Ramandeep Kaur (Migration)

[2020] AATA 5794

Ramandeep Kaur (Migration) [2020] AATA 5794 (5 October 2020)

DECISION RECORD

DIVISION:Migration & Refugee Division

APPLICANTS:  Mrs Ramandeep Kaur
Mr Gagandeep Singh

CASE NUMBER:  1931629

HOME AFFAIRS REFERENCE(S):          BCC2019/4650955

MEMBER:Vanessa Plain

DATE:5 October 2020

PLACE OF DECISION:  Melbourne

DECISION:The Tribunal affirms the decisions not to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas.

Statement made on 05 October 2020 at 7:17pm

CATCHWORDS
MIGRATION –Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visa – subclass 500 (Student) visa– genuine temporary entrant criterion not met–enrolment in relatively low-level courses– no strong incentive to return to home country –use the student migration program to maintain ongoing residence – decision under review affirmed

LEGISLATION
Migration Act 1958, ss 65, 359, 499
Migration Regulations 1994, r 1.03, Schedule 2, cl 500.212

STATEMENT OF DECISION AND REASONS

APPLICATION FOR REVIEW

1. This is an application for review of a decision made by a delegate of the Minister for Home Affairs on 23 October 2019 to refuse to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas under s.65 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

2. The applicants applied for the visas on 17 September 2019. At the time of application, Class TU contained two subclasses: Subclass 500 (Student) and Subclass 590 (Student Guardian). The primary visa applicant (the applicant) applied for the visa to undertake study in Australia and does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa.

3. The delegate in this case refused to grant the visas on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy the requirements of cl.500.212(a) of Schedule 2 to the Migration Regulations 1994 (the Regulations).

4. The applicants appeared before the Tribunal on 5 October 2020 to give evidence and present arguments.  

5. The applicants were assisted in relation to the review by their registered migration agent.

6. For the following reasons, the Tribunal has concluded that the decision under review should be affirmed.

   CONSIDERATION OF CLAIMS AND EVIDENCE

7. The criteria for a Subclass 500 (Student) visa are set out in Part 500 of Schedule 2 to the Regulations. The primary criteria in cl.500.211 to cl.500.218 must be satisfied by at least one applicant. Other members of the family unit, if any, who are applicants for the visa need only satisfy the secondary criteria. The issue in the present case is whether the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay in Australia as a student.

8. Clause 500.212 requires as follows:

   The applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student because:

   (a)the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily, having regard to:

   (i)the applicant’s circumstances; and

   (ii)the applicant’s immigration history; and

   (iii)if the applicant is a minor—the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; and

   (iv)any other relevant matter; and

   (b)the applicant intends to comply with any conditions subject to which the visa is granted, having regard to:

   (i)the applicant’s record of compliance with any condition of a visa previously held by the applicant (if any); and

   (ii)the applicant’s stated intention to comply with any conditions to which the visa may be subject; and

   (c)of any other relevant matter.

9. Clause 500.311 requires as follows:

   The applicant is a member of a family unit of a person (the primary person) who holds a student visa, having satisfied the primary criteria for that visa, and either:

   (a)the applicant became a member of the family unit of the primary person before the grant of the student visa to the primary person and was included in:

   (i)the primary person’s applications under subregulation 2.07AF(3); or

   (ii)information provided in relation to the primary person’s application under subregulation 2.07AF(4); or

   (b)the applicant became a family member of the family unit of the primary person:

   (i)after the grant of the student visa to the primary person; and

   (ii)before the application was made.

   Does the applicant intend genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily?

10. In considering whether the applicant satisfies cl.500.212(a), the Tribunal must have regard to Direction No.69, ‘Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications’, made under s.499 of the Act. This Direction, which is attached to this decision, requires the Tribunal to have regard to a number of specified factors in relation to:

    ·the applicant’s circumstances in their home country, potential circumstances in Australia, and the value of the course to the applicant’s future;

    ·the applicant’s immigration history, including previous applications for an Australian visa or for visas to other countries, and previous travel to Australia or other countries;

    ·if the applicant is a minor, the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; and

    ·any other relevant information provided by the applicant, or information otherwise available to the decision maker, including information that may be either beneficial or unfavourable to the applicant.

11. The Direction indicates that the factors specified should not be used as a checklist but rather, are intended only to guide decision makers when considering the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, in reaching a finding about whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

    Evidence in support of application

12. The applicant submitted the following documents in support of her application, as follows:

    ·    COE for an Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management

    ·    A suite of academic documents for various courses, evidencing course attendance, grade attainment and completion

    ·    A Response to Request for Student Visa Information (s.359(2) of the Act)

    ·    GTE Statement

13. The Tribunal has considered these documents, the material before the delegate, the decision record and the applicant’s oral evidence at hearing. 

    Entry and Visa History

14. The applicant in this case is an Indian woman who first arrived in Australia on 1 February 2014 as the holder of a Student visa (subclass 573).  Since that time, she has held a a further student visa and a Temporary Graduate work visa VC-485 and associated bridging visas. 

15. The student visa the subject of this application was lodged on 17 September 2019 and is the applicant’s third student visa, all of which were lodged onshore.         

    Current Status

16. The applicant is currently enrolled in an Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management which is scheduled to conclude in July 2021, thereby extending the applicant’s time in Australia to approximately 7 years.     

17. The applicant has included her husband as a dependant applicant on her student visa application.  

    Previous Study and Work History before entering Australia

18. The applicant completed secondary school in her home country and did not disclose a working history before arriving in Australia. 

    Study History in Australia

19. Since arriving in Australia, the applicant has been enrolled in the following courses:

    ·A Certificate III in Commercial Cookery which she completed;

    ·A Diploma of Hospitality Management which she completed;

    ·A Certificate IV in Commercial Cookery which she completed;

    ·A Advanced Diploma of Hospitality Management which she completed;

    ·A Diploma of Leadership and Management which she completed; and

    ·An Advanced Diploma of Leadership and Management which the applicant is studying presently and which is scheduled to conclude in July 2021.

    Applicant’s circumstances in their home country  

20. The Tribunal has had regard to the applicant’s circumstances in India, as follows:

    Reasons for not studying in home country

    ·In her GTE statement, the applicant said that she is impressed by the education sector in Australia.  She stated that entrance exams in her home country are tough and the facilities are outdated and studying in Australia generally will improve her communication skills. 

    Personal ties to home country

    ·As to the applicant’s personal ties to India, the applicant is a married woman and her husband resides in Australia with her.  Her parents, siblings and in-laws reside in India.

    ·The applicant stated that she is very close with her family, that she wishes to finish her studies and return home to open a restaurant.  In her Response, she contended that she calls her family daily and she is strongly attached to her parents.  The applicant further contended she has strong community ties in India, in the form of the Sikh temple she frequents. 

    ·The applicant contended that she has $15,000 in Australia, $20,000 in India and two properties in India valued at $700,000 and $80,000 respectively. 

    ·The applicant has returned home to India on four occasions to visit her family, since arriving onshore in 2014.  She has not travelled to any other countries since being in Australia.

    Economic circumstances in Australia as incentive not to return home

    ·The applicant stated that she is not working presently and hasn’t worked since July 2019.  However, the applicant’s Response sets out a detailed working history, as follows: the applicant worked as a chef between July 2018 and July 2019; as a housekeeper between March 2017 and May 2018; as a labourer between November 2017 and January 2018; as a chef between July 2017 and November 2017; and as a housekeeper between June 2014 and June 2016.   

    Military service or civil/political unrest concerns in home country

    ·The applicant has no such concerns.

21. The Tribunal is unable to accept the applicant’s reasons for not studying in India, due to the fact that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that she has undertaken any significant research into the availability of the course in her home country.

22. The Tribunal acknowledges that the applicant’s family ties to India are strong, however, it does not consider that the applicant’s family and community ties, in and of themselves, present as a significant incentive for her to return to India, when considered against her circumstances in Australia, in the form of her husband and solid employment history.   

23. The Tribunal is unable to place significant weight on the applicant’s alleged financial ties to India and she has provided no objective evidence to substantiate her claims. 

24. The Tribunal finds that the length of time the applicant has been onshore without leaving (noting that she has left the country only four times since arriving onshore in 2014) is indicative of an intention to remain in Australia on a more permanent basis.   

25. Although the Tribunal acknowledges that the applicant is not working presently, the Tribunal finds that the applicant’s strong working history over a substantial period of time, as evidenced by the matters set out above, is indicative of a person who is motivated to remain in Australia for economic reasons, rather than out of a genuine desire to temporarily reside in Australia as a student.  

26. The Tribunal places significant weight on the fact that the applicant has been in Australia since early 2014 and has undertaken a significant number of vocational level courses which are all similar to one another, as being behaviour that is inconsistent with that of a genuine student.  The Tribunal informed the applicant that her study history may be the reason or part of the reason for affirming the delegate’s decision and invited the applicant to comment or respond. 

27. The applicant stated that she came to Australia in 2014 and has completed all the courses she embarked upon.  She said she has worked as a chef and when she did so, she realised that it was essential that she obtain leadership and management skills because she wants to open her own business in her home country.   

28. While the Tribunal accepts that individuals may choose different areas of study on the basis of a change of decision as to career course, the Tribunal cannot be satisfied that the current course in which the applicant is enrolled will further assist her career development or earning potential in view of the qualifications she already holds and the work experience as a chef that she already has.      

29. Taking in account all the aforementioned matters, the Tribunal finds that the applicant’s circumstances in her home country did not provide a significant incentive for her to return there at the conclusion of her studies.

    Applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia  

30. The Tribunal has had regard to the applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia, as follows: 

    Applicant’s ties with Australia

    ·The applicant’s husband resides in Australia and is included in the applicant’s visa application as a dependant person.

    Evidence visa program being used to circumvent migration program

    ·The applicant has been enrolled in multiple courses since 2014 as set out above, all of which are at the vocational level and she has not progressed to higher level studies.  She has held several temporary visas since arriving in 2014.

    Primary and secondary applicants relationship of concern

    ·The applicant’s husband is included in the applicant’s visa application as a dependant person.

    Applicant’s knowledge of living in Australia, their intended course and level of research into their intended course

    ·In the applicant’s GTE statement, the applicant has demonstrated a sounds knowledge of her education provider and course objectives. 

31. The Tribunal finds that the applicant has a reasonable knowledge of her course provider and educational objectives, however, it is concerned that the applicant is undertaking another vocational levels course in an area that she has studied previously, rather than progressing to an academically more challenging course.   

32. Due to the sheer volume of courses the applicant has undertaken as set out above and the length of time she has been in the country, the Tribunal is of the view that the applicant is enrolling in a series of vocational level courses with the primary intention of attempting to circumvent the intention of the student migration program and remain in Australia on a more permanent basis.   

33. The Tribunal places significant weight on the fact that the applicant’s husband is in Australia with her, as a factor which serves as a significant incentive not to return to India.  The presence of the applicant’s spouse in Australia and the applicant’s ties to her local Sikh temple in Australia, present as a tie to the Australian community that may incentivise the applicant to remain in Australia on a more permanent basis.    

    Value of the course to the applicant’s future

34. The Tribunal has had regard to the value of the course of study to the applicant’s future, as follows:

    Is the course consistent with the applicant’s current level of education?

    ·The course is consistent with some of the previous qualifications the applicant has obtained as set out above.

    Will the course assist applicant to obtain employment or improve employment prospects and expected remuneration?

    ·IN her GTE Statement and in her oral evidence, the applicant stated that she wishes to open her own business in India.  In her GTE statement she sets out various estimates of the percentage growth in the restaurant market in India.     

    Relevance of course to past study?

    ·The applicant’s current course is similar to previous courses she has undertaken as set out above.    

35. The Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant has demonstrated the value of the proposed course to her future.  The Tribunal is unable to accept the applicant’s assertions as to the value of the course to her future as she has not provided any objective evidence, such a job offers, applications, internet research or a draft business plan, demonstrating how the completion of her current course will improve her employment prospects, add value to her earning capacity or assist her open her own business, in view of the qualifications and work experience (as a chef) which the applicant already possess.  

36. While it is not uncommon for an applicant to re-educate themselves or make a change in study plans or work pathways, the Tribunal finds that it is not consistent with the behaviour of a genuine student to seek to change pathways to the extent that the applicant has (evidenced from the courses set out above) where it is not objectively demonstrated how those pathway changes will be beneficial to the applicant in the future, to an extent that would outweigh the financial commitment involved in doing further study.

37. Based upon the applicant’s qualifications and work history to date, the Tribunal is of the view that the applicant has demonstrated that she is more than qualified to return home and open a restaurant business in India.    

    Immigration history

38. The Tribunal has had regard to the applicant’s immigration history.  There is no evidence of other visa refusals or cancellations.  However, the Tribunal is concerned by the fact that the applicant has an extensive history of temporary visa applications and has spent approximately 6 years studying various low level vocational courses while maintaining on going employment.  The Tribunal simply does not find this behaviour to be consistent with that of a genuine student who intends to remain in Australia temporarily.  Rather, the Tribunal finds that this behaviour demonstrates an intention to use the student migration program to maintain ongoing residence in Australia.    

    Any other relevant matters

39. There is no evidence before the Tribunal regarding the following factors indicated by Direction 69:

    ·Any other relevant information provided by the applicant that may be either beneficial or unfavourable to the applicant.

40. The Tribunal considers that an applicant who is a genuine temporary entrant will have circumstances which support a genuine intention to remain in Australia temporarily, recognising the possibility that this may change over time to utilise lawful means to remain in Australia.   

41. Although the applicant provided information to the Tribunal demonstrating that she has successfully completed studies undertaken to date, considering all the circumstances and all the evidence before the Tribunal, the Tribunal does not accept the applicant’s claims to be those of a genuine temporary entrant.

42. On the basis of the above, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily. Accordingly, the applicant does not meet cl.500.212(a).

43. Accordingly, the Tribunal is not satisfied that the applicant is a genuine applicant for entry and stay as a student as required by cl.500.212.

44. As the primary applicant is found not to meet clause 500.212(a), the dependant applicant does not satisfy cl 500.311. Accordingly, no further enquiry is required with regards to the dependant applicant.

45. Given the above findings, the Tribunal finds that the criteria for the grant of a Subclass 500 (Student) visa are not met. The applicant does not claim to meet the criteria for a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa. Accordingly, the decision under review must be affirmed.

    DECISION

46. The Tribunal affirms the decisions not to grant the applicants Student (Temporary) (Class TU) visas.

    Vanessa Plain
    Member

    
    

    Attachment – Direction No.69

    DIRECTION NUMBER 69 – ASSESSING THE GENUINE TEMPORARY ENTRANT CRITERION FOR STUDENT VISA AND STUDENT GUARDIAN VISA APPLICATIONS

    (Section 499)

    I, PETER DUTTON, Minister for Immigration and Border Protection give this Direction under section 499 of the Migration Act 1958 (the Act).

    Dated: 18 April 2016

    Peter Dutton

    
    

    Minister for Immigration and Border Protection

    Note: Section 499(1) of the Act empowers the Minister to give a written direction to a person or body having functions or powers under the Act if the directions are about the performance of those functions; or the exercise of those powers. Under section 499(2) of the Act, the direction must not be inconsistent with the Act or the Migration Regulations 1994. Under section 499(2A) of the Act, the person or body must comply with the Direction.

    Part 1 of Direction No. 69 - Preliminary

    Name of Direction

    This Direction is Direction No. 69 - Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa and Student Guardian visa applications.

    It may be cited as Direction No. 69.

    Commencement

    This Direction commences on 1 July 2016.

    Interpretation

    Act means the Migration Act 1958.

    Genuine temporary entrant means a person who satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa or Student Guardian visa applications.

    Genuine temporary entrant criterion refers to clause 500.212(a), 500.312(a) and 590.215(a) at Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    Home country has the same meaning as the definition of that term in regulation 1.03 in Part 1 of the Regulations.

    Regulations mean the Migration Regulations 1994.

    Relative has the same meaning as the definition of that term in regulation 1.03 in Part 1 of the Regulations.

    Spouse has the same meaning as the definition of the term in section 5F of the Act.

    Student visa means a Subclass 500 (Student) visa

    Student Guardian visa means a Subclass 590 (Student Guardian) visa.

    Application

    This Direction applies to delegates performing functions or exercising powers under section 65 of the Act in relation to assessing an applicant’s temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications in Schedule 2 to the Regulations.

    This Direction also applies to members of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal who review the decisions of primary decision-makers in relation to a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa application.

    The genuine temporary entrant criterion must be satisfied by all applicants who make an application for either a Student visa seeking to satisfy the primary criteria for a Student Guardian visa.

    Preamble

    The Australian Government operates a student visa programme that enables people who are not Australian citizens or Australian permanent residents to undertake study in Australia. A person who wants to undertake a course of study under the student visa programme must obtain a student visa before they can commence a course of study in Australia.  A successful applicant must be both a genuine temporary entrant and a genuine student.

    An applicant who is a genuine temporary entrant will have circumstances that support a genuine intention to temporarily enter and remain in Australia, notwithstanding the potential for this intention to change over time to an intention to utilise lawful means to remain in Australia for an extended period of time or permanently.

    The genuine temporary entrant criterion for Student visa applications requires the Minister to be satisfied that the applicant intends genuinely to stay in Australia temporarily, having regard to:

    a.the applicant’s circumstances; and

    b.the applicant’s immigration history; and

    c.if the applicant is a minor — the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant; and

    d.any other relevant matter.

    This Direction provides guidance to decision makers on what factors require consideration when assessing the above paragraphs a to d, to determine whether the applicant genuinely intends to stay in Australia temporarily.

    Decision makers must take a reasonable and balanced approach between the need to make a timely decision on a Student visa or Student Guardian visa application and the need to identify those applicants who, at time of decision, do not genuinely intend to stay in Australia temporarily

    Part 2 of Direction No. 69 - Directions

    Assessing the genuine temporary entrant criterion

    1.Decision makers should not use the factors specified in this Direction as a checklist. The listed factors are intended only to guide decision makers when considering the applicant’s circumstances as a whole, in reaching a finding about whether the applicant satisfies the genuine temporary entrant criterion.

    2.Decision makers should assess whether, on balance, the genuine temporary entrant criterion is satisfied, by:

    a.considering the applicant against all factors specified in this Direction; and

    b.considering any other relevant information provided by the applicant (or information otherwise available to the decision maker).

    3.Decision makers may request additional information and/or further evidence from the applicant to demonstrate that they are a genuine temporary entrant, where closer scrutiny of the applicant's circumstances is considered appropriate.

    4.Circumstances where further scrutiny may be appropriate include but are not limited to:

    a.information in statistical, intelligence and analysis reports on migration fraud and immigration compliance compiled by the department indicates the need for further scrutiny;

    b.the applicant or a relative of the applicant has an immigration history of reasonable concern;

    c.the applicant intends to study in a field unrelated to their previous studies or employment; and

    d.apparent inconsistencies in information provided by the applicant in their Student visa application.

    5.An application for a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa should be refused if, after weighing up the applicant’s circumstances, immigration history and any other relevant matter, the decision maker is not satisfied that the applicant genuinely intends a temporary stay in Australia.

    The applicant’s circumstances

    6.Decision makers should have regard to the applicant’s circumstances in their home country and the applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia.

    7.For primary applicants of Subclass 500 Student visas, decision makers should have regard to the value of the course to the applicant’s future.

    8.Weight should be placed on an applicant’s circumstances that indicate that the Student visa or Student Guardian visa is intended primarily for maintaining residence in Australia.

    The applicant’s circumstances in their home country

    9.When considering the applicant’s circumstances in their home country, decision makers should have regard to the following factors:

    a.whether the applicant has reasonable reasons for not undertaking the study in their home country or region if a similar course is already available there. Decision makers should allow for any reasonable motives established by the applicant;

    b.the extent of the applicant’s personal ties to their home country (for example family, community and employment) and whether those circumstances would serve as a significant incentive to return to their home country;

    c.economic circumstances of the applicant that would present as a significant incentive for the applicant not to return to their home country. These circumstances may include consideration of the applicant’s circumstances relative to the home country and to Australia;

    d.military service commitments that would present as a significant incentive for the applicant not to return to their home country; and

    e.political and civil unrest in the applicant’s home country. This includes situations of a nature that may induce the applicant to apply for a Student visa or Student Guardian visa as means of obtaining entry to Australia for the purpose of remaining indefinitely. Decision makers should be aware of the changing circumstances in the applicant’s home country and the influence these may have on an applicant’s motivations for applying for a Student visa or a Student Guardian visa.

    10.Decision makers may have regard to the applicant’s circumstances in their home country relative to the circumstances of others in that country.

    The applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia

    11.In considering the applicant’s potential circumstances in Australia, decision makers should have regard to the following factors:

    a.The applicant’s ties with Australia which would present as a strong incentive to remain in Australia. This may include family and community ties;

    b.evidence that the student visa programme is being used to circumvent the intentions of the migration programme;

    c.whether the Student visa or Student Guardian visa is being used to maintain ongoing residence;

    dwhether the primary and secondary applicant(s) have entered into a relationship of concern for a successful Student visa outcome. Where a decision maker determines that an applicant and dependant have contrived their relationship for a successful Student visa outcomes, the decision maker may find that both applicants do not satisfy the genuine temporary entrant criterion; and

    e.the applicant’s knowledge of living in Australia and their intended course of study and the associated education provider; including previous study and qualifications, what is a realistic level of knowledge an applicant is expected to know and the level of research the applicant has undertaken into their proposed course of study and living arrangements.

    Value of the course to the applicant’s future

    12.Decision makers should have regard to the following factors when considering the value of the course to the applicant’s future:

    a.whether the student is seeking to undertake a course that is consistent with their current level of education and whether the course will assist the applicant to obtain employment or improve employment prospects in their home country. Decision makers should allow for reasonable changes to career or study pathways; and

    b.relevance of the course to the student’s past or proposed future employment either in their home country or a third country; and

    c.remuneration the applicant could expect to receive in the home country or a third country, compared with Australia, using the qualifications to be gained from the proposed course of study.

    The applicant's immigration history

    13.An applicant’s immigration history refers both to their visa and travel history.

    14.When considering the applicant’s immigration history, decision makers should have regard to the following factors:

    a.Previous visa applications for Australia or other countries, including:

    i.if the applicant previously applied for an Australian temporary or permanent visa, whether those visa applications are yet to be finally determined (within the meaning of subsection 5(9) of the Act), were granted, or grounds on which the application(s) were refused; and

    ii.if the applicant has previously applied for visa(s) to other countries, whether the applicant was refused a visa and the circumstances that led to visa refusal.

    b.Previous travels to Australia or other countries, including:

    i.if the applicant previously travelled to Australia, whether they complied with the conditions of their visa and left before their visa ceased, and if not, were there circumstances beyond their control;

    ii.whether the applicant previously held a visa that was cancelled or considered for cancellation, and the associated circumstances;

    iii.the amount of time the applicant has spent in Australia and whether the Student visa or Student Guardian visa may be used primarily for maintaining ongoing residence, including whether the applicant has undertaken a series of short, inexpensive courses, or has been onshore for some time without successfully completing a qualification; and

    iv.if the applicant has travelled to countries other than Australia, whether they complied with the migration laws of that country and the circumstances around any non-compliance

    If the applicant is a minor— the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant

    15.If the primary or secondary applicant for a Subclass 500 Student visa is a minor, decision makers should have regard to the intentions of a parent, legal guardian or spouse of the applicant.

    Any other relevant matters

    16.Decision makers should also have regard to any other relevant information provided by the applicant (or information otherwise available to the decision maker) when assessing the applicant’s intention to temporarily stay in Australia. This includes information that may be either beneficial or unfavourable to the applicant.