Dear Shadow Minister,

I am aware that German citizenship is automatically
lost when a person acquires the citizenship of another
country - however this is the problem with Senator
Eric Abetz. Why the renunciation only in 2010?
Why did he not have it in 1994 when he first entered
Parliament? Tony Abbott has documentation in writing to
prove that he renounced his British citizenship PRIOR
to his entering Parliament, why does Mr Abetz have his
sixteen years after his entry into Parliament?

And should he also have to repay the money he's gained
over all those years - like some here are suggesting for
Ludlum and Waters to do?

We need some rational here don't you think?
What's good for some should also be good for others.
As leoj pointed out - we do need some balance here don't we?
And not just because some belong to the Greens whilst the
other is a member of the Liberal Party - so its OK to brush
that under the rug.

Foxy,

Pleased that you agree that Ludlam and Waters should be required to recompense the Taxpayer for losses they are responsible for.

No doubt too where the Greens are concerned there could be a wealthy overseas benefactor who would oblige by picking up the tab.

For starters, Larissa Waters' case there is that swish Hipster electorate office that the media asked her about but were given the dust-off at the time. This one,

"Queensland Greens Senator Larissa Waters spent $414,000 on fitout for Paddington office
CourierMail
April 19, 2014

GREENS Senator Larissa Waters spent a whopping $414,000 to fit out her trendy Paddington office – more than any of her Queensland political colleagues at the time.

The office, on the top floor of a pristine-condition, split-level building on Given Tce, includes a rooftop patio with timber outdoor furniture and artificial turf.
..
Australian Pensioner and Superannuants League Queensland state secretary Raymond Ferguson said: “They need to look at all their lurks and perks. It’s outrageous.
“There are not enough checks and balances and guidelines. Politicians more than ever should have to account for their actions and the way they spend taxpayer money.” [The Courier Mail Apr19,2014]

Hi Foxy, the motivation that drives some to demand payback is political, I would expect nothing less. If on one hand a return of "wages" is demanded. Then, on the other hand could you not also reasonably argue that compensation be paid for ones contribution to the parliament over the same time, one countering the other. If natural justice is to occur then any prosecution for wrong doing should be in a court of law, not something carried out by ones political enemies within. For example; if you defraud your employer you can be prosecuted for the fraud, but not for remuneration paid during the time when fraud was taking place.

Something I could not let pass;

"At least now the Senate wont have to put up with Larissa making an exhibition out of feeding her baby in the workplace."

How the perverted religious mind sees something "dirty" in something so natural is beyond me. Another run through by runner

Dear Paul,

This entire business is political.

How many of our past Prime Ministers had dual
citizenships I wonder? On the law of averages
I very much doubt if each and everyone who had
been born elsewhere even thought of renunciation
back in those days.

Also as was pointed out in
an earlier link - here we are having two decent
politicians resigning over dual citizenships
which they were not even aware of - due to an
archaic and irrelevant law to Modern Australia
when this country's Head of State just happens to
be British! How on earth can we swallow that?

What's good for the goose (you know the rest)...

leoj,

Wrong again.

Nobody in their right mind would approve of any
politician having to pay back money for being
employed, working hard, and doing a good job
during their term in office -
simply because during that time they happened to
unknowingly have dual citizenship.

So stop stirring.

I suppose that a fitting reply to a Green who claims that the public concerns over the wastage of public funds by the disgraced Greens Senators is only 'political' and gives questionable employment advice, would be to suggest that the $6 per hour paid by the Greens leader to his live-in Nanny (while failing to declare his farm) would be more than sufficient for those unqualified senators.

However as the slack Greens would be aware, politicians can always be relied upon to protect their own kind. So it is unlikely that any pay or conditions received would be forfeited.

However, parliamentary superannuation is different. That is where a refund of contributions without interest would be more than generous.

Then there is the question of what contribution should be made by them and their Party to the costs of those electorate offices. Which in the case of Ms Larissa Waters was always over-generous, self-indulgent and as The Courier Mail was to find, completely over the top.

The issue remains,
"Where a member of the public is concerned, ignorance is no excuse. There should be no difference between the 'big knobs' of society, in this case the very well paid and well-connected Senators and an ordinary member of the public. But obviously there is, as is already apparent from the special pleading and emotional rhetoric in the media and from their political mates. That is favouritism."

Foxy,

Your post is logically deficient. while you acknowledge that Abetz taking Australian citizenship (prior to 1994) means that he loses German citizenship, and thus is eligible prior to 1994, and thus not liable to pay back any sum of money.

In 2010 when he was preparing for the election, he was challenged in the high court by John Hawkins. While JH had no evidence whatsoever, the high court case would not only cost both parties a lot of money but would complicate the election. Popping into the German consulate and renouncing any claim to German citizenship resolved the issue instantly, and left JH with the bill for legal costs.

And the answer to your next question is that one does not have to have German citizenship to renounce it.

Paul,

According to the law, the state can demand the wages and costs of staff to be paid back. The main reason that payment hasn't been demanded from Bob Day is that the reason the senator resigned was that he was bankrupt, and suing anyone that is bankrupt is an exercise in futility.