The Australian legal profession is already subject to “robust regulatory oversight”, Ms Wright said in a statement, and the bill would “remove unnecessary dual regulation” for legal practitioners.

“As highlighted by the committee, the issue of dual regulation of lawyers who provide migration assistance has been long debated. It is long overdue for this bill to be passed,” Ms Wright said.

“The discontinuation of dual regulation is in accordance with multiple major recommendations spanning a number of years, including those of the 2014 Independent Review of the Office of the Migration Agents Registration Authority, and a previous report by the Senate legal and constitutional affairs legislation committee.”

Dual regulation is a source of confusion for consumers, Ms Wright continued, who may be uncertain about the differences between immigration lawyers and migration agents.

“As acknowledged by the committee, the legal profession in Australia is well regulated and offers effective consumer protection mechanisms, including for vulnerable people in need of migration assistance,” she said.

VIEW ALL

“Lawyers must already demonstrate qualifications, fitness to practise and maintenance of professional standards in order to maintain a practising certificate. Removal of expensive and inefficient dual regulation of migration lawyers will improve access to justice by reducing costs for consumers and allow more lawyers to provide immigration assistance, including on a pro bono basis.”

LCA supports the implementation of a transitional period, she noted, during which time migration agents holding a restricted practising certificate may complete their supervised training and obtain an unrestricted practising certificate.