Yes is does happen from time to time it's called Tea Money, Take belchin joe from QLD for a start the best man that ever breathed oxygen, that is what the queenslanders would say. So joe thought it was ok to tickle the till. That is what happens when you put foxes in charge of ckook houses.

Am I the only one here who can see how this could be an innocent mistake? They did subsequently change the rules so people with NZ citizenship would lose it if they became Australian citizens. He was obviously unaware that this hadn't been the case when he became an Australian.

It's certainly a more likely explanation than criminal intent.

Ludlum is reputed to have been 'hang 'em high' and entirely without empathy and compassion where other members of parliament who might have transgressed rules, even innocently, were concerned. Malcolm Turnbull drew attention to that in the news report linked to earlier.

Further, it is not as though the subject of birthplace alone, above and beyond dual citizenship, as a reason to doubt or even disqualify hasn't been used in the Parliament and recently, to sledge opponents. Abbott's 'Anglophilia'. How shocking!(sic) And those who sledged him dismissed any charge of Anglophobia, while boasting their own multiculturalism. A matter of birthplace, not dual citizenship. Abbott had taken action on the latter.

Simply to say that the political 'Overlords' in Canberra cannot choose what laws they will obey, or be excused for their claimed ignorance, while the public, the 'punters' (sic), are daily being held to account and are forced to repay Centrelink for errors that are not always of their own making or intent. Or for another example, wages overpayments by Qld's State Health's complicated payroll system that was assured by a global IT contractor and by Health's own highly paid executive.

If politicians are unhappy with a law, they have the power to change it. In this case by a referendum.

But where politicians, aspiring ones too, have so much access to simple 'Plain English' guides and free advice, where application forms are simple and blunt and where they and their colleagues might be criticising others over similar issues, it is very difficult indeed to regard Ludlum's protestations of 'oversight' as anything but negligent casualness and on the pub measure, feigned, B.S.

I don't doubt that politicians will protect one another and a rationalistion not available to erring members of the public will excuse Ludlum from having to repay any moneys and entitlements received to date.

I believe that the credibility of the federal Parliament will again suffer. Even more so if Ludlum isn't immediately refunded his contributions to Parliamentary superannuation and instead is allowed to retain and claim those 'Golden Handshake' benefits.

Graeme of Malvern,

I think your stats are incorrect, firstly because there are 226 MPs in Canberra, not 535. Perhaps you are including the states as well? Secondly, 84 arrested for drunken driving this year with nothing in the papers?

Aidan,

The requirement not to have the citizenship of another country is well known and is made clear to prospective MPs. Also well known is that NZ citizenship is granted automatically at birth and is only lost by it being renounced by the holder.

Secondly, a freedom of information request was sent to Scott Dumdum specifically to determine his NZ citizenship, which was rejected. So Scott Numbnuts cannot claim to know that it wasn't an issue.

So the probability of it being a mistake is remote and would require a monumental level of incompetence.

Shadow,

"The requirement not to have the citizenship of another country is well known and is made clear to prospective MPs."
Agreed.

"Also well known is that NZ citizenship is granted automatically at birth and is only lost by it being renounced by the holder."
I disagree. AIUI that's not even the current situation, and it's now impossible to gain dual Australia/NZ citizenship.

"Secondly, a freedom of information request was sent to Scott Dumdum specifically to determine his NZ citizenship, which was rejected. So Scott Numbnuts cannot claim to know that it wasn't an issue."
Wasn't there a similar FOI request, also rejected, pertaining to Tony Abbott's citizenship? Do you think that was really an issue?

There's an interesting article by Graham Richardson
in The Australian (I can hear the rants, accusations,
insults, ad hominems, and other childish tactics
coming at me) but bear with me - this is
for those who are able to
maintain a balance in their viewpoint to consider the facts
and put politics to one side.

I guess that you could say that Ludlum has only himself to
blame.

You could - but I won't.

Richardson points out - it's one hell of a penalty to
pay for not checking on your relationship with a nation you
left at 3 years of age and never knew.

Obviously there is the argument that the Constitution is
merely trying to ensure that the only allegiance our
parliamentarians have is to Australia but again as Richardson
tells us - New Zealand is not Libya, Syria, Somalia, Russia or
China.

He also reminds us of the real affinity between New Zealand and
Australia which is perfectly encapsulated in our joint ANZAC
tradition.

In this country you don't have to be born in Australia to
become our Prime Minister as they do in the United States
to become President.
However it seems logical as Richardson tells us that if you
were born next door in New Zealand and left when you were three
years old - there should be room for you in our Parliament.

Ludlum has lived here for half a century without causing a fuss.
And I agree with Richardson that instead of booting him out
let's hold a Referendum, change the Constitution and choose
another to boot out. And yes, we all know who that would be.
He was born in London and came to this country when he was three
years of age. I wonder where his loyalty lies. (Knight and Dames,
and Prince Philip - spring to mind).