Hey true blue, is it me and you? Citizenship and the Constitution.

What Should Joyce Do?

  • Step down from parliament, the rules are quite clear.

    Votes: 54 77.1%

  • Step down from the ministry, nothing has been confirmed yet.

    Votes: 4 5.7%

  • Business as usual, NZ is just an Australian territory anyway, right?

    Votes: 6 8.6%

  • Abstain from all future parliamentary votes, or risk future legislation being deemed illegitimate.

    Votes: 6 8.6%
  • Total voters
    70
  • Poll closed .

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

Here's a thought.

How many voters out there are dual-nationals?

How many of you, who voted for these people, have dual citizenship?

I think any voters who has not renounced their ties cannot vote in any election until they do. Also, it makes you a hypocrite if you bag them for it, yet are one yourself.

I mean, the whole rule is stupid. This is a young country, not even 300 years old. That's about 3 1/2 generations. That means that either you, your father, or your grandfather could possibly be from another country. That means that all white Australians have dual citizenship.

Yet we are happy to prevent people elected for office to do their job simply on symantics. Being a dual national doesn't prevent a politician from doing an effective job. Also, most of the dual citizenship is for countries who are allies of Australia in war situations. It isn't like there is a pollie who has Afghan ties and may go and join ISIS. I think the country's security is safe if all we have to worry about is some pollies being Poms, Kiwis or Yanks.

This rule means that, technically, only indigenous people can be parliamentarians, since they are the only ones who haven't had ancestors from other countries.

Also, something is fishy about this. We have had many parliaments over our history, and only now this is an issue? How come? How come most pollies are in trouble for this now, yet I don't recall any other pollie in the past being in trouble for the same thing.

I find it hard to believe that this many politicians have been sloppy. Moreover, that ALP pollies don't seem to get done for it. I smell an agenda, and maybe if the idiot media and voters in this country stopped bagging pollies for the sake of it for five minutes, maybe an investigation could be launched to see why this whole thing is so one-sided and a clause in the Constitution is only being enforced now.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gough said:
Whatever you might think of the law, it is what it is and if you want to talk Constitutional reform I've got some ideas too. These MPs and Senators, for better or for worse have been caught out by some Perth lawyer with a grudge against Scott Ludlam.
Click to expand...


Maybe time for Scott Ludlam or some pollie to dig up some dirt on this lawyer, to use as leverage.

If I were a pollie, I would keep files on my enemies to stop things like this happening.
 
madmug said:
I guess the answer is that its in the Constitution. End of storey. It doesn't matter what we think about it. It doesn't matter if we disagree with the speed limit or the laws of gravity. They is their & thats it.

Sure, we can get our State pollies to change the speed limits. A referendum is needed to change the Constitution, but they are rarely upheld by the voters. And unfortunately we are stuck with the laws of gravity, for now at least. :)

So their she is.
Click to expand...


yes it does.

How about we vote to change the rule in the Constitution. I mean, it is archaic, and doesn't prevent good government, so the rule isn't needed.

Your flippant response shows your apathy towards this country, which is a problem with today's society.
 
Catters 070911 said:
Here's a thought.

How many voters out there are dual-nationals?

How many of you, who voted for these people, have dual citizenship?

I think any voters who has not renounced their ties cannot vote in any election until they do. Also, it makes you a hypocrite if you bag them for it, yet are one yourself.

I mean, the whole rule is stupid. This is a young country, not even 300 years old. That's about 3 1/2 generations. That means that either you, your father, or your grandfather could possibly be from another country. That means that all white Australians have dual citizenship.

Yet we are happy to prevent people elected for office to do their job simply on symantics. Being a dual national doesn't prevent a politician from doing an effective job. Also, most of the dual citizenship is for countries who are allies of Australia in war situations. It isn't like there is a pollie who has Afghan ties and may go and join ISIS. I think the country's security is safe if all we have to worry about is some pollies being Poms, Kiwis or Yanks.

This rule means that, technically, only indigenous people can be parliamentarians, since they are the only ones who haven't had ancestors from other countries.

Also, something is fishy about this. We have had many parliaments over our history, and only now this is an issue? How come? How come most pollies are in trouble for this now, yet I don't recall any other pollie in the past being in trouble for the same thing.

I find it hard to believe that this many politicians have been sloppy. Moreover, that ALP pollies don't seem to get done for it. I smell an agenda, and maybe if the idiot media and voters in this country stopped bagging pollies for the sake of it for five minutes, maybe an investigation could be launched to see why this whole thing is so one-sided and a clause in the Constitution is only being enforced now.
Click to expand...
You obviously don't know what you are complaining about, you say technically that only indigenous people can be parliamentarians due to this rules. You are wrong. Just be a sole Australian citizen. Simples.

A primary school teacher at a public school is ineligible to run for parliament, I don't see any outrage over that despite it being a stupid rule. It's not as if a teacher or admin worker has any authority over decisions being made in regards to education policy. But the rules are the rules. At least the citizenship rule has some logic.

You are right with the timing though and how it all became an issue now, it all started with someone having a vendetta against the Greens on a technicality, and it opened up Pandora's box.
 
Catters 070911 said:
yes it does.

How about we vote to change the rule in the Constitution. I mean, it is archaic, and doesn't prevent good government, so the rule isn't needed.

Your flippant response shows your apathy towards this country, which is a problem with today's society.
Click to expand...
It's only an issue until the next election and then no one will ever care about it again since every party will check their status. If you want to be a parliamentarian don't be a duel citizen and don't work in the public sector.
 
Catters 070911 said:
yes it does.

How about we vote to change the rule in the Constitution. I mean, it is archaic, and doesn't prevent good government, so the rule isn't needed.

Your flippant response shows your apathy towards this country, which is a problem with today's society.
Click to expand...

Flippant? Ive said before that nothing can be done by anyone but the politicians themselves. They have to be the ones to initiate a referendum. Not 'us'. But did they? ever? So it was clearly never a problem to them until now. How DUMB is that.

Now they've been found out its all panic & wringing of hands. Yes lets abuse the frames of the constitution. Lets bark at the moon about it.

So dont come at me with that 'flippant' & 'apathy' guff. When the people we pay to run the country within the rules are too stupid to read those rules then don't point fingers at anyone else other than the Politicians themselves. They are the ones who should know the rules, obey the rules, or CHANGE the bludy rules via a referendum. But have they???

I'm the wrong guy to cop that shyte. Apathy! PO!
 
Catters 070911 said:
Here's a thought.

How many voters out there are dual-nationals?

How many of you, who voted for these people, have dual citizenship?

I think any voters who has not renounced their ties cannot vote in any election until they do. Also, it makes you a hypocrite if you bag them for it, yet are one yourself.

I mean, the whole rule is stupid. This is a young country, not even 300 years old. That's about 3 1/2 generations. That means that either you, your father, or your grandfather could possibly be from another country. That means that all white Australians have dual citizenship.

Yet we are happy to prevent people elected for office to do their job simply on symantics. Being a dual national doesn't prevent a politician from doing an effective job. Also, most of the dual citizenship is for countries who are allies of Australia in war situations. It isn't like there is a pollie who has Afghan ties and may go and join ISIS. I think the country's security is safe if all we have to worry about is some pollies being Poms, Kiwis or Yanks.

This rule means that, technically, only indigenous people can be parliamentarians, since they are the only ones who haven't had ancestors from other countries.

Also, something is fishy about this. We have had many parliaments over our history, and only now this is an issue? How come? How come most pollies are in trouble for this now, yet I don't recall any other pollie in the past being in trouble for the same thing.

I find it hard to believe that this many politicians have been sloppy. Moreover, that ALP pollies don't seem to get done for it. I smell an agenda, and maybe if the idiot media and voters in this country stopped bagging pollies for the sake of it for five minutes, maybe an investigation could be launched to see why this whole thing is so one-sided and a clause in the Constitution is only being enforced now.
Click to expand...

Someone posted it earlier in this thread (I can't be bothered searching all the way through it to appropriately credit the poster) but this is an intelligence test. If someone running for Parliament cannot be bothered or doesn't think of checking their citizenship status prior to standing for Parliament, then are they really smart enough to sit in Parliament and debate laws that affect all Australians?

It's also worth remembering that this kerfuffle all started because some bright spark in the WA Liberal Party thought he could toss a bomb at Ludlam and get him out of the Senate. As is generally the case with ticking time bombs, the resulting shrapnel from the explosion took out a few of his own side of the political spectrum.

The ALP is pretty rigorous in background checking its candidates prior to preselection, but it's interesting to see what happens (if anything) with Keay and Gallacher. The minor parties (including the Greens) don't have the same structures in place, but that doesn't absolve the Liberals from this issue.
 
Catters 070911 said:
Here's a thought.

How many voters out there are dual-nationals?

How many of you, who voted for these people, have dual citizenship?

I think any voters who has not renounced their ties cannot vote in any election until they do. Also, it makes you a hypocrite if you bag them for it, yet are one yourself.

I mean, the whole rule is stupid. This is a young country, not even 300 years old. That's about 3 1/2 generations. That means that either you, your father, or your grandfather could possibly be from another country. That means that all white Australians have dual citizenship.

Yet we are happy to prevent people elected for office to do their job simply on symantics. Being a dual national doesn't prevent a politician from doing an effective job. Also, most of the dual citizenship is for countries who are allies of Australia in war situations. It isn't like there is a pollie who has Afghan ties and may go and join ISIS. I think the country's security is safe if all we have to worry about is some pollies being Poms, Kiwis or Yanks.

This rule means that, technically, only indigenous people can be parliamentarians, since they are the only ones who haven't had ancestors from other countries.

Also, something is fishy about this. We have had many parliaments over our history, and only now this is an issue? How come? How come most pollies are in trouble for this now, yet I don't recall any other pollie in the past being in trouble for the same thing.

I find it hard to believe that this many politicians have been sloppy. Moreover, that ALP pollies don't seem to get done for it. I smell an agenda, and maybe if the idiot media and voters in this country stopped bagging pollies for the sake of it for five minutes, maybe an investigation could be launched to see why this whole thing is so one-sided and a clause in the Constitution is only being enforced now.
Click to expand...

Its been constantly reviewed- since we moved away from being British Subjects in the 60's

Dual Citizenship has had two Parliamentary committees on this issue. (One in the 70s and one in 1999).

Before 2002, any Australian citizen who became a citizen of another country automatically lost their Australian citizenship. This has now changed.
The 99 committee outlined some suggestions such as putting it to a referendum to resolve this issue. None of which was implemented by Howard and his merry men.

Its a lack of leadership from all sides over the past 15 years that has brought this issue into prominence.
 
aCunningPlan said:
You obviously don't know what you are complaining about, you say technically that only indigenous people can be parliamentarians due to this rules. You are wrong. Just be a sole Australian citizen. Simples.

A primary school teacher at a public school is ineligible to run for parliament, I don't see any outrage over that despite it being a stupid rule. It's not as if a teacher or admin worker has any authority over decisions being made in regards to education policy. But the rules are the rules. At least the citizenship rule has some logic.

You are right with the timing though and how it all became an issue now, it all started with someone having a vendetta against the Greens on a technicality, and it opened up Pandora's box.
Click to expand...


But people like Barnaby Joyce were BORN here. He isn't from overseas, his parents are. So why should that disqualify you?

The rule would be better if the pollie himself was born overseas, and lived there for a significant amount of time, making them an immigrant.

But if Barnaby Joyce is born here, he is Australian. End of story.

When you start getting penalised for where OTHER people are born, then I see that as a problem.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ohitsthatguy
Is it cool that Stokes, Murdoch and Costello own Australian media?
2
Replies
40
Views
2K
Gethelred
Gethelred
HurleyHepsHird
It is time to end the consultancy gravy train and rebuild the public service
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Demonic Ascent
Demonic Ascent
D
Steps towards Treaty: the Uluru Statement and Referendum Council Report
13 14 15 16 17
Replies
424
Views
13K
South of the Yarra
South of the Yarra
Aristotle Pickett
Vic The joke that is the Victorian Liberal Party.
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
135
Views
6K
Saint
Saint
Geoff
The Joke that is the West Australian Liberal Party
2 3
Replies
59
Views
3K
blueboy25
blueboy25
C
  • Locked
Bigfooty Censorship- Daniel Andrews thread
Replies
6
Views
679
Hava Alle
Hava Alle
Seeds
Australias tax system takes from the young to give to the old
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
Syd
Syd
Back
Top