The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > The dual citizenship scandal/imbroglio/fiasco > Comments

The dual citizenship scandal/imbroglio/fiasco : Comments

By Don Aitkin, published 24/11/2017

It is surely worrying that another country can apparently determine whether or not one of our citizens is eligible to stand for our national parliament.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All
Allan,

I have not abused you. You might want me to abuse you, but I haven't and I will not. You just don't like people disagreeing with you.

Tell me. Just how does the “majority” get a referendum up? Has it ever been done before? You seem to be confusing Australia with Switzerland, where they have Citizen Initiated Referenda, and a certain number of people can petition the government for a referendum. It simply is not like that here. Australian politicians will not permit that to happen because it's far too dangerous for them.

Even the politicians do not want the expense of a referendum when there is no call nor need for one. All that is necessary is for political candidates in future to check the Constitution and ensure that they can legally stand for parliament. And, of course, nobody trusts politicians enough to help them meddle with the Constitution – except, perhaps, you. That's why most referendums fail. And, anyone wanting to go into politics in the future will have by now got the message. So,there is no problem to be fixed.

I am glad that you have finally grasped the fact that that the Constitution can only be changed by a referendum achieving a positive vote by a majority of voters in a majority of states. 99.9% of Australians already knew that.

You can download the Australian Constitution free if you want to improve your knowledge, and there a loads of books about the Constitution written in a way that the layperson can understand.
Posted by ttbn, Saturday, 25 November 2017 11:21:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
minotaur
It was the Aust Govt which abused the intent of the Constitution when changing the definition of citizenship. It could easily have written that for the purpose of s44 those people are able to be elected. That would fit the intent of the Fed Constitution as well as the interests of th Crown.
Posted by nicknamenick, Saturday, 25 November 2017 11:59:31 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
nnn...which change to the citizenship act are you referring to? There have been a few...or did you now know that? And how do you know what the intent of the Constitution is?
Posted by minotaur, Sunday, 26 November 2017 12:21:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
minotaur
You replied to Alan who said "And therefore folks born in any part of the non Australian commonwealth, even though they had the very same head of state, went from being eligible in 87 to ineligible in 88!"
You also wrote of " the intent of the Constitution."

MP's can
1) write a sensible citizenship act
2) comply with the Constit. and write a letter to
Pom House
Home Office
c/- HM Elizabeth and Charlie.
Posted by nicknamenick, Sunday, 26 November 2017 12:48:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Without question, a decent MAJORITY would carry the day in any referendum. 61-62 % would likely take every state, with something like 17 seats voting for the no case! The entire length and breadth of the country!

I'd bet my house if a properly worded question, like is it right and proper for an Australian born of a lest one Australian parent, who can trace at least one ancestor to the first or second fleet!

Be made ineligible for public office in any Australian parliament by the decisions of any, repeat any foreign parliament. Including a British parliament!?

Or for that matter, any new Australian who has served in our, or shoulder to shoulder, allied armed forces, and has taken a sacred oath of Allegiance to us and ours; and no other!?

Britain, since entering the EU, has since 88, treated all Australians/Anzacs as aliens with less rights than former common enemies!

Anything other than a resounding yes, offends the fair go principle, now part and deep in the heart, of the Aussie/Anzac ethos!
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Monday, 27 November 2017 12:15:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan
We only have convict MPs because of Poms . And only spaeka da Englis here due to German George III ( his grandpa couldn't). There are no MPs at all as we have seen this year in Canberra.

" Section 44(i) of the Australian Constitution says that a person is incapable of being elected , if they are "entitled to the rights or privileges of a citizen of a foreign power".-- you just have to be entitled to those rights and privileges.
,. under recent and little-noticed changes to New Zealand law, Any Australian citizen is entitled to live, study and work there.
, .subject to New Zealand law, working or studying. And there's no doubt that New Zealand is a "foreign power" -- you only have to watch the All Blacks do the haka to realise that.

New Zealand law has made every Australian citizen incapable of being elected to, or serving in, the Australian Parliament. It's not just Barnaby Joyce: It's everyone!"_ R Angyal , barrister .

As there is no parliament then the Gov Gen and the Greens must quickly get the acts together.
Posted by nicknamenick, Monday, 27 November 2017 1:19:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy