.
Dammit.


----------



## cynix008 (Jan 25, 2017)

abuhelwa said:


> The rationale behind the reforms regarding the English and citizenship test make sense because people who live in Australia should have certain level of English skills to integrate in the society and they should commit and embrace Australian values.
> 
> However, the rationale behind the 4 years after the PR doesn't make sense to me. They say it is to make sure that immigrants commit and embrace Australia values. But if I lived here for 4 years not necessarily on a permanent resident visa rather on a temporary visa, that would be an enough period for the government to know whether I am a good or bad person so why to wait for another 4 years after getting the PR visa to be eligible for the citizenship?
> 
> What do you guys think? Do you think this will be accepted by the Parliament?


The rational for 4 year - well i guess they dont want you to vote or join army.

I am also sceptical whether they would be policy changes for 189/190 visa program specially when the times come for 189/190 PR holders to apply for citizenship. Keeping in mind that these visa holder already has scored 7 in IELTS in order to meet the required score before getting 189/190 visa. Do they have to re-take the exam inorder to apply for citizenship? 

It would be a total waste of time and effort for those applying for 189/190 visa if in future we are not even recognized as australian citizens.


----------



## mnmedipa (Sep 9, 2016)

frowq said:


> Well that sucks doesn't it...
> Not as much as it sucks for my housemate who's live was basically changed 2 days ago when they abolished 457 visa and her occupation from the lists together with her plans to get PR and build a life here.
> Dammit.


Well that is so bad...The only thing to do is find an Aussie and say I do...(pun intended)


----------



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

mnmedipa said:


> It applies to any new citizenship applications from April 20...Doesnt matter if you got PR before that day...You have to wait 4 years from PR date..



But is this effective yet or just a proposal?


----------



## incyann (Jan 4, 2017)

abuhelwa said:


> But is this effective yet or just a proposal?


Effective. http://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/discussion-papers/citizenship-paper.pdf


----------



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

incyann said:


> Effective. http://www.border.gov.au/ReportsandPublications/Documents/discussion-papers/citizenship-paper.pdf


The document says this: "The Government will introduce new citizenship related legislation into the Parliament, informed by responses to this paper, by the end of 2017. The package of reforms will apply to applications received on or after the
Government’s announcement on 20 April 2017."

So, it is effective now but they will introduce it to the Parliament by the end of this year. Is there a chance that if the Parliament didn't pass it that it will be revoked?


----------



## aumelb1 (Jan 27, 2017)

abuhelwa said:


> The document says this: "The Government will introduce new citizenship related legislation into the Parliament, informed by responses to this paper, by the end of 2017. The package of reforms will apply to applications received on or after the
> Government’s announcement on 20 April 2017."
> 
> So, it is effective now but they will introduce it to the Parliament by the end of this year. Is there a chance that if the Parliament didn't pass it that it will be revoked?


There is a chance of course  only God knows what's gonna happen.


----------



## abuhelwa (Jan 24, 2016)

aumelb1 said:


> There is a chance of course  only God knows what's gonna happen.


I hope so. At least the 4 years things, it is ridiculous. Is there anything we can do as a community to resist that change or at least make it less severe?


----------



## diogosgp (Jul 30, 2013)

I just jumped to the immi website and applied for myself and my wife for the citizenship. I was eligible to apply since Feb this year. They already charged my credit card and I got an acknowledgement letter via email.

Does this mean that they can still cancel my application or this means I went through?


----------



## Tens24 (Apr 20, 2017)

diogosgp said:


> I just jumped to the immi website and applied for myself and my wife for the citizenship. I was eligible to apply since Feb this year. They already charged my credit card and I got an acknowledgement letter via email.
> 
> Does this mean that they can still cancel my application or this means I went through?


Your application went through. Now prepare for the citizenship test. They'll inform you with the details


----------



## incyann (Jan 4, 2017)

abuhelwa said:


> I hope so. At least the 4 years things, it is ridiculous. Is there anything we can do as a community to resist that change or at least make it less severe?


1. It's either a political move.
2. They really are trying to tighten the borders.

IMHO, the changes aren't ridiculous. You already have your PR, you enjoy the same benefits as Australian citizens do. If you already have a job and are settled down in Australia, 4 years will zoom by.

Like what the document says, Australian Citizenship is a privilege, not a right.


----------



## Tens24 (Apr 20, 2017)

People with temporary visas will get affected the most. Those on 189/190 will not be affected. 

IMO its a bad move. They could have reduced the quota of temporary intake rather than changing citizenship rules. Citizens pay tax, contribute to the economy. By bringing in these new rules I think people will be discouraged to come to Australia.


----------



## incyann (Jan 4, 2017)

Tens24 said:


> People with temporary visas will get affected the most. Those on 189/190 will not be affected.
> 
> IMO its a bad move. They could have reduced the quota of temporary intake rather than changing citizenship rules. Citizens pay tax, contribute to the economy. By bringing in these new rules I think people will be discouraged to come to Australia.


PRs pay taxes as well, but we don't get to vote. While it's unfair for people who have waited for a long time to be eligible for citizenship, it's also mandatory that the government make changes to ensure a fair system that isn't abused. I see the point in toughening the Citizenship requirements, but the changes aren't diabolical if you read the PDF released by DIBP. 

If the government decides to reduce the quota of temporary visas, the backlash would be more severe as more people are hoping to at least become a temporary resident first, then PR then citizenship.


----------



## diogosgp (Jul 30, 2013)

Tens24 said:


> Your application went through. Now prepare for the citizenship test. They'll inform you with the details


Hopefully you're right. Lets see.


----------



## australis (Mar 26, 2017)

Interestingly, some of the new requirements concerning Australian citizenship test seem to be directly aimed at certain religious minority. Doubtful, that this minority will be very honest when sitting the test though and the repercussions of their actual attitude towards their new host country and its culture can be seen in these policies and the overall skepticism of Australian people.


----------



## hourglass (Sep 5, 2013)

I am surprised there is no transitional period. When the last changes were introduced, there was a 3 years transitional period!!


----------



## gkvithia (Dec 9, 2013)

Does not make any difference if you were directly under 189/190 or any PR visa but bad news for those with other visas


----------



## Tens24 (Apr 20, 2017)

australis said:


> Interestingly, some of the new requirements concerning Australian citizenship test seem to be directly aimed at certain religious minority. Doubtful, that this minority will be very honest when sitting the test though and the repercussions of their actual attitude towards their new host country and its culture can be seen in these policies and the overall skepticism of Australian people.


This minority constitutes only 2.2% of the Aussie population. They pay their taxes & have generally assimilated into the population. Vetting is taking place to give visas to people associated with this religious minority. Over the last 2 years the Aussie government has been deporting few anti social elements amongst this minority. So the hyperbole that some politicians direct towards a particular minority is nothing but vote bank politics. Maybe we the general + liberal public of Australia should keep ourselves away from this issue.


----------



## australis (Mar 26, 2017)

Tens24 said:


> This minority constitutes only 2.2% of the Aussie population. They pay their taxes & have generally assimilated into the population. Vetting is taking place to give visas to people associated with this religious minority. Over the last 2 years the Aussie government has been deporting few anti social elements amongst this minority. So the hyperbole that some politicians direct towards a particular minority is nothing but vote bank politics. Maybe we the general + liberal public of Australia should keep ourselves away from this issue.


This is going off-topic, but since I completely disagree with your opinion, I feel obliged to respond.

We have seen and still see the "only 2.2%" rhetoric in Europe, and this has led to some countries already reaching 10% and above in a matter of not too many years. The reason being that this minority is fueled by a strong belief, which among other things, encourages to reproduce as much as possible. There is a reason why this demographic group has 2 to 4 times higher average birth rate than your average ethnic European family. This is backed up by simple statistics. Compound effect is a powerful thing, mate.

Not to mention that "only 2.2%" is not, in fact, a small number. Even one person choosing a malicious ideology above Australian laws and freedoms is too many. All people are equal, but not necessarily all cultures. I feel that the liberal public you are talking about seems to be extremely shortsighted. Hopefully, Australia will be for Australians first - for those people who identify as Australians and wholeheartedly believe in its culture and freedoms.


----------



## cynix008 (Jan 25, 2017)

seems like Australia politics no longer into embracing diversity(culture as well as religious).


----------



## Maggie-May24 (May 19, 2015)

diogosgp said:


> I just jumped to the immi website and applied for myself and my wife for the citizenship. I was eligible to apply since Feb this year. They already charged my credit card and I got an acknowledgement letter via email.
> 
> Does this mean that they can still cancel my application or this means I went through?


I read somewhere that the DIBP systems will be updated over the coming weeks to align with the changes. The citizenship change is still just a proposal, but if it does go through they propose to make it effective the date of the announcement.

So unfortunately the fact that the system accepted your application and your payment, doesn't mean your application will be processed. If the government approves the change, then you will have applied too late to meet the new criteria and they would likely tell you to withdraw your application and take a refund.

But wait to see what happens, there could still be further changes for all we know.


----------



## aumelb1 (Jan 27, 2017)

australis said:


> This is going off-topic, but since I completely disagree with your opinion, I feel obliged to respond.
> 
> We have seen and still see the "only 2.2%" rhetoric in Europe, and this has led to some countries already reaching 10% and above in a matter of not too many years. The reason being that this minority is fueled by a strong belief, which among other things, encourages to reproduce as much as possible. There is a reason why this demographic group has 2 to 4 times higher average birth rate than your average ethnic European family. This is backed up by simple statistics. Compound effect is a powerful thing, mate.
> 
> Not to mention that "only 2.2%" is not, in fact, a small number. Even one person choosing a malicious ideology above Australian laws and freedoms is too many. All people are equal, but not necessarily all cultures. I feel that the liberal public you are talking about seems to be extremely shortsighted. Hopefully, Australia will be for Australians first - for those people who identify as Australians and wholeheartedly believe in its culture and freedoms.


Good point but this thread getting nowhere...


----------



## diogosgp (Jul 30, 2013)

Maggie-May24 said:


> I read somewhere that the DIBP systems will be updated over the coming weeks to align with the changes. The citizenship change is still just a proposal, but if it does go through they propose to make it effective the date of the announcement.
> 
> So unfortunately the fact that the system accepted your application and your payment, doesn't mean your application will be processed. If the government approves the change, then you will have applied too late to meet the new criteria and they would likely tell you to withdraw your application and take a refund.
> 
> But wait to see what happens, there could still be further changes for all we know.


Do you think it's best to withdraw my application. I'm afraid they can reject it and take my money.


----------



## Luis7183 (May 1, 2017)

diogosgp said:


> Do you think it's best to withdraw my application. I'm afraid they can reject it and take my money.


Hi Diogo, 
I've done the same as you. I applied on the 24th of apr. lets see whats gonna happen.


----------



## Qn2016 (Mar 23, 2016)

Luis7183 said:


> Hi Diogo,
> I've done the same as you. I applied on the 24th of apr. lets see whats gonna happen.


Hi, I am so unlucky. I submitted right on early of 20 of April, not knowing that was the day they changed policies. Maybe they will send my application back with refund.


----------



## chinkyjenn (Jan 26, 2017)

I am hoping that this proposal doesn't get approved lol... I wonder when will they announce this?? 

I've been here for more than 10 years and I really want that citizenship!


----------



## kaju (Oct 31, 2011)

I suspect the 4 year Permanent Resident requirement will pass, but with (at least) an easier English language requirement.

Of course, required residence for Citizenship is longer in many countries:
Austria - 15 years
Germany - 8 years
Japan - 10 years
Switzerland - 10 years
US - 5 years with green card
India - 5 years
United Kingdom - 5 years

Makes the proposed 4 years for Australia seem reasonable by comparison.


----------



## chinkyjenn (Jan 26, 2017)

kaju said:


> I suspect the 4 year Permanent Resident requirement will pass, but with (at least) an easier English language requirement.
> 
> Of course, required residence for Citizenship is longer in many countries:
> Austria - 15 years
> ...


yeah we shall see as labor is against these changes....

just my two cents, some of us have to pass 79 on PTE or 80 on IELTS to apply for a residency. Why do we have to sit for another IELTS examination which gonna cost us another $300 bucks...


----------



## lovesny2001us (Mar 6, 2013)

kaju said:


> I suspect the 4 year Permanent Resident requirement will pass, but with (at least) an easier English language requirement.
> 
> Of course, required residence for Citizenship is longer in many countries:
> Austria - 15 years
> ...


Let's not normalize the hardship caused to immigrants and expats with such comparisons. Pls remember no one complaint about increasing timeline, the problem is with changing the rules for everyone and not just the new applicants. We played by rules, paid taxes and planned our lives around the commitment and rule of law Australia had, only to be taken away in a second. I am absolutely hope this law gets defeated.


----------



## lovesny2001us (Mar 6, 2013)

chinkyjenn said:


> I am hoping that this proposal doesn't get approved lol... I wonder when will they announce this??
> 
> I've been here for more than 10 years and I really want that citizenship!


I agree! Also, agree about the IELTS bit - I cleared it just over 2 yrs ago and now I have to appear again. This seems unnecessary.


----------



## chinkyjenn (Jan 26, 2017)

Swrajjoshi said:


> Let's not normalize the hardship caused to immigrants and expats with such comparisons. Pls remember no one complaint about increasing timeline, the problem is with changing the rules for everyone and not just the new applicants. We played by rules, paid taxes and planned our lives around the commitment and rule of law Australia had, only to be taken away in a second. I am absolutely hope this law gets defeated.


I second that! 

the previous rule was only 1 year and now all sudden they wanted to increase it to 4 years without a notice period? that seems unfair. 

The least they can do is to propose this change to happen in 2020 or something... so people have clear expectation prior applying.


----------



## kaju (Oct 31, 2011)

Swrajjoshi said:


> Let's not normalize the hardship caused to immigrants and expats with such comparisons. Pls remember no one complaint about increasing timeline, the problem is with changing the rules for everyone and not just the new applicants. We played by rules, paid taxes and planned our lives around the commitment and rule of law Australia had, only to be taken away in a second. I am absolutely hope this law gets defeated.


I understand completely that people who meet current requirements would be disheartened and feel that the changes, if apppied to them, would be unfair.

It's quite possible that there may be a grandfathering clause as one of the changes made, before the legislation is finalised. 

But your argument that you played by the rules and payed taxes is irrelevant - every law-abiding resident must do that anyway - that is an obligation for all of us! 

What is not irrelevant is the simple fact that these proposed changes will affect people that were not warned of them first - there's some sympathy for current applicants among the opposition parties and the measure to only apply the 4 year PR requirement to applicants applying after the legislation is passed may be approved - or the Bill itself may be dropped from Parliament if is is not voted on by October 18. 

If that is not done, the Government would have to find a way to pass a motion to reintroduce the Bill, which might be a bit difficult (in the Bill's present form!) given a fairly hostile Senate.

In any case, I'm not entirely sure exactly what hardship you're talking about...


----------



## lovesny2001us (Mar 6, 2013)

kaju said:


> In any case, I'm not entirely sure exactly what hardship you're talking about...


This is the reason I posted a response to your note. You are a moderator but may not know what hardship (mental/physical/financial) we aspiring citizens have to go through to live in this country and call it home.

Can you imagine up rooting yourself from mother land, spending over 4 years in country, making friends, relationships and investing your hard earned money in house/car etc because there was a pathway to be local here? Only to be told that in the times of Paulin Hanson and terrible negative propaganda against immigrants that we will not be given what was marketed as law.

Please remember impact is less if you are from a developed country e.g. Germany or UK but even then many expat friends from such countries have shared pain such law change caused them.

It is absolutely necessary to show that we have been law abiding citizens cause it is the single most point raised in defense of this law.

I sure hope this law dies in the parliament, it still won't help us cause DIBP will have backlog of tens of thousands of applications leading to more delays.
-----------------
“They feel that changes to the Citizenship Act will negate their years of contribution, and place in jeopardy the opportunities of newly-arrived migrants who, [through] no fault of their own, will not be provided the same equality of opportunity,”. The level of fear and distress in cultural and linguistic communities in Australia is extraordinary and unprecedented.”

"This change will affect those who entered Australia on temporary work or humanitarian visas. These people will no longer be able to count their time as temporary residents toward the residence requirement for citizenship.

The proposed change has the potential to inflict particular harm on refugees. Many are now only granted temporary protection visas. For them, citizenship is an important sign of their permanent acceptance and commitment to Australia."
-----------------


----------



## kaju (Oct 31, 2011)

Swrajjoshi said:


> This is the reason I posted a response to your note. You are a moderator but may not know what hardship (mental/physical/financial) we aspiring citizens have to go through to live in this country and call it home.
> 
> Can you imagine up rooting yourself from mother land, spending over 4 years in country, making friends, relationships and investing your hard earned money in house/car etc because there was a pathway to be local here? Only to be told that in the times of Paulin Hanson and terrible negative propaganda against immigrants that we will not be given what was marketed as law.
> 
> ...


I answered in a friendly way.  

You seem to assume that I have never moved to another country. In fact I have, a few times, starting completely from scratch, including moving long-term with no experience to a country where I have not yet learned the language, having to find a home, job, etc for me and my family. So yes, I can imagine uprooting myself, and it is a little unfortunate that you incorrectly assume otherwise. 

What you seem to easily dismiss is that you already have Permanent Residence. Very many people never take up Australian Citizenship as they don't worry about it. 

As I have said already, the prospects are good that current applicants will get "grandfathered". But the reality is that even if they did not, they are not going to be denied Citizenship - at worst there would be an additional 3 year wait, and for many, it might be a lot less than that.

I don't think it's fair that changes should be retrospective, and that proposal may be eliminated, as I have said. 

But to say that extending the time for existing applicants would cause hardship - I don't agree with that. You may not like it, and it may not be fair. You may want an Australian Passport, but not having it for at most 3 years more - what actual hardship will that cause you? It won't affect your work, your pay, where you live, how others treat you, your ability to travel (unless you plan to leave Australia for a long time).

All prospective applicants for Citizenship must, under both the current and the proposed new laws, be Permanent Residents. As such, they can already enter and leave Australia pretty much as desired, with at most the requirement for an RRV after 5 years of Permanent Residency. That doesn't stop them traveling, of course - many people that are Permanent Residents never take up Citizenship. My wife is an example - she has finally applied after 40 years here. 

What is the hardship that you are so concerned about? If you are complaining that you expected to get Citizenship after 1 year of Permanent Residence, and with a possible new requirement for 4 years Permanent Residence, how would this so adversely affect you?

The differences would mean a delay in you getting an Australian Passport, and you'd have to get a Resident Return Visa if you leave the country after 5 years, there would be a delay in your ability to vote in Australian elections, in many (but not all) cases to join the Australian Public Service, and to serve on a jury. 

Assuming you are a permanent resident, the lack of Citizenship for another three years does not affect the way other people here see you, your rights, your ability to live in Australia, to get a job, or in most cases, your ability to travel. Is that such a hardship?

RRV's are not difficult to get. If this is an issue because you can't get a 5 year RRV because you did not spend at least 2 years of the last 5 in Australia since gaining Permanent Residency, I suspect most Australians wouldn't have all that much sympathy - but under the old rules you wouldn't be eligible to apply for Citizenship then anyway!  Permanent Residency is granted on the basis of benefit to Australia, and if you're not here for most of the first 5 years, there's an argument that could be made by many Australians that you haven't earned a 5 year RRV as you haven't really met your side of the bargain. 

The truth is, most countries require a period of permanent residency of a few to several years before people become eligible for Citizenship - Australia has had a very short time requirement, and even after the proposed changes it will still be on the short side compared to many countries.

If you believe that temporary residence should be counted for qualification for Citizenship, that's your view. But the Government in Australia and many other countries don't have that view, and I suspect very strongly that opposition parties don't to any major extent either - there is little disagreement about the proposed 4 year PR requirement for those applying after the law may be introduced, more so about current applicants, people that actually live here already. For both that group and those coming after any legislation is passed, the concern is also about the actual Citizenship test and language testing. 

In terms of refugees, the proposed change is no different for them than other applicants generally. If they have been granted a Temporary Protection Visa, they would not be eligible to apply for Citizenship anyway, as they do not have Permanent Residence. 

This is another matter entirely (whether refugees should be granted temporary or permanent protection) - if a refugee gains Permanent Residence they can apply for Citizenship just like anyone else.

I'd argue that the 4 year requirement should only be applied to those applying for Citizenship after the law is passed, simply on the basis of fairness, and I suspect it will turn out that way.  
But while it may be undesirable, annoying, frustrating or whatever, I don't accept an argument that a longer wait constitutes hardship:
_severe suffering or privation.
"intolerable levels of hardship"
synonyms:	privation, deprivation, destitution, poverty, austerity, penury, want, need, neediness, beggary, impecuniousness, impecuniosity, financial distress;_


----------



## lovesny2001us (Mar 6, 2013)

kaju said:


> I answered in a friendly way.


Just putting a smiley at the end of each argument defending change in law does not make your answer friendly, it only makes it more weird.

Once again - yes it is absolute hardship for me and many more of my friends. I don't wish to share personal situations I have come across leading to problems but bottom line is - You don't get to decide that. So, please stop with your arguments. :fencing:

As I have tried to stress so many times, there was absolutely no need for this law to be applied to folks already in the process. The whole setup reeks of political point taking at our expense. End of argument, lets move on. :deadhorse:

I am more interested to know if there is any information on what steps govt will take if 4 yrs PR is not mandatory i.e. law is not passed? Are folks able to file application and wait for final outcome which could be Oct/Nov?


----------



## Jack.Sparrow (Jul 15, 2014)

Swrajjoshi said:


> Just putting a smiley at the end of each argument defending change in law does not make your answer friendly, it only makes it more weird.
> 
> Once again - yes it is absolute hardship for me and many more of my friends. I don't wish to share personal situations I have come across leading to problems but bottom line is - You don't get to decide that. So, please stop with your arguments. :fencing:
> 
> ...


Take it easy, mate! Nobody is defending changes to the law or saying that it is easy to settle in a new country. Kaju agreed to your point that it is not fair to apply new rules to those people who are already in Australia and waiting to become Citizen. But you have to see these changes in the light of current political and economical situation around the world. Immigrants around the world are being looked at in a suspicious and negative manner. Due to public pressure, government naturally want to tighten their controls around immigration and show that they are doing something to preserve the Australian values by allowing only those people who will easily adopt them. 

But in spite of that, if you compare citizenship criteria in Australia with other developed countries, you will find that Australia is still very very lenient. Besides, the law is not yet passed by the parliament, so why boil your blood over something which is not even confirmed?


----------

