Not only does leoj want to vindictively apply the law to the errant pair. Which is fair enough, he wants to go beyond that, demanding that if they were to become legally entitled to re-enter the Senate they be barred from doing so. The leoj types would much rather see the Reichstag populated with those of his particular political persuasion than a couple of errant Greens, how they get there leoj would not much care.

Foxy,

Australian citizenship is not taken lightly. If as an Australian citizen over 18, one takes the citizenship of another country, one automatically loses one's Aus citizenship, so the requirement to relinquish dual citizenship in order sit in the highest position of representation of Australia is far from unreasonable or onerous for the 50 odd people to which it applies.

Having dual citizenship is no barrier to becoming an MP, in spite of what Grant Wyeth claims, and an Australian MP is expected to put the interests of Australia firmly before that of any other country.

There are huge chunks of the constitution that are vestigial, that have a vastly greater negative effect than section 44i, such as the entire unrepresentative senate whose only function is to block the decisions of the lower house.

Paul,

Please don't misquote people. I can't find a single instance where Leoj has called for the greens senators to be barred from re entry.

He does make a good point in that the lefties on this thread are perfectly happy to apply section 44 of the Constitution to Bob day and Paul you almost wet yourself with excitement in another post at a labor challenge to a lib MP on the same section, and both green numbnuts were far from charitable, so seeing the chickens coming home to roost for the sanctimonious duo does give us the right to chuckle.

Leoj also makes a good point, LW is a lawyer with a decade of practice, and a blunder of this magnitude certainly casts doubt on her competence. Scott Numbnuts, however, has a fluffy degree and should be applauded if he can walk and chew gum at the same time.

I found the surprise that Scott Ludlum and Larissa Waters expressed, when they realised they were dual citizens, a little hard to swallow at first. To me, if one was born in another country, it was just common sense that one remained a citizen of that country until they renounced their citizenship.

It appears, however, that this isn’t common sense to everyone. I’ve now got some of my uncles and aunts on Facebook expressing surprise at the realisation that they, too, are dual citizens. Until these two incidents, they had all assumed that they lost their British and Finnish citizenships when they got their Australian citizenship.

In hindsight, I suppose that it was only common sense to me because my father finally got his Australian citizenship in the ‘90s, after having lived here for 25 years, and I remember him telling me that he deliberately renounced his British citizenship at the same time because he hated the place. He was so proud of himself.

AJ,
My daughter-in-law said the same thing. She took out Australian citizenship in the 1990's. She assumed it negated her NZ citizenship with the ceremony on OZ day. speech welcoming all the new Aussie citizens, and a nice printed certificate.
I should have known, she still barracks for the All Blacks! And gives me heaps when they kick Aussie ass.

Foxy said;
Wyeth stated that the premise behind Article 44 (i)
of the Constitution came from an era where pompous
ideas about "national loyalty" were predominant.

Foxy we are in a time when our whole cultural identity, our legal
system and eventually our homeland is under attack.
Right now our "national loyalty" is very much needed.

It is time to stand up and be counted or submit.