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. His office says the address will be rescheduled within a fortnight.
One line in the reporting deserves more attention than it has had. The package is said to include stopping spouses, children and parents of Australian citizens and permanent residents from lodging a family visa application while they are in Australia on a visitor visa.
Read that against how the subclass 864 actually works and you reach an uncomfortable conclusion. 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.
None of this is law. It has not been announced, it is not in the Migration Regulations, and the minister’s own spokesperson has indicated elements are unsettled. So what follows keeps what is in force today apart from what has only been reported.
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. Any restriction on onshore lodgement takes the bridging visa, not the visa at the end.
What is already in force, and what it does to parents
Two things have changed this year that parent visa families should understand before any speech is delivered.
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 August 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.
Condition 8503 is already closing this door for some families
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.
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 reported change is academic in that case, because the door is shut already.
What still works if the onshore door closes
Nobody should read a postponed speech and start moving money. But it is fair to ask what the shape of a parent visa plan looks like if onshore lodgement from a visitor visa goes.
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 rule about who may lodge onshore 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
If a parent is in Australia now, is eligible, and does not hold a visa carrying 8503, then the case for waiting has weakened. Not because we know what is in the speech, but because two of this year’s changes, Direction 117 and the July fee rise, took effect with no notice period at all. A plan that depends on a rule which exists today and has been publicly canvassed for removal has a shorter shelf life than it looks.
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. The balance of family test still applies and it is unchanged. The assurance of support obligations still apply. 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 after the address is rescheduled. Our parent visa work starts exactly there.
We will update this article when the address is rescheduled and again when any legislative instrument is registered, and we will date the update so you can see exactly what changed.
Frequently asked questions
Can my parent still apply for a subclass 864 visa onshore?
As at 6 August 2026, yes, provided they are in Australia, meet the criteria, and their current visa does not carry condition 8503 or another bar. A restriction on lodging family visa applications from a visitor visa has been reported as part of a postponed package. It has not been announced or made.
Is the subclass 864 being abolished?
No. Nothing has been announced that abolishes any parent visa subclass. The reported change would restrict who can lodge onshore, which would affect the subclass 864 and 804 heavily in practice because both require the applicant to be in Australia to apply.
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.
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 if onshore lodgement closes?
The most common pattern would 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 6 August 2026 and is not advice on your circumstances.