Tony Burke was due at the National Press Club on Thursday 6 August 2026 to set out the government’s migration overhaul. On 5 August he pulled out. He presented on Thursday 17 September 2026, and this article has been updated to reflect what he said.
He announced that every visitor visa will carry a no further stay condition. His stated reason was to stop people arriving as visitors, applying onshore for another visa, and moving onto a bridging visa.
He used partner visas as his example. That does not narrow it. A no further stay condition on the visa the parent holds bars the onshore application whatever subclass it is, so it lands on the subclass 864 and the 804 exactly as it lands on a partner visa. Parent visas were not mentioned in the address and they did not need to be.
Read that against how the subclass 864 actually works and you reach the conclusion we reached in August. You would not need to repeal the onshore parent visas to end them. You would only need to close the door people walk through to reach them, and that is what has now been announced.
One thing to be clear about. The parent visa criteria have not been touched. The balance of family test is unchanged. The assurance of support obligations are unchanged. What is changing is the condition on the visitor visa the parent arrives on.
Why the subclass 864 depends on a visitor visa
The Contributory Aged Parent (subclass 864) and the Aged Parent (subclass 804) are onshore visas in the strict sense. The applicant must be in Australia when they apply and in Australia when the visa is granted. There is no other way to hold one.
Very few parents are already in Australia on something else. They are not students, they are not sponsored workers, and they are past working age. In practice, the visitor visa is how a parent gets here, and the onshore application is what they lodge once they arrive.
Take away the ability to lodge from a visitor visa and the subclass 864 stays on the books, fully drafted, with nobody able to reach it. The regulation would be untouched. The pathway would be gone.
What families are actually buying with an onshore lodgement
This is where most commentary gets it wrong. Families do not choose the 864 over the offshore Contributory Parent (subclass 143) because the permanent visa at the end is different. It is not. They choose it because of what happens during the wait.
A valid onshore application generally attracts a Bridging visa A, and that bridging visa is what keeps a parent lawfully in Australia, with their family, for the duration. Against a queue the Department currently estimates at around 15 years for contributory parent applications, that is not a technicality. It is the entire difference between a family living together and a family visiting each other.
The permanent residence is the destination. The bridging visa is the reason people take that road rather than the other one. Burke named the bridging visa himself when he explained the measure, so the effect on the 864 is intended rather than incidental.
Condition 8503 is the mechanism, and it is already in use
Here is the part that gets missed. For a meaningful number of parents the onshore pathway is already shut, and no announcement was required.
Condition 8503, “no further stay”, prevents the holder from applying for most further visas while they remain in Australia. It is mandatory on some visitor streams, including the sponsored family stream, and it can be applied at the Department’s discretion on others. Grant patterns vary by nationality and by individual assessment, and we have seen 8503 imposed on visitor visas where families did not expect it.
That discretion is the point. Condition 8503 already sits in the regulations and the Department can already impose it. Making it standard on visitor visas does not require new law. It requires the Department to start doing routinely what it can already do case by case, which can happen at any time and without notice.
We do not expect the condition to be attached to the 601 Electronic Travel Authority or the 651 eVisitor. On that reading the measure bites on subclass 600 holders, which is most parents from most countries.
The effect is severe and it is technical. If 8503 is on the visa, an onshore subclass 864 or 804 application is not weak, it is invalid. It does not get assessed, it does not get a queue date, and the application charge is at risk.
There is a waiver, but treat it as an exception rather than an option. Regulation 2.05(4) requires compelling and compassionate circumstances that have developed since the visa was granted, over which the holder had no control, producing a major change in their situation. Wanting to stay is not that. Having always intended to apply is certainly not that. We do not build plans on an 8503 waiver and neither should anyone else.
So before anything else, read the grant notice. Not the passport label, not what the agent overseas said, the grant notice for the visa the parent currently holds. If 8503 is on it, the announcement changes nothing in that case, because the door is shut already.
What is already in force, and what it does to parents
Two things changed earlier this year that parent visa families should understand.
Ministerial Direction 117
Direction 117 replaced Direction 102 on 25 July 2026. It tells decision makers to give highest priority to family visa applications made while the primary applicant was in Australia, for a visa that can be granted in Australia. Applications where the applicant is offshore, or must be offshore at grant, rank below all of that.
On its face that reads as good news for the 864. Look closer and the benefit is thinner than it appears. Within the onshore group, Direction 117 orders applications: ministerial intervention cases, then partner and dependent child, then orphan relative, then contributory parent and contributory aged parent, then carer, and last of all parent, aged parent, remaining relative and aged dependant relative.
More to the point, Direction 103 still governs capped and queued categories, and every parent subclass is capped and queued: 103, 804, 143, 173, 864 and 884. Those are released in queue date order. So a parent lodging onshore in September 2026 does not jump ahead of a parent who lodged offshore in 2019. The queue date rules, and it is the same queue either way.
Which is the point worth holding onto. The onshore advantage in a parent case has never really been about speed. It is about where you are allowed to be while you wait.
The queue, in numbers
As at 31 May 2026 the Department had released for final processing:
Contributory Parent applications with a queue date up to November 2018
Parent applications with a queue date up to March 2014
Aged Parent applications with a queue date up to April 2014
Its published estimate for a new application is around 15 years for the contributory subclasses and around 33 years for the Parent and Aged Parent visas. Those are estimates built on current place numbers, and place numbers move. The 2026-27 programme reduced parent allocations to 7,060 places, and a smaller allocation against unchanged demand lengthens the queue rather than shortening it.
Our page on what happens after you lodge a parent or aged parent application works through queue dates in detail.
What still works when the onshore door closes
The offshore Contributory Parent (subclass 143)
The 143 is lodged offshore and it delivers the same permanent residence as the 864. Because both sit in the same capped and queued pool, released in queue date order, the queue consequence of choosing 143 over 864 is far smaller than families assume. What you give up is the bridging visa and therefore the ability to wait here.
The Sponsored Parent (Temporary) visa (subclass 870)
The 870 lets a parent stay for up to three or five years per grant, to a cumulative maximum of ten years. It is the only visa in the system designed to hold a parent in Australia for a long period without permanent residence.
Be clear about what it is not. The 870 does not lead to permanent residence. It carries no work rights. Condition 8501 requires adequate health insurance maintained for the whole stay, and there is no Medicare, which is a real annual cost at an age when it is highest. The sponsor must meet an income threshold and takes on financial responsibility for the parent’s costs.
The combination worth understanding
Put those two together and you get the pattern we expect to see far more of: lodge the 143 offshore to hold a place in the queue, and run the 870 alongside it so the parent can actually be here.
That pairing gets a family close to what the 864 and a bridging visa delivered, and it is honest to say it does not get all the way. It costs more. It carries no Medicare, which our Medicare guide for parent visa applicants explains matters more for this group than any other. Ten years is a ceiling on the 870, and the contributory queue is currently longer than ten years, so the sequencing needs thought rather than optimism.
And what’s a deal breaker for many parents in today’s economic environment? There are no work rights on an 870.
It is a re-sequencing, not a workaround. Anyone selling it as an equivalent substitute is not being straight with you.
If you have already lodged
An application already lodged is not exposed to a change in lodgement rules. Migration changes are rarely retrospective in their eligibility criteria, and a condition imposed on visitor visas granted in the future has nothing to say about an application already sitting in a queue with a queue date attached. If your parent’s 864 or 804 is in, it is in.
The honest read on timing
In August the argument for acting rested on a reported measure in a postponed speech. It now rests on an announced one, which is a different thing.
If a parent is in Australia now, is eligible, and does not hold a visa carrying 8503, the case for waiting has gone. Not because we know the day the change lands, but because the Department does not need to pass anything to land it, and because two of this year’s changes, Direction 117 and the July fee rise, took effect with no notice period at all.
That is not an instruction to rush. A parent application that fails the core criteria at queue assessment is refused, and a refusal is a worse outcome than a later lodgement. Lodging a file that cannot get a queue date buys nothing and costs the charge.
The right call is a conversation about your parent’s actual visa, actual conditions and actual eligibility, held now rather than later. Our parent visa work starts exactly there.
Frequently asked questions
Did Burke announce the end of parent visas?
No parent visa subclass was abolished or amended, and parent visas were not mentioned in the address. What was announced is a no further stay condition on every visitor visa. Because the onshore subclass 864 and 804 can only be lodged from inside Australia, and because a parent is almost always here on a visitor visa, that measure closes the practical route to those visas without touching the parent visa rules.
He talked about partner visas, not parent visas. Does it still apply?
Yes. A no further stay condition operates on the visa the holder already has and bars onshore applications generally. It does not distinguish between a partner application and a parent application. Partner visas were the example, not the limit.
Can my parent still apply for a subclass 864 visa onshore?
As at 18 September 2026, yes, provided they are in Australia, meet the criteria, and their current visa does not carry condition 8503 or another bar.
What does condition 8503 mean for a parent visa?
If condition 8503 applies to the visa your parent currently holds, an onshore parent visa application is invalid rather than refused. It receives no assessment and no queue date. A waiver exists under regulation 2.05(4) but requires compelling and compassionate circumstances that developed after grant and were beyond the holder’s control. Wanting to stay does not meet that test.
Does lodging onshore make a parent visa faster?
Not in itself. All parent subclasses are capped and queued, and Direction 103 requires release in queue date order. Direction 117 prioritises onshore family applications generally, but the queue date still governs a parent case. The onshore benefit is the bridging visa and the ability to remain in Australia during the wait.
What is the alternative once onshore lodgement closes?
The most common pattern will be a Contributory Parent (subclass 143) lodged offshore to hold a queue place, paired with a Sponsored Parent (Temporary) (subclass 870) so the parent can spend extended periods in Australia. That combination carries no Medicare, no work rights and a ten-year cumulative limit on the 870, so it needs to be planned against the individual family’s circumstances.
Get advice on your own situation
If your parent is in Australia now, or you were planning to bring them here to lodge, the useful next step is a look at the actual visa and its actual conditions rather than at the headlines. Book a consultation and we will tell you where you stand.
Andrew Heathcote, Registered Migration Agent, MARN 0850840. This article is general information current at 18 September 2026 and is not advice on your circumstances. First published 6 August 2026 and updated 18 September 2026 following the Minister’s address.