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

[Dixie Flatline]

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Dear oh dear. This threatens to come apart on the ALP at the seams.

 

[Dry Rot]

Dear oh dear. This threatens to come apart on the ALP at the seams.

Note to Mods: it appears that it is now acceptable to call someone a maggot.

 

[Satan]

Note to Mods: it appears that it is now acceptable to call someone a maggot.

But only near Parliament House
I thought whataboutism was only in Trump thread, it has moved

 

[Dry Rot]

Feeney may be dumped if there is a by-election

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...p-david-feeney-in-batman-20171206-gzzrn9.html

 

[Satan]

Feeney may be dumped if there is a by-election

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...p-david-feeney-in-batman-20171206-gzzrn9.html

So was there a crime committed for falsely signing the pre election form?

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Dear oh dear. This threatens to come apart on the ALP at the seams.

There are some random backbenchers out there, aren't there? I get where he's coming from, though. There's nothing new in the story. Why is Matt not happy to talk with him and insists she has to answer? And then follows her in to what end? He appears to be asking the same question over and over - I guess for TV? But it's been posted by Fairfax?

The answer from Labor has been the same for months. They have some MPs who did their paperwork prior to the deadline but it may not have been actioned by the UK before the deadline. They have legal advice saying it's fine, and I thought the High Court already said it was OK, but apparently the Libs are referring them anyway so maybe there's a subtle difference (e.g. if someone deliberately waited).

The annoying thing is when Turnbull said everyone was having the week off and the LNP said they would only deal with 2 things (marriage equality and citizenship), it's clear this is what they had in mind. There's bugger all new, but they wanted to leave a bunch of Labor MPs in limbo over Christmas, so they could remove some of the stench off the fact only LNP blokes had gone to byelection.

And the media is swallowing it all up. Channel 9 reporter just said Shorten had claimed no Labor MPs were under a cloud. Of course people can be under a cloud, that happens as soon as any question is asked. It's whether they've done something legally wrong which is the separate, pertinent question.

 

[Satan]

There are some random backbenchers out there, aren't there? I get where he's coming from, though. There's nothing new in the story. Why is Matt not happy to talk with him and insists she has to answer? And then follows her in to what end? He appears to be asking the same question over and over - I guess for TV? But it's been posted by Fairfax?

The answer from Labor has been the same for months. They have some MPs who did their paperwork prior to the deadline but it may not have been actioned by the UK before the deadline. They have legal advice saying it's fine, and I thought the High Court already said it was OK, but apparently the Libs are referring them anyway so maybe there's a subtle difference (e.g. if someone deliberately waited).

The annoying thing is when Turnbull said everyone was having the week off and the LNP said they would only deal with 2 things (marriage equality and citizenship), it's clear this is what they had in mind. There's bugger all new, but they wanted to leave a bunch of Labor MPs in limbo over Christmas, so they could remove some of the stench off the fact only LNP blokes had gone to byelection.

And the media is swallowing it all up. Channel 9 reporter just said Shorten had claimed no Labor MPs were under a cloud. Of course people can be under a cloud, that happens as soon as any question is asked. It's whether they've done something legally wrong which is the separate, pertinent question.

Maybe they should get Laurie from the Castle as a barrister?

 

[Pessimistic]

I just find it curious with have an important section in our constitution for the purpose of mitigating influence of our political leaders.

When it comes to allegiance it has the citizenship element but fails to address the almighty $, religion or the papal state.

In regards to Dastyari, tell me he wouldn’t sell out his integrity for the dollar. When it comes Abbott, tell me he wouldn’t put god before man. Clearly these are far more dangerous than a dual citizen alone.

Coincidentally they were both foreigners and the administration process of denouncing citizenship complies with s44 but has not achieved the purpose of s44.....neither have broken any law or any law that could be practically introduced other than in s44.

I’d like to bet Abbott like the dollar several magnitudes more than daster does

 

[tandino]

There are some random backbenchers out there, aren't there? I get where he's coming from, though. There's nothing new in the story. Why is Matt not happy to talk with him and insists she has to answer? And then follows her in to what end? He appears to be asking the same question over and over - I guess for TV? But it's been posted by Fairfax?

Seriously?

Because the question was not asked of him, it was asked of her.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

Seriously?

Because the question was not asked of him, it was asked of her.

It is a legal question. Labor thought it was fine so long as the paperwork was done prior to the deadline. The Libs are spending money seeing if that checks out. Labor has never denied that aspect. They are thorough, but they have legal advice to say that "reasonable efforts" being taken is enough to satisfy S44. So that is what they have done. Asking questions of each individual person doesn't change that fact. It's pointless. Keay already admitted to delaying it (below), but I don't know why the court would see that as a bad thing sseeing as the writs control the election and that controls the deadline:

“I delayed it – it’s one of those things with the citizenship I knew I could never get it back,” she said. “If I don’t get elected I can’t get my citizenship back and for me, it was a very personal thing. I try not to be upset about it but - it was that last tangible connection with my dad.” She acknowledged the renunciation could have been done earlier, and the delay had created the cloud hanging over her head.

 

[tandino]

It is a legal question. Labor thought it was fine so long as the paperwork was done prior to the deadline. The Libs are spending money seeing if that checks out. Labor has never denied that aspect. They are thorough, but they have legal advice to say that "reasonable efforts" being taken is enough to satisfy S44. So that is what they have done. Asking questions of each individual person doesn't change that fact. It's pointless. Keay already admitted to delaying it (below), but I don't know why the court would see that as a bad thing sseeing as the writs control the election and that controls the deadline:

Money spent defending the constitution is money well spent.

At the risk of repeating myself, at least the reasonable steps provision will now be tested and we will see if that legal advice stands up to High Court scrutiny. I don't think the legal advice, or what I understand of it, is wrong. They may have done all in their power to start the renunciation process, but I don't think that alone is enough, though I may be proven wrong.

If we acknowledge that Keay, for example, held UK citizenship on the nomination date and work backwards from there, did she do all that was reasonable for her to ensure she was eligible by that date? I would argue that she didn't, she had months to prepare. If all reasonable steps need to be taken, the most reasonable steps to take are those that ensure renunciation is complete before that date.

Just as an aside, if we try and pick apart the mess today and look at the Government's 4 MP's that were on the block, Julia Banks, Alex Hawke & Nola Marino have provided documents from the respective Greek and Italian embassies that state clearly that they are not considered citizens (The Greek document more comprehensive than the Italian document it must be said, but nevertheless). Labor want to argue the point on that, which is not unreasonable. But if assurances from the embassies of foreign countries are not enough, then open the floodgates because there are plenty of MP's and Senators that use those assurances in their statements to assert their eligibility. Start with Plibersek and Di Natale and go from there. What's your view on that?

 

[HairyO]

So was there a crime committed for falsely signing the pre election form?

Or accidently finding out he owned a a couple of multi million dollar houses.

Not a bad effort for a guy who went from Uni to Union Advocate to Party Secretary to Parliament.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Just as an aside, if we try and pick apart the mess today and look at the Government's 4 MP's that were on the block, Julia Banks, Alex Hawke & Nola Marino have provided documents from the respective Greek and Italian embassies that state clearly that they are not considered citizens

The documents really state that they don't have them on record as citizens at specific municipal offices, not that they aren't by law. Although I suspect they'd get off on the Canavan ruling.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

If we acknowledge that Keay, for example, held UK citizenship on the nomination date and work backwards from there, did she do all that was reasonable for her to ensure she was eligible by that date?

So if you look at it from a specific, narrow point of view that ignores the facts, it looks like she may have slightly acted differently? Pointless.

At the time of deadline she had taken all "reasonable steps". She should be fine. It's pretty silly to decide on an arbitrary timing that is "reasonable" before the deadline, because someone may only be nominated a few days before the deadline. The deadline is the deadline. The High Court already said they should use it. Keay had taken all reasonable steps, as the other Labor MPs had done, and it was simply up to the UK to send a reply letter. For Keay it arrived 9 days after the election, before Parliament resumed. That was approximately 40 days after she did the paperwork. For Kate Gallagher it was 118 days. That isn't in their control, and doesn't effect the fact they had both taken "All reasonable steps" well prior to the deadline.

From ABC Fact Check (where that ABC journo could do his "research"):

The key is the date of nomination. All reasonable steps to renounce other citizenship have to be taken by that date.
...All reasonable steps have to be taken under the relevant foreign law — it is not enough to make a "reasonable effort".

I'm not familiar with the problems with the Liberal MPs. But it did seem odd that documentation wasn't provided by the deadline and only came out as journos or politicians asked. It's not a great process.

 

[AM]

Feeney may be dumped if there is a by-election

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-polit...p-david-feeney-in-batman-20171206-gzzrn9.html

What is more remarkable about Feeney's 'oversight' is that his partner is Liberty Sanger a principal with a leading law firm and no naive participant in the political process.

Feeney losing his pre-selection would be a net gain for Labor.

 

[Ratts of Tobruk]

What is more remarkable about Feeney's 'oversight' is that his partner is Liberty Sanger a principal with a leading law firm and no naive participant in the political process.

Feeney losing his pre-selection would be a net gain for Labor.

Surely he just never did it? Wouldn't you be able to get documentation sent from the UK otherwise? Or is he claiming there will be a delay in that happening? If he did do it, then it's kinda believable you could lose the letter. It's been a long time and who knows which house he has it in?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

Surely he just never did it? Wouldn't you be able to get documentation sent from the UK otherwise? Or is he claiming there will be a delay in that happening? If he did do it, then it's kinda believable you could lose the letter. It's been a long time and who knows which house he has it in?

The problem seems to be that they might not keep records for that long. Which is why Feeney is trying to locate his own copy.

I find it more believable that he could lose the letter than that he did not do the UK one at the same time as the Irish one, if he wasn't going to bother he wouldn't have bothered with the more questionable Irish one.

 

[Ice-Wolf]

As Feeney was born in Australia and citizenship is via his father the Brits wouldn't have any records for him other than the renunciation papers unless his father registered him with UK gov. Hell given his father was from Northern Ireland the Home Office may not even have records on hand (in London) of him.

 

[Satan]

Surely he just never did it? Wouldn't you be able to get documentation sent from the UK otherwise? Or is he claiming there will be a delay in that happening? If he did do it, then it's kinda believable you could lose the letter. It's been a long time and who knows which house he has it in?

Parliament?

 

[Dry Rot]

I find it bizarre that Frydenberg is untouchable in all this. Piss weeak view by Plibersek.

 

[Northalives]

I hope people realise that what Turnbull and the LNP Government has done by only referring ALP members to the High Court is an outrageous act tantamount to what a tin pot dictator would do? In dictatorships, there is one law for some people and another for others. Why are the ALP members being referred to the High Court and not members of the LNP?

 

[Ice-Wolf]

I find it bizarre that Frydenberg is untouchable in all this. Piss weeak view by Plibersek.

Dryfus has gone him.

 

[TimmeT]

Dryfus has gone him.

He's the only one who can get away with it.

 

[LeverPuller]

I find it bizarre that Frydenberg is untouchable in all this. Piss weeak view by Plibersek.

Jewish Labor MPs not happy about it. Dont blame them. Targeting Holocaust survivors?

For Frydenberg's old man to be cleared by Australian authorities as stateless at the time only to get picked up on a technicality seventy years later and forcing every Jew to revisit the Holocaust...it would be horrendously poor.