I was under the assumption that the consiitution states (section 34 i)that a member must be 21 years or older? Am I wrong

Don't know good point. Will go looking now. Do you have a specific clause in mind?

Either way his election is a prime example of the unthinking QLD vote at this election. They may well have had much to be angry about but to elect a child to go to represent them in Canberra is questionable. What hope does this chid have of being reelected?

Well spotted wellie.

Australian Constitution - Section 34 - Qualifications of members

Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the qualifications of a member of the House of Representatives shall be as follows:-

(i.) He must be of the full age of twenty-one years, and must be an elector entitled to vote at the election of members of the House of Representatives, or a person qualifies to become such elector, and must have been for three years at the least a resident within the limits of the Commonwealth as existing at the time when he was chosen:

(ii.) He must be a subject of the Queen, either natural-born or for at least five years naturalized under a law of the United Kingdom, or of a Colony which has become or becomes a State, or of the Commonwealth, or of a State.

I smell a by-election. At least he bats for Abbotts team otherwise there might be a slush fund ready to send him to jail for fraud.

"Until the Parliament otherwise provides"

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s163.html
--
COMMONWEALTH ELECTORAL ACT 1918 - SECT 163
Qualifications for nomination [see Note 6]

(1) A person who:

(a) has reached the age of 18 years;

(b) is an Australian citizen; and

(c) is either:

(i) an elector entitled to vote at a House of Representatives election; or

(ii) a person qualified to become such an elector;

is qualified to be elected as a Senator or a member of the House of Representatives.

(2) A person is not entitled to be nominated for election as a Senator or a member of the House of Representatives unless the person is qualified under subsection (1).

--

Time will tell how well he goes but I'm not convinced that others who have spent their lives in trade union roles or as lawyers have a better understanding of the real world.

R0bert

Bugsy,
I believe it also says,

s 34 of the Constitution says in part:
"Until the Parliament otherwise provides, the qualifications of a member of the House of Representatives shall be as follows:
"(i.) He must be of the full age of twenty-one years..."

Parliament did otherwise provide in s 163 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, which reads in part:
"A person who: (a) has reached the age of 18 years."

Looking at this i would imagine it will be ok.

Oh, come now, nairbe.

>>They may well have had much to be angry about but to elect a child to go to represent them in Canberra is questionable<<

I distinctly recall that at the age of twenty I knew absolutely everything there was to know.

Women. Politics. How to balance twin carburettors.

Everything.

It's hard to judge someone simply by their
age. Boys will be boys (and so will a lot
of middle-aged men). Just joking.

Seriously though, this young man obviously
has the confidence of his community
and who knows what he can do?
I remember going for a job interview where
the young man interviewing me was just a kid,
or so I thought. It turned out to be the
toughest interview I've ever encountered,
and taught me a great deal. In the end
I was so impressed that I envied the organisation
that had hired him. He would have been an asset to
any employer.

Heh. As I've said before, I wouldn't vote for a 20 year old because I don't think anyone that age and limited life experience could adequately represent me in Parliament. However, his electorate clearly thought otherwise, so he either impressed them incredibly with his personal talents or he benefited from a very well-run campaign and an underperforming ALP incumbent. Whatever, that's certainly democracy and good luck to him.

I suspect he'll be doing a lot of growing up in the next three years. As GrahamY said in another thread, if the electorate got it wrong in electing young Wyatt, they'll undoubtedly correct the situation at the next election.

You could look at it another way - the House of Reps has lost Wilson Tuckey and gained Wyatt Roy. It's hard to imagine that Roy could be any worse than Tuckey :)

The last town I lived in has a very young mayor (he is something like 25yo now and in his second term as mayor I think). He was elected a councillor at the age of 18 or 19. Yes he has a somewhat limited life experience, but is one of those people who is not afraid to ask advice and not afraid to act on his own judgement of it. And its not a back-blocks town but a reasonably large one that also has a very fine line between development and risk to the long-term local ecology and economy (think BHP vs the farmers).

Most people of a certain age will act a certain way, but dont judge one by the actions of everyone else. Young Wyatt will probably be a more enthusisastic and optimistic participant and representative than many twice his age, burdened by cynicism. Good luck to him - he will be judged on his merits by the people that put him there in the first place.

I was/am concerned about the legal prospect of a person under the age of 21, but there seems there may be an option with the other section, As far as C.J.Morgan goes, if you can point out any person in parliament that has been worth voting for, you have less pride in who is going to make any more laws to send us further into recession than the mobs we have had over the last 20 years or more, you never know, he might just motivate some of those dodgy older hasbeens. As far as I am concerned, you could cut their salary by 80%, and they would still be well paid. He wouldn't need to be very good to be better than the last two treasurers, that's for sure, they couldn't keep away from a recession, could they?

IT'll be interesting to see how he goes. This topic has been all over Twitter since the "election" and haven't seen anyone successfully dispute his legitimacy to be in his position. Chances are they figured that stuff before he could register to run.

Seems like an articulate young fella - the most articulate on "election night" - and 'worldly' and wisdom don't necessarily go hand in hand.

[Deleted for abuse].

Pericles,
My deepest apologies, remiss of me to not recall how much i have forgotten.
Thanks for reminding me(or not) how many years it has been.

Given that some have said they wouldn't vote for a 20 yr old, it is reasonable to ask what they believe the minimum age should be and why.

The parliament should represent all Australians regardless of age, however both youth and seniors regularly claim that their views are not listened to and they are poorly represented.

Doubtless this 20yr old might even that score a little and his presence in the house is a reminder to other parliamentary members that youth exists. He is also a reminder to youth that their interests might not always be forgotten, helping to ensure that more youth remain engaged with the political process.

It is interesting though that while young women have been lauded for entering parliament, this young fellow's success is continuing to attract criticism. Why is it so?

Pericles, if you can still balance twin carbs, move to the USA immediately.

I am advised by the people on forums dealing with LESCs, [little English sports cars], that they are having trouble, in many areas, finding anyone who knows what a carburettor is let alone what to do when someone has put 2 on the same car.

Much money to be made, while practicing a truly humanitarian & worth while service to the more mature men of the USA.

I'd do it myself, but Examinator has convinced me, that I'm too old & decrepit for such an adventure.

The legal age of majority used to be 21. However, it is now 18. At this age a person has full rights as an adult.

A similar situation came up when they talked about raising the drinking age to 21, it simply could not be enforced.

(OT) Thanks for the advice, Hasbeen.

>>Pericles, if you can still balance twin carbs, move to the USA immediately.<<

I can also code in Assembler.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Basic_assembly_language

Perhaps I could combine the two somehow, maybe tracking a BALR instruction using a piece of rubber tubing...

I don’t think that life experience is very important at all.

How many members of parliament have life experience in the anything more than one or two areas amongst the many that they would have to deal with in their political lives, or in the methodology of the job? Not a lot, I would think.

The most important things are intelligence, good articulation and the ability and willingness to quickly learn.

Oh, and a set of basic principles that are in the right ball park - both personal principles and those of the party to which the MP belongs.

Having perused Wyatt Roy’s website, it is this last point that is of the most concern to me, as I critiqued in the previous general thread about him: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=3807#93459

ha ha ha Pericles, that's pure gold. It sounds like you knew nearly as much as I did at that age, but I'd say I would have been a much more experienced driver...

Being a 20 year old should be no barrier, neither should being a 70 year old. This is a good example of people seeing an opportunity to be prejudiced, without looking like a racist/sexist/homophobe etc.
Maybe we are just a bit jealous that this young man is doing well, when at the same age we might have been more interested in sport and girls.

Good on him. We have a 19 y/o on council. When young people pull off something different, they are classed as adult or in this case by some, as a child, i would say that is a case of sour grapes.

If he knows how to do as he's told and talk publicly in an eloquently circumspect manner so that he articulates nonsense intelligibly, then he'll be Prime Minister by 29.