Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Dual Citizenship Crisis - s 44(i)

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 21, 22, 23  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 7:53 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
This is getting ridiculous:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-18/nick-xenophon-citizenship-british-home-office/8819502

I'll eat my shoe if there aren't any Labor MPs in strife.


I wouldn't worry about the condiments, I'll bet labor is frantically running round in the background, checking and renouncing but trying to keep it all quiet so they can claim the high moral ground. It will bite them sooner or later.

Interesting how Sect 44 doesn't apply to state governments, only the feds.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 8:57 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Why is it "interesting"? It's the Commonwealth Constitution. So, it deals with the establishment and filling of positions in the Commonwealth Parliament. To the extent that the States have "constitutions", they are actually only Acts of the State Parliaments (eg, in Victoria, see the Constitution Act 1975), so none of their content is entrenched in any real legal sense. Similarly, the creation of "local government" is, in turn, achieved by an Act of the State Parliaments, so "local government" is about as necessary, constitutionally, as a railway corporation - ie, not at all.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 8:59 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

^

Cheers counsel, but the average punter likely didn't study constitutional law so wouldn't know that

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 9:14 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

stui magpie wrote:
^

Cheers counsel, but the average punter likely didn't study constitutional law so wouldn't know that

In fact, hilariously, I see that the Victorian Parliament has entrenched a few provisions by amending legislation passed in 2003 - so they've deliberately fettered themselves (or, if you're feeling miserable about it, us).
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Fri Aug 18, 2017 11:13 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I was under the impression that Victoria had basically no limits. You could be a syrian national with temporary residency in Australia and get voted in.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 9:25 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Xenophon is a British citizen and is now off to the high court too. If anyone has a case here, it's him.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/19/nick-xenophon-will-go-to-high-court-after-finding-out-he-holds-dual-citizenship

Quote:
He said the “great irony” of the situation was that his father travelled to Australia decades ago from Cyprus to escape British colonial rule.

When Cyprus gained independence, most Cypriots lost their British citizenship except those who moved to one of nine countries, including Australia. This made Xenophon’s father a British overseas citizen, a status that automatically extended to Xenophon, who was born in Australia.

Xenophon told reporters on Saturday that the advice he received from the UK was “that this whole scenario is quite a rare peculiarity”, adding that being a British overseas citizen was “quite useless” and gave him no rights to live or work in the UK.

“To add insult to injury, the European Union of which Cyprus is a member does not consider a British overseas citizen to be a UK national,” Xenophon said, describing it as a “third-class” of citizenship “just one notch above being stateless”.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Pies4shaw Leo

pies4shaw


Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 10:01 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh, oops! A not-so-independent Independent?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
ronrat 



Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 4:04 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

The British should know better. Now there bloody stupid citizenship laws are biting former colonies on the arse. There own influx of Indian, Pakistani, West Indian , Bangladesh people should have been the wake up call.

When Ronald Biggs was recaptured in Brazil he was allowed to stay because his son Michael was a Brazillian. The British were furious. So why disn't they clean up their own archaic citizenship laws. Then came the Brixton riots etc. OK it was a loophole to getZola Budd and a few cricketers.

And what the hell do they discuss at CHOGM. Durely at the next one they need to thrash this out.

_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 5:39 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I wouldn't blame the British for this. Ordinarily a dual citizenship is a privilege, not a problem; if they want to hand them out to the children of British citizens, there's nothing inherently wrong with that. Many countries do this, perhaps even us as far as I know. Anyway, we're the ones whose stupid law on the matter has thrown our parliament into chaos.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
stui magpie Gemini

Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:17 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
I wouldn't blame the British for this. Ordinarily a dual citizenship is a privilege, not a problem; if they want to hand them out to the children of British citizens, there's nothing inherently wrong with that. Many countries do this, perhaps even us as far as I know. Anyway, we're the ones whose stupid law on the matter has thrown our parliament into chaos.


Our 'stupid" law is common amongst countries that allow duel citizenship. A number of countries make you renounce any foreign citizenship just to be able to be a citizen, let alone a member of parliament.

_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 6:41 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Whether or not that's true, I still think it's stupid and unnecessary.

Let's consider the law actually acting as it's supposed to (i.e. not landing half our elected parliamentarians in the High Court on a technicality). Say, in a hypothetical Australia where Section 44(i) doesn't exist, Igor Igorevich is a Russian national who has attained Australian citizenship and decided to run for preselection. Unbeknownst to anyone, Igor is a Russian spy working for Vladimir Putin, just waiting to get into Parliament House so he can get a ministry, negotiate favourable trade deals with Russia and, while he's at it, leak classified information about the contents of Tony Abbott's underwear draw. In the imminent Australo-Russian war, he's planning to bat for both teams. Our nation's sovereignty is at stake!

Now replay the same scenario in which Igor is forced to tactically renounce his Russian citizenship before running for election. What changes? Which aspects of his dastardly plan can he no longer achieve? If he gets sprung, there's always the chance of claiming political asylum in Russia. There's literally nothing about section 44(i) that protects us from such a scenario. It's pure symbolism.

I get the symbolism part of it. I just don't get the point of hanging onto a symbolic law when its only use in practice seems to be a stumbling point for a near-random assortment of elected politicians. To say it's caused more harm than good would be an understatement.

_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
ronrat 



Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand

PostPosted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 8:16 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

A big part of the dual citizenship allowance is due to Israel.Other nations, mainly Muslim, do not allow entry to Israeli citizens. Malaysia is one such country.

Another issue will be surrogacy, adoption and donor sperm etc. Forgetting any possible ethical concerns anyone has, and that is bad enough, the legal ones will be an issue.

Lets hope we see some commonsense from the High Court. Because we aren't from anywhere else.

_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Jezza Taurus

2023 PREMIERS!


Joined: 06 Sep 2010
Location: Ponsford End

PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 12:43 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Derryn Hinch has now been embroiled in this crisis.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-30/derryn-hinch-faces-section-44-uncertainty/8857752

_________________
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
David Libra

I dare you to try


Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda

PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 1:26 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Lol. Will we have any politicians left by the end of this?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger  
Tannin Capricorn

Can't remember


Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania

PostPosted: Thu Aug 31, 2017 1:58 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

ronrat wrote:
Lets hope we see some commonsense from the High Court. Because we aren't from anywhere else.


Just so. It is virtually certain that the High Court will rule - as it is required to do - in accordance with the law. None of the politicians who hold foreign citizenship are entitled to sit in parliament. The constitution is perfectly clear on this. Joyce, Canavan, Nash, Roberts, and possibly Xenophon will all be rubbed out. (Xenophon is not a full British Citizen, his case is borderline.)

Ludlum and Waters have already done the right thing and resigned. Hinch should be OK, he's not by any stretch of the imagination a US citizen.

So that gives us:

  • Gawn: Joyce, Canavan, Nash (all Nationals) and Roberts (One Nation).
  • Resigned: Ludlum and Waters (both Green).
  • 50/50: Xenophon (Xenophon Party).
  • OK: Hinch (Hinch Party).


Joyce will have to be replaced at a by-election. His seat is far from safe.

All the others are senators and will be replaced by members of their own parties via a recount. (It is possible that a recount could elect a new senator from another party, but unlikely.)

No sane person could regret the loss of any of the threatened senators. Nash is a corrupt crony of the big food lobby; Canavan is a pretty typical hard-right conservative with no known redeeming values; Roberts is a certifiable wild-eyed loonie even by One Nation standards. Xenophon is fairly decent by Liberal Party standards (i.e., deceitful and right-wing); his replacement (if needed) is unlikely to be any worse and quite possibly better.

Ludlam, of course, has been a colossal loss: many people - young ones in particular - regarded him as quite the best Senator in the chamber. His replacement is an unknown quantity but most unlikely to be as good as Ludlam was. Waters was another good'un but won't be missed as much because her replacement is, if anything, even better.

That leaves Joyce. No-one knows who will win the by-election for his seat. On the whole, even in the Nationals retain it, it is difficult to imagine that his replacement won't be a better, more decent person.

So overall, we can offset the unfortunate loss of Ludlam against the undoubtedly positive loss of Roberts, Joyce, Canavan and Nash. On balance, you'd reckon it is overall a good thing.

(None of this is to deny that the Section 44 provision itself is daft. But it is in the Constitution and can't be changed without a referendum. In past years, there was broad cross-party agreement that it ought to be fixed, but the only political party which could be bothered actually doing anything about it was the Greens, and the big parties ignored the problem. Meanwhile, the law is the law and the High Court will enforce it. Suffer in your jocks Trumble.)

_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 11 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 7, 8, 9 ... 21, 22, 23  Next
Page 8 of 23   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group