That is certainly the question now in Australia as four Senators have been forced to declare dual citizenship and thus ineligibility

Each circumstance is bizzairre such as arrival as infants, being nominated for citizenship by your parent as an adult or the latest revelation that he revoked his citizenship but it wasn't acknowledged until after the election

Senator Malcolm Roberts dual citizenship in question (http://www.news.com.au/finance/work/leaders/one-nation-senator-malcolm-roberts-engulfed-in-dual-citizenship-saga/news-story/316dc64b26b28f64e3999eaba49e3e40)

The government has passed some radical changes with the help of these now deposed senators and the whole structure of the next legislative session hangs in the balance, but the more interesting is that these erstwhile citizens are members of minor parties, no one in the major parties has owned up yet

Ah, Constitutions, they are hard to get around but apparently not as hard as some think


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


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 qualified 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 is chosen;
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.


The qualifications of a Senator shall be the same as those of members of the House of Representatives


A change to qualifications can be decided by the parliament, not by plebicite as some think, and does this mean a citizen of the UK or NZ is eligible, a somewhat vague clause, but the matter has since been resolved by many changes to citizenship, meaning no citizen of another country can hold a seat in federal parliament unless they have made all reasonable efforts to renounce citizenship of another country.

How do you renounce a citizenship you didn't know you had, a true dilema

guess your nation does not want Manchurian candidates .

Oh we have some chinese politicians, some english politicians, some kiwi politicians, some italian politicians, etc, australians all, we even have some politicians who are in the pocket of the chinese, our laws are designed in the days of terrorists to keep such allegiences to a minimum

Manchurian Candidate


NOUN

A person who is (or is believed to be) brainwashed into becoming a subversive agent, especially an assassin.



Origin1970s; earliest use found in The National Review. Popularized by the 1962 film The Manchurian Candidate, adapted from the 1959 novel of the same name by Richard Condon.

yes I wasn't speaking specifically of the nationality of the politician. Here the Constitution guards against a President with possible conflicts due to dual national loyalties .


yes I wasn't speaking specifically of the nationality of the politician. Here the Constitution guards against a President with possible conflicts due to dual national loyalties .

yes I wasn't speaking specifically of the nationality of the politician. Here the Constitution guards against a President with possible conflicts due to dual national loyalties .
.

Nor was I necessarily however recent events lead both ways
Labor reeling after Senate candidates China links find $120k for the party (http://www.news.com.au/national/politics/labor-reeling-after-senate-candidates-china-links-find-120k-for-the-party/news-story/af3daad4edb16d6dc34aac92664106ee)

Destyari and Robb are particular cases in point and might fit smoothy's definition. Our Constitution is also explicit at the federal level although there are some vagarities regarding the point at which dual nationality has been disgarded

This an annus horribilis, will no one rid me of these meddlesome Kiwi, in the latest of this citizenship, non-citizenship saga, Barnaby Joyce, leader of the Country Party, and deputy Prime Minister has been outed as a dual citizen because his father was born in New Zealand. This absolutely ridiculous, that means I have British citizenship automatically because my father was born in Britain, not withstanding that I am a sixth generation Australian. How come no one explained that to me when I was resident in Britain. The Constitution must be changed immediately to remove this disqualification from office of Australian citizens

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-14/politics-live-august-14/8802990

Here we go again, not only is the leader of the Country Party having citizenship problems but his deputy, Fiona Nash has been outed for being a scot. If this goes on the country will become ungovernable and we will have a constitutional crisis

This is a nation of migrants so the possibilities of dual citizenship are endless, but our founding fathers had some rediculous idea our linage had to be pure, an attempt long ago to stop this rot by including the words "or naturalised citizen" wasn't allowed, not that it would have solved the problem of parentage

it may be an outmoded concept . I always thought the reason the American framers put in the provision for 'naturalized citizen ' was because of their hatred of Alexander Hamilton. He among all the framers deserved the chance to become President . But he was excluded because he was born in the Caribbean to a mixed race mom. I understand they were concerned about a'Manchurian Candidate' in the young republic . But in the 21st century ,that could be a provision to revisit .

It seems our Constitution might be outmoded in other ways too, but this is a real problem, legislation was recently lost on a 31-31 vote in the Senate, some Senators having being removed because of dual citizenship, now we are going to have a non binding plebisite, the actions of the government are being taken to the High Court for lack of clear legislation and the balance in the House hangs on the vote of these dual citizens so no legislation which doesn't have bi-partisan support can be introduced

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-18/abolish-the-constitution-and-start-again/8816488

Unbelievable, another Senator, Nick Xenophon, leader of a minor party, is caught up in this debacle of citizenship through parenthood. Xenophon may be a british citizen because his father was born in Cyprus and may have had british citizenship. What I don't get about this nonsense is that at the time of writing the constitution we were all British subjects, but suddenly we are british citizens even though Britain severed its ties. How can the rights of an Australian born person be abrogated by the actions of another country?

you had your chance to go from a constitutional monarchy to a Federal Republic .


you had your chance to go from a constitutional monarchy to a Federal Republic .

The sins of the your founding fathers have come home to roost Clete. Don't you learned people have a way to fix your glitch?

The sins of the your founding fathers have come home to roost Clete. Don't you learned people have a way to fix your glitch?

Oh yes Tal, it is called a constitutional referendum, but the problem is who will frame the question and the terms in a parliament where the "majority" is in the hands of those who have been outed in this crisis. In a recent vote the Senate was divided 31-31 but now two of those votes are in doubt, and the one seat majority in the House rests with another whose vote is in doubt. We are then forced into bi-partisanism, an oft touted but rarely seen display of anything other than self interest

you had your chance to go from a constitutional monarchy to a Federal Republic .



and it will come again, but will it rest on a rewrite of this archaic document written with ideas borrowed from the United States or will our republic have a president appointed by the politicians, some eminent person. If the people decide we can have a republic, the last time the question was put they voted against it and we did not have a revolt. Very soon we will have an opportunity to gage the atmosphere for change when the question of same sex marriage is put to the people, I suspect our conservative values will be on show

Oh yes Tal, it is called a constitutional referendum, but the problem is who will frame the question and the terms in a parliament where the "majority" is in the hands of those who have been outed in this crisis. In a recent vote the Senate was divided 31-31 but now two of those votes are in doubt, and the one seat majority in the House rests with another whose vote is in doubt. We are then forced into bi-partisanism, an oft touted but rarely seen display of anything other than self interest

I guess your governing system is imperfect, and needs maintenance, and tweaking every now and then huh? I feel YA!

I guess your governing system is imperfect, and needs maintenance, and tweaking every now and then huh? I feel YA!

Yes, what was thought to be good two centuries, or, even one century ago, fails to embrace the realities of today. From my observation all governing systems are imperfect, but some work better than others. Making the leaders answerable to the parliament as ours does serves the purpose of moderation and ensuring decisions are common sense for the most part. Leaders cannot get away with fiat and whim without it being brought to debate very quickly, but attitudes have changed a great deal, and I think two world wars and the continuing threat of a third requires more that lip service to a founding document. It requires the over arching principles to be reinforced and if necessary, changed.

We must get away from this trial by media approach and get back to allowing those who govern to do so without corruption

Thankfully our forefathers had the vision to include mechanisms to amend the Constitution. Only one of them has been utilized . It's time to consider the other .

Thankfully our forefathers had the vision to include mechanisms to amend the Constitution. Only one of them has been utilized . It's time to consider the other .

Yes us too, but amending our founding document has proven to be very difficult in the past, we have been debating forever on how to include recognition of indigenous persons without opening the floodgates for compensation claims and some sort of star chamber where they direct policy

Give them a seat at the table. Naw, you could NEVER do that because you would have to listen to their concerns. Only a racist could think that a seat or two according to population would lead to a minority directing policy. I guess you will have to keep suppressing them until you find that solution, that will keep suppressing them.

You can stop wasting your time "debating" because the present system works just fine doesn't it? The problem really is how to get MORE for you and less for them. Be easy if they would just bend a knee to your dominance and do as they were told. That would solve your problem wouldn't it?

We are alike in our racists democracies.

Give them a seat at the table. Naw, you could NEVER do that because you would have to listen to their concerns. Only a racist could think that a seat or two according to population would lead to a minority directing policy. I guess you will have to keep suppressing them until you find that solution, that will keep suppressing them.

You can stop wasting your time "debating" because the present system works just fine doesn't it? The problem really is how to get MORE for you and less for them. Be easy if they would just bend a knee to your dominance and do as they were told. That would solve your problem wouldn't it?

We are alike in our racists democracies.

I think you are racist Tal, they are not excluded from the electoral process and have Senators and Representatives, but reserved seating is something else, so is the suggestion of a third chamber, a sort of native House of Lords as might operate in that failed nation Fiji. We do use proportional representation in our voting system and it elects the Senate and there are a number of minor parties which makes governing difficult. I notice that your founding fathers never saw the need to include your indigenous population in this way, you saw war and extermination as a much more effective measure even in regard to those who you had treaties with and were peaceful

As to the present system working fine, it works about as fine as yours, but we do seem to have the ability to pass important legislation from time to time. The present debacle is the result of using a constitutional mechanism to resolve deadlocks

Yeah we are barbarian still, despite the suits and cognac. We can pass stuff when its important, sometimes. I blame it on the cognac though, not the constitution. On second thought it's probably the politicians who drink the cognac.

What do you guys drink?

What do you guys drink?

Well, myself, I don't mind Scots Whisky, but the general populace enjoys Beer, Wine, Vodka, almost anything. Can't really say what the pollys drink, probably too much chardonny

In a further development Bill Shorten , leader of the Labor Party and the opposition, was questioned by Tony Jones on the Q&A programme about his citizenship status after he claimed he had renounced British citizenship in 2006. It seems we are going to have to question all these 10 pound poms and their children who have made it into parliament

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/liberal-mp-ann-sudmalis-attempts-to-dismiss-new-questions-over-dual-citizenship-20170821-gy15xu.html

We just went through a "birther" phase here Clete when Barrack Obama was elected president and his place of birth questioned mostly by Donald Trumpwhomade a huge stink about it. I bet that's where your genius politicians got the idea from to challenge their opponents.

It's a form of "papers please" used for ILLEGAL immigrants. Seem to work better in your country than it did in mine.

BUMMER!

We just went through a "birther" phase here Clete when Barrack Obama was elected president and his place of birth questioned mostly by Donald Trumpwhomade a huge stink about it. I bet that's where your genius politicians got the idea from to challenge their opponents.

It's a form of "papers please" used for ILLEGAL immigrants. Seem to work better in your country than it did in mine.

BUMMER!

No, Tal, our politicians are neither geniuii nor borrowers of this particular idea, it started with some greens politicians, people not noted for their intelligence, realising that they did not comply with the Constitutional requirement of one allegiance. Since that time various other politicians have examined their linage, and its implications, and this has taken on the trappings of comic opera.

I myself am both entitled to first class british citizenship by reason of parentage, my father having left the sceptured isle more than a century ago, and second class british citizenship having being born a british subject in the Commonwealth (empire). My Australian citizenship offers far more, really, especially since it entitles me to reside far from the maddened crown

Like I said... BUMMER!

Like I said... BUMMER!

Yes, well there are more bummers than that, Malcolm is swinging on Donald's coat tales criticising Kim and agreeing to add some token troops to Afghanistan while preparing to ask us what we think about gay marriage in a non binding plebesite. He's hoping the electorate will endorse what he is afraid to put to a vote. Since he had the Shlt kicked out of him in the republic plebesite he is reluctant to do anything the public don't approve of. Personally I'm agin it, and so I expect are at least 60% of the electorate.

This is unbelievable
Derryn Hinch faces Section 44 uncertainty over US social security card - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-30/derryn-hinch-faces-section-44-uncertainty/8857752)

Yet another caught out

They should all be detained pending deportation in a detention camp with the rest of the illegals!

Not quite the understanding of dual citizenship, Tal, there is no criminal offense of sitting in the Parliament without qualification, perhaps there should be, but then, many more might be disqualified on other grounds. Hinch, for example, was incarcerated for Contempt of court, should he be disqualified as a felon

Well here's a new turn, and we are told not to preempt the High Court decision. The X man, Nick Xenophon has announced that after the High Court decision, he will resign from the Senate to seek a seat in the South Australian parliament, South Australian being where all the action is these days. It certainly has produced a crop of ineligible Senators

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-06/analysis-nick-xenophon-gambles-on-another-career-flip/9022354

I don't know what this tells us, he is ineligible to sit in the Senate, or he is having his cake and eating it too, as the rules will mean his party retains the Senate seat and he retains his influence in federal affairs while being a real nuiance in local affairs. I do know he should be sited for contempt for wasting the courts time

The day of reckoning is coming, Friday is the day when we find out who is out, like we have three down already, and the Parliament could turn into more of a farce that it already is, today the government went on a witch hunt to find the illegal dealings of the Leader of the Opposition before he joined the Parliament, a glowing ember with much smoke. Inditement would mean he's out too

You seem to have a process in place for dealing with these unexpected political events despite the drama and hand wringing.

You seem to have a process in place for dealing with these unexpected political events despite the drama and hand wringing.

Yes we have long abandoned the kangaroo court of the Senate Select Committee for the Supreme Court and the legal process of Royal Commission. I think you might have similar processes but ours are less politicised usually. Our Mr Shorten was a union leader and as we have found with past leaders walking that road to power, there are often dealings with union funds that won't stand scrutiny. In the days of Julia Gillard as Prime Minister, the equivalent of your President, she was continually dogged by inquiry into her dealings as a union lawyer, Shorten's dealings have long been open to scrutiny, but have thus far been exposed as shady deals without evidence of outright criminal activity. This leads the Prime Minister to often shout across the dispatch box "would you trust this man" followed by a listing of shady deals

I hope your voters are smarter than ours and can ignore the distraction of personal attacks and get to issues. Drama is fine theater though for the uninformed looney fringe that have plenty of agenda but no facts.

Okay we have a lot more loonies, but that's only because we are much bigger.

The loonies and the crooks are everywhere Tal but our Union movement seems to attract them like honey. These darlings of the left then move on to grace our parliament

Yes they are, but consider, the right wing loonies have always accused the left wing loonies of corrupting the process... and VICE VERSA. Consider also, they both ignore their own lunacy. Its been that way for a long time here, and seems to be a common theme there as well.

Catastrophy

A catastrophic day for the conservative edge

Citizenship Seven: High Court rules Deputy PM Barnaby Joyce ineligible to serve in Parliament - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-27/live-blog-high-court-delivers-judgement-on-citizenship-seven/9085032)

Five of the seven miscreetes are out on their nellies, and the consequences could be huge

The Deputy Prime Minister has got the boot, Senators fall to the right and to the left, vital legislation will be shelved. The Senate isn't as serious an issue as losing the DPM, his loss puts Liberal rule at risk, whereas the Senators will be replaced by candidates from the same party, but decisions will have to be held in abeyance until they take their seats and will there be a penalty such as repaying parliamentary salaries

Tony Windsor will be back to antagonise Barnaby Joyce in the bi-election. This is a bad climate to hold a bi-election

We now have another head pop up Liberal Senator Stephen Parry who is checking if he is a UK citizen. His circumstance is the same as mine, his father migrated from the UK, so he doesn't need to ask, he is a UK citizen, so he shouldn't even been on the election ticket and this means a recount, in fact it means a recount for all the Senators found out. They can't resolve it by resigning and have their places taken by someone from the same party, the votes have to be recounted and in Parry's case this would mean the election of two different Senators from Tasmania, but you can't unseat a siting Senator duly elected, so back to the High Court to have it resolved as to who takes the vacant seat. But I have to ask, some of these dills have been in the parliament for years, and so have sat in multiple parliaments. What does this mean for the validity of legislation passed?

This is further complicated as some unelected candidates took public service jobs after the election and you cannot be elected if you hold an office for profit

Self governance is complicated, but you'll figure it out, and tighten up the rules and regulations, as you adjust to this and future challenges. It's an ongoing battle you know trying to stay viable and credible. Growing pains?

Self governance is complicated, but you'll figure it out, and tighten up the rules and regulations, as you adjust to this and future challenges. It's an ongoing battle you know trying to stay viable and credible. Growing pains?

It isn't about self governance, it is about due diligence, are you qualified to be a candidate or not? It was easy at the time of federation, we were all british subjects and anyone who wasn't wasn't qualified and in good nineteenth century fashion this was vaguely defined in the constitution but in changing circumstance, even a british subject is not qualified. It is very difficult to change the constitution, most attempts have failed because of the convoluted rules associated with doing so. The parliament can't just vote a change into place.

This debacle has come to the point where the amount of revenue defrauded by these unqualifed candidates over the terms they have been seated in parliament is $9,600,000

You don't have to change the constitution to get a legislative fix to your dilemma, do you? Well I guess you have to wait before you get the right legislatures elected that WANT to close those loopholes. That's not easy if the intent is to keep certain people out of your ruling class.

You don't have to change the constitution to get a legislative fix to your dilemma, do you? Well I guess you have to wait before you get the right legislatures elected that WANT to close those loopholes. That's not easy if the intent is to keep certain people out of your ruling class.

You can't legislate contrary to the Constitution, there have been a number of provisions seeking to illluminate section 44, but the provision against dual citizenship remains. The problem is other nations claim citizens even though they may never have lived there though provisions that confer citizenship on children and grand children or provisions that confer citizenship at birth to children of foreign nationals. This is a multicultural nation with many first, second and third generation of migrant background, but becoming a naturalised citizen doesn't demand you repudiate former allegiences.

In this latest case, he should have known and should have outed himself sooner. We are only trying to keep people who may not be 100% committed out of parliament, this is a difficult age with many trade agreements and treaties being made as well as conflicts and it is important that those making decisions are not swayed in their judgement by such allegiences. Our multiculturism was vigoursly pursued in earlier decades by children of migrant families

Another saga begins as Josh Frydenburg is outed as a Hungarian citizen because his mother was made stateless by the nazi Germany. The only sane way this can end is to ensure no Australian born child of an Australian citizen can be conferred citizenship of another country irrespective of the laws of that foreign country. The whole point is, who is in control of our destiny, this nation or some foreign dictate

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-03/minister-josh-frydenberg-faces-possibility-of-dual-citizenship/9113982

Draining the swamp? Or purging the ruling class with a purity test? Make the aborigines' the ruling class since they are the only ones who can be GUARANTEED to be loyal to THEIR country.

The whole idea of whose a loyal immigrant is suspect anyway but I suppose your judiciary knows best.

Draining the swamp? Or purging the ruling class with a purity test? Make the aborigines' the ruling class since they are the only ones who can be GUARANTEED to be loyal to THEIR country.

The whole idea of whose a loyal immigrant is suspect anyway but I suppose your judiciary knows best.

Tal, the aborigines are incapable of handling their own affairs, their method of democracy is that every person should be heard and so nothing gets done, in 60,000 years they never even invented a house. The country they are loyal to is their "country" or tribal lands, which might as well be somewhereelse.

I am sixth generation Tal, there is no other place for me to be even though my father was an immigrant who came as a child, to suggest that I am not totally loyal to my nation is offensive, and to suggest that I might be loyal to a foreign nation is offensive.

I have no doubt this is the same for those outed in this debacle. Like your own constitution, our constitution carries with it thinking that is difficult to constrew in modern circumstances and redefinition is needed

Tal, the aborigines are incapable of handling their own affairs, their method of democracy is that every person should be heard and so nothing gets done, in 60,000 years they never even invented a house. The country they are loyal to is their "country" or tribal lands, which might as well be somewhere else.

Okay so they don't do it the Euro way, so what? You immigrants came conquered and suppressed the natives, and that makes you better? Naw just stronger and more aggressive. Unlike you immigrants who squabble over divided loyalties, and heritages they have none of that. That don't possess the land they lived in it. What need did they have for fine and proper Euro homes?

I am sixth generation Tal, there is no other place for me to be even though my father was an immigrant who came as a child, to suggest that I am not totally loyal to my nation is offensive, and to suggest that I might be loyal to a foreign nation is offensive.

I meant no offense nor implied any, just pointing out what you admit you are, an immigrant and subject to whatever laws the judge says so. I didn't make your silly rules or constitution. Save your offence for the JUDGE.

I have no doubt this is the same for those outed in this debacle. Like your own constitution, our constitution carries with it thinking that is difficult to constrew in modern circumstances and redefinition is needed

And that's why we still STRIVE to define ourselves TODAY, just like you are, so for all the offensive crap you have hurled at MY COUNTRY on this forum, you have proved no better than us...which has been my point all along.

You know Tal, the point is we immigrants of 1822 did no such thing, we had good relations with the locals, large numbers still inhabit the place where we settled today. I'm not suggesting they needed fine homes, but in this climate good shelter is a basic necessity. The aborigines were immigrants of another age, and we did much less to our natives than you did to yours. We did not go into open warfare against them, but there were some misguided individuals who sought to profit by their death. The first Governor was under instructions to have peaceful relations with the natives. You think our aborigines do not squabble among themselves, you are deluded, the reason nothing gets done is they cannot agree, the idea of consensus is not in their culture. I am perfectly happy for them to live in tribal lands if that is what they want, but they want handouts too, sit down money. Most aboriginal deaths were as a result of disease, they were particularly susceptible to the diseases of the eighteenth and early nineteenth century


Your country is in a stalemate, and deliberately so, and the sad part is you want to export this form of government thinking it better. Our form of government has advantages but is hamstrung by nineteenth century thinking just as yours is hamstrung by eighteenth century thinking. My country has been landed in a predicament by that nineteenth century thinking, but we do have a way out, we don't have fixed terms and maybe that is a good thing. When I said I was offended I didn't mean you, I am offended by the nineteenth century clowns who wrote such a provision, limiting the options of a person who can count more Australian ancestors than most aborigine can name and casting aspersions on the loyalty of the children of immigrants

Oh stop taking everything so personally, as your history is the history of all of us, and tracks the same way if not exactly, then very close. I get national pride, got some of that myself, as imperfect and misplaced as it is sometimes. Sometimes though I think in our zeal to settle new lands we forget how we move the NATIVES aside for our own purpose, and what starts as friendly co operation and co habitation turns to SUBJUGATION at expect assimilation as you build what you left and look down your noses at what was here.

At it's core is the very human flaw of justifying your own actions (We called it "manifest destiny) to just take over someone's else's land and call it yours, without the thought of paying them RENT. They would be so wrong to deny you immigration into their lands, and boy you would have been so insulted by that rejection you probably would have invaded by force of arms instead of force of numbers. That's been done too, so don't for a minute try to say how peaceful you came because an invasion and occupation by open arms or bearing arms is still the same outcome isn't it?

You own the new land and the natives are just lazy savages wanting a handout from your generosity! You balk at their unwillingness to assimilate when all they want is to live FREE as they have before you got there. Now you can spin that anyway you want but fact remains that is the human history repeated over, and over again, with the same OUTCOME. Come on Clete, you are not that unique from the rest of humanity, you are just in denial because you rather think you are.

That too is a human trait we all share as well as the lack of empathy for those you pushed aside to further your own agenda. To the point of this post and no offence here but we have been playing the same dirty politics tricks for a very long time, so I understand and have empathy for your predicament. I predict you to will be stagnant until you figure it out, as we did. I only hope you don't suffer a nincompoop like Trump along the way. I also predict many more challenges to YOUR system, so just be cool and deal with it.

Human evolution is seldom swift, smooth, or pretty. It helps if you recognize the stink you smell is your own, and all humans have their own stink, separate and apart but equal in aroma. May as well quit pretending yours is BETTER.

I only hope you don't suffer a nincompoop like Trump along the way. I also predict many more challenges to YOUR system, so just be cool and deal with it.

We have already been through an era of nincompoops, with Rudd and Gillard and their self agrandizement, not that they were the only popularists we have suffered, another was Witlam who was ousted in a coup in 1975.

Oh stop taking everything so personally, as your history is the history of all of us, and tracks the same way if not exactly, then very close. I get national pride, got some of that myself, as imperfect and misplaced as it is sometimes. Sometimes though I think in our zeal to settle new lands we forget how we move the NATIVES aside for our own purpose, and what starts as friendly co operation and co habitation turns to SUBJUGATION at expect assimilation as you build what you left and look down your noses at what was here.

At it's core is the very human flaw of justifying your own actions (We called it "manifest destiny) to just take over someone's else's land and call it yours, without the thought of paying them RENT. They would be so wrong to deny you immigration into their lands, and boy you would have been so insulted by that rejection you probably would have invaded by force of arms instead of force of numbers. That's been done too, so don't for a minute try to say how peaceful you came because an invasion and occupation by open arms or bearing arms is still the same outcome isn't it?

You own the new land and the natives are just lazy savages wanting a handout from your generosity! You balk at their unwillingness to assimilate when all they want is to live FREE as they have before you got there. Now you can spin that anyway you want but fact remains that is the human history repeated over, and over again, with the same OUTCOME. Come on Clete, you are not that unique from the rest of humanity, you are just in denial because you rather think you are.

That too is a human trait we all share as well as the lack of empathy for those you pushed aside to further your own agenda. To the point of this post and no offence here but we have been playing the same dirty politics tricks for a very long time, so I understand and have empathy for your predicament. I predict you to will be stagnant until you figure it out, as we did. I only hope you don't suffer a nincompoop like Trump along the way. I also predict many more challenges to YOUR system, so just be cool and deal with it.

Human evolution is seldom swift, smooth, or pretty. It helps if you recognize the stink you smell is your own, and all humans have their own stink, separate and apart but equal in aroma. May as well quit pretending yours is BETTER.


Well done, tal!

Well the solution is upon us, all members are to declare their status, now I thought they were actually doing this when they nominated but this is to be formal, like filling in an expense report. Our Prime Minister has made what is considered a brave political decision after one more stalwart wants to argue whether he had dual citizenship, and an even braver individual wants a referendum on Constitutional change to permit dual citizenship among parliamentarians, afteral if it is good enough for the rest of us it should be good enough for them

All this drama and so simple a solution? Are you guys bored or something? The Dufus show is playing in your neighborhood. Keep him long as you want.

On a serious note still sounds like a dirty political trick.

All this drama and so simple a solution? Are you guys bored or something? The Dufus show is playing in your neighborhood. Keep him long as you want.

On a serious note still sounds like a dirty political trick.

No he's not in our neighbourhood, he is off annoying Kim again and playing those old tunes, ain't america great, and we are first, you know. No we are not bored, it seems we might have a dufus of our own in the person of Turncoat, he doesn't want to risk his ever shrinking majority on any more of these idiots being found out. He could also think about punitive penalties. Well maybe he's hoping some of the opposition will be caught out, there are a lot of migrant lefty types on that side of the house. You see section 44 isn't really open to interpretation, either you are a dual citizen or you are not, and it is other places that grant that right

48907Another one, outspoken senator Jacqui Lambie is the latest with dual nationality. Does no one follow the rules? Or is expedience the order of the day? The above post is jacqui's response

What I find a nonsense about this is that most are being outed for being citizens of Commonwealth countries with allegiance to the same ultimate head of state

Get yourself to the High Court, this is the advice the PM gave to the latest cross bencher to stick their hand up, apparently Ms. Sharky received notification of revocation after she was elected. The way I read it she should not have been on the ballot paper so this brings a recount and with it probably the loss of the majority in the House

So this is constitutional crisis of someone's making, you can't make this stuff up. Last time we had a constitutional crisis was 1975, and I'm wondering, what does it take for the Governor-General to act this time?

Bill Shorten might have the last laugh after all, and that would bring the budgee smuggler from down under thundering back

or is it

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-10/even-patrick-dodson-is-answering-citizenship-questions/9140026

aboriginal activist Senator Patrick Dobson, eminent person among the indigenous community, may not be as aboriginal as it seems, and would therefore not be eligible to become a member of parliament, or I suspect a member of that third house he is touting.

Do you have a link to the law that makes such an issue of people lineage? I find it incredible that civilized societies can pick who is loyal enough to serve their country. Smacks of the birther movement that Obama went through, and it turned out to be a political tactic. Your situation sounds like a political tactic and shows a disturbing trend in your democracy.

Do you have a link to the law that makes such an issue of people lineage? I find it incredible that civilized societies can pick who is loyal enough to serve their country. Smacks of the birther movement that Obama went through, and it turned out to be a political tactic. Your situation sounds like a political tactic and shows a disturbing trend in your democracy.

44. Any person who -
(i.) Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power: or
(ii.) Is attainted of treason, or has been convicted and is under sentence, or subject to be sentenced, for any offence punishable under the law of the Commonwealth or of a State by imprisonment for one year or longer: or
(iii.) Is an undischarged bankrupt or insolvent: or
(iv.) Holds any office of profit under the Crown, or any pension payable during the pleasure of the Crown out of any of the revenues of the Commonwealth: or
(v.) Has any direct or indirect pecuniary interest in any agreement with the Public Service of the Commonwealth otherwise than as a member and in common with the other members of an incorporated company consisting of more than twenty-five persons:
Shall be incapable of being chosen or of sitting as a senator or a member of the House of Representatives.

Senator Jackie Lambie, a somewhat controversial figure, has revealed she is a UK dual citizen and she has resigned, no doubt to pursue a career in the Tasmanian parliament. Jacqui has been there quite a while, since the Clive Palmer days, and would owe quite a bit if she had to pay it all back

These crossbenchers and single issue candidates have proven to be the ones who are caught out through lack of due diligence and it isn't as though the rules are not plain, Jacqui can be added to the list of recent days, John Alexander, as well as the controversial move by One Nation to sack their replacement Senator as soon as he took the oath of office, I guess he wouldn't roll over and hand the post to the outed Malcolm Roberts. The Liberal Party will now refer other Labor representatives and Senators to the High Court and all Parliamentarians will be required to formally declare their status by December 2

Where can we rent a big tent, the clowns are running out of room?

LOL, we have dumbkoffs, you have clowns. So much for advanced civilization.

Yes it is a sad reflection on western civilisation

The OTHER civilizations ain't looking so good either so go figure.

Might be something to be said for anarchy

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/why-politics-needs-more-bull-and-less-honesty/news-story/f7463f05e153a225fb031da3cefcdcb0

You clowns need to hire lawyers.

Most of our clowns are lawyers

Most of our clowns are lawyers

One of our clowns has just prorogued Parliament. Turncoat knows he hasn't the numbers and with a lower house revolt on the way, he has prorogued Parliament, deferring sitting dates and avoiding votes he knows he will loose, such as a banking royal commission and defeat of the government on the reduction of penalty rates. This means that the same sex marriage bill will be delayed and so will further referrals to the High Court on Parliamentarians caught out in the citizenship debacle.

The vultures circle waiting for a dead corpse and this could be what kills off Turncoat. Ah what the hell centuries ago parliament only met at the convenience of the King, all hail King Turncoat

Hey Thank you

You elected these clowns so what's the problem? When is the next election so you can upgrade to better clowns. If there is such a thing in your country.

You elected these clowns so what's the problem? When is the next election so you can upgrade to better clowns. If there is such a thing in your country.

There are no better clowns in sight, election is a couple of years away unless a snap election is called, in this environment it would be stupid to do it again after the last one produced what is essentially a hung parliament. The Liberals operate with a majority of 1 in the House and the support of the cross bench on confidence, the Senate only operates with cross bench support, a resignation is all it takes and there is a bi-election in a couple of weeks that could go either way. I don't like what our political process has become, it is a circus with the biggest tent of all. Leftist politics here produces a bad result and we had hoped we would be free of it for a while

Gridlock can be expected as obviously there are enough lefties to destroy the righties lock on power, or the righties screwed up pretty bad last time they made policy, and the electorate need a better balance.

Gridlock can be expected as obviously there are enough lefties to destroy the righties lock on power, or the righties screwed up pretty bad last time they made policy, and the electorate need a better balance.

I think in general we might have a better balance here, tal, since the lines of left right are a little blurred here. From left to right there are Greens, Labor, Liberal, National, Conservatives, NXT, One Nation. The major parties are in the centre left and centre right and in things such as health care, welfare, indigenous, illegal migration, Foreign policy they are much closer, The real divide comes in monetary policy, environmental issues and in allowing people to suck on the government teat

Do you guys have CORPORATE welfare for rich guys who suck on the government teat? Righties love that.

Well of course, a lovely set of tax deductions, subsidies for greenhouse gas abatement and thoughts about lower taxes. There are also nice initiatives for development in regional areas

As the indigenous might say; "poor fella, my country"

Here we go again, this time we have the I was told otherwise excuse

Another Senator bites the Dust, Nick has gone and one of his flock follows. The government relies heavily on cross bench support and it is dwindling fast, when December 5 gets here will there be anyone left in the Senate?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-22/sky-kakoschke-moore-reveals-dual-citizenship-concerns/9179502

Here we go again, the Senate list is out and surprise , surprise, there are more. The House list comes out today and I predict disarray

Well the House list is out and it becomes more bizzaire, not only do you have to renounce foreign citizenship but you have to factor in the time it takes for a british civil servant to get off their collective Arses

Two of the errant Representatives have now been returned to the House in Bi-elections. The vote in Bennelong however heralds the return of Canadian born Kristina Kennerly, former Premier of New South Wales, who will now undoubtedly be appointed to one of the vacant Senate seats. Kennerly's term was remarkable for the era of corruption it condoned and being parachuted into the Senate means the Labor Party is committed to ensure feeding at the trough continues like the good little socialists they are. Shorten thinks the result gives him the keys to the kingdom at the next election, but one day does not a year make

I wonder what Penny Wong, Labor leader in the Senate will think about having such a powerful politician as KK beside her, time for a change perhaps

ERRANT - my favorite word of the moment.

Means either straying off the correct path, or wandering in search of adventure.
Knights-errant were regular good-guy knights, out and about fighting evil and saving damsels, but they didn't own land. So they hoped to be given some as a reward, without asking or getting pushy about it. Their one purpose was to fight evil.

AH, I wish the purpose of these rule breakers was to fight evil, I suppose they do as it is personified in the person of the Greens and Labor, but their purpose is to perpetuate the right side in power

All politicians want to be on the right side of power. That's what they say anyway. Political shenanigans and dirty tricks is nothing new!

By right side I mean conservative, Tal, or not leftist.

I know that Clete, everybody has a favorite. Down with the other guy, right?

It's not so much down with the opposition, it is more like not putting up with their B/S designed to get everyone drinking more from the cash cow. Middle class welfare is an area for reform because it is politically motivated. I don't agree with tax cuts for the wealthy when the poor still pay tax, whether that's nominal or not, and I believe that a measure of universal health care should be part of the social contract, but those who can pay should pay.

You see, Tal, we may be closer in our thinking on some things than you might wish to admit, but our approach is very different to yours. Dealing with freeloaders is an issue

I think its standard operating procedure for a politician anywhere to bring himself into a better light to the public by dimming the light of his opponents. So digging for dirt or anything they can spin their way against an opponent is normal. After all the stakes are pretty high, since it means power, money, and influence, and the enhanced social STATURE an official title bestows on winners of elections, and let's not ignore the PERKS.

We have elections every two years here, and the political campaigns seem to be endless, but I think the modern world of technology feeds that perception more than anything, and our views of the whole world has grown rather fast challenging our brains and emotions like never before. It's no wonder that fear and uncertainty can so easily be stoked to fever pitch amongst many groups, and individuals. Fear mongering is a popular tool for our politician because it works, as well as out and out lying. We seem to fall easily for that dumb stuff, but should we blame the ignorant and gullible for being ignorant and gullible? Or the desperate for being desperate? Unfortunately we cannot always choose our flaws, or the severity of them, and some have more severe flaws than others, but it's frustrating like most human interactions can be.

Yes the governing structures of our two nations is very similar in many ways, as it is in many other nations, I will agree, but I think all nations are struggling with the idea of getting better. The great human experiment is evolving though. Seems it's a never ending process, and our own flaws and imperfection are the obstacles to that process. Unfortunately we all can have an aversion to step back and evaluate our own actions and make adjustments to obvious mistakes (Like electing Trump, and then tolerating his belligerence, IN MY OPINION.).

Coping 101 is acknowledging our mistakes and making changes which none of us likes to do.

Let me give you the remark of the day, deeply felt: I'm too old for this sh!t!

LOL, I totally feel ya Clete!

Just to wrap up this ongoing saga, the fallout has resulted in a cabinet shuffle, with new faces in the parliament on the front row. The Nationals are taking pain as Barnaby Joyce, the first to be outed in the crisis and reelected, has changed his lineup with lame explanations of needing representation from every state, while it seems the qualification for Minister of Agriculture is to have sat in a farm kitchen. opportunistically, the Attorney-General and leader in the Senate will make his way to London as "ambassador", no doubt to bang out a trade agreement with the UK at brexit. The decks have been cleaned and scrubbed ready for 2018 and the halls definately have not been decked with Holly

I've been study your government structure Clete, eerily similar to ours, though the names have been changed to protect the innocent ;), and am curious which party are you affiliated with? I think from what I know you would teeter between a right wing ultra conservative republican here, with moderate leanings. Oh now don't take offense, I intend none, just pointing out what I think are your ideological matches to our equivalents. I figure I would fit in rather well with the Labor party being a left leaning centrist myself, though fiscally very conservative, but hopefully not when it comes to the general welfare.

Please hurry and respond as our government shuts down tomorrow, leaving Dufus and his family home alone counting their money, and making room for everyone else's he just stole!

Hi Tal, I am not affiliated with any party. The Australian Conservatives most reflect my policy perspectives, but they don't seek representation at local level only in the Senate, thus I am forced to cast my vote in favour of the Nationals in the House because I cannot support Labor, they have demonstrated themselves to be fiscally irresponsible on many occasions and are full of ex union officials of dubious record including their leader, Shorten.

There is no ideological match that reflects your republicans or democrats since we are further along the socialist scale than you are and thus our Liberals might be closer to your democrats than your republicans. If our government structure is similar to yours it is because we took your model when writing our constitution but we left out the more contentious parts where you seem to have a great deal of debate today. Our states have a specific role in service delivery, but no role in military or economic matters, they cannot tax in the broader definition of that function

We don't keep having debates about whether the government will or won't be funded, it is a given within the budgetary process, so none of the drama and grand standing on that account. If supply is denied, the government must resign, last time that happened is 1975, when a Labor government was kicked out of office

Hey Clete, we are more expressive and dramatic, and there are a lot more of us, and we all have opinions. We have grown since those 13 original colonies, and a few million people, and more recently 4 TV channels, and ONE dominant race, and culture. Our tolerance and acceptance is being tested, and assimilation is on it's way out.

We still associate socialism with communism here Clete, so our progress, or lack of it in that regard, is extremely muted. A cold war does that to you.

So you don't like communism but you Like labor, Hmmmmm! More discernment necessary. Tal, we don't have full blown socialism, we are slowly privatising government run industries, but we had to have them because no one else had the capital or would take the risk. You speak often of there being more people, that isn't the issue, privilege is, and I thought from your perspective you would understand that. Assimilation is essential, otherwise you have a nation that doesn't even speak the same language.

We understand the cold war too, but we didn't let it colour our perspective. The Soviets were evil but the russian people weren't, we have the same perspective about you, about China and NK. Our close relationship with you hasn't done us any favours you know, but we preserve it because we are relatives from way back

I never said I personally didn't like communism, or socialism for that matter, they are but forms of governance, practiced by people who were not our best friends, but an all out war would destroy the known world. We can't have that can we? I'm not saying they have it perfected either, as obviously it's pretty easy to keep the sheep in line with an iron shepherd herding them for centuries. That's what dictators do dominate the whole population with no tolerance for crossing strictly laid lines.

I will point out that there is no free press in dictatorships.

Don't you agree that for assimilation to go on there must be some sort of INDOCTRINATION? I know you hate that and that's a problem when you don't know you have been indoctrinated. So much for freedom huh?

I never said I personally didn't like communism, or socialism for that matter, they are but forms of governance, practiced by people who were not our best friends, but an all out war would destroy the known world. We can't have that can we? I'm not saying they have it perfected either, as obviously it's pretty easy to keep the sheep in line with an iron shepherd herding them for centuries. That's what dictators do dominate the whole population with no tolerance for crossing strictly laid lines.

I will point out that there is no free press in dictatorships.

Don't you agree that for assimilation to go on there must be some sort of INDOCTRINATION? I know you hate that and that's a problem when you don't know you have been indoctrinated. So much for freedom huh?

When I speak about assimilation I don't speak about compulsion, as some countries do. We bend over backwards to assist newcomers such as having instructions in government agencies printed in different languages, and having a broadcasting service which caters for other cultural interests, but it is obvious some ethnics don't share our values as a nation, their loyalties are elsewhere and this is unacceptable.

I'm not sure what you think of as free press is such a great idea, it is not impartial, just sensationalist.

Socialism is an idea that everyone in an economy has the right to enjoy the fruits of the economy, not just the wealthy or the privileged. Communism is something different, it is state control of everything, and it has been proven not to work in a modern economy. You have never been in an all out war with communism, just skermishs at the fringe, you were in an all out war with fascism, which may have had a socialist base. Keeping people subject for centuries was found in monarchy and empire, the closest thing we have to that in this age is not necessarily socialist, communist or capitalist, but found in all three.

What I say is what my government says; if you want to come here and stay we expect you to adopt our values, if you want to be a citizen you have to know what they are, and be capable of communicating with other citizens

What values should I be willing to adapt to?

Fairness, religious freedom of expression, mateship, looking after the less fortunate, rule of law, no violence in family situations, no compulsion, democratic representation, freedom to dress as you please, loyalty to the nation before loyalty to any foreign entity, religious or political. While these might be present in your society, they are not a part of the societies many migrants come from

I think if you broaden your perspective you would see that the vast majority of current and past migrants are peace loving people just trying to fit in and make a life. Some slip through the cracks with whatever issues, but the numbers pale when you consider that many more so called Americans commit mayhem than do migrants.

Sure you can blow up any incident and lay blame to INDIVIDUAL migrants, but would it not be fair to balance that by recognizing the positive actions that migrants contribute? That would at least be objective. The Dufus is disgusting when he highlights the bad behavior of one and assigns blame to all, that's the very definition of prejudice, red meat to his fellow racists and fear mongering fans. The very ones who ignore and fail to address the bad behavior amongst their own. That's the definition of racism.

I was hoping you had examples of whole populations of migrants who go against the rules, norms, or values of the country they migrate too. I think it's more accurate to acknowledge that good people have good values and bring them to wherever they go. I'm not saying all migrants are good, just saying they all are not bad. Not all Americans meet that same standard for sure in my own experience, and you probably could say the same for your own countrymen. Even The Dufus isn't ALL bad, but mostly! He sure says and does some awful things to others in the way of a lying, bully, racist.

You Aussies have a lot of upside already and GREAT future potential, for flawed humans. At the moment my own great nation is stuck in our own shat. Hopefully it's a temporary condition. That UN stunt leaves one wondering.

I think if you broaden your perspective you would see that the vast majority of current and past migrants are peace loving people just trying to fit in and make a life. Some slip through the cracks with whatever issues, but the numbers pale when you consider that many more so called Americans commit mayhem than do migrants.

Sure you can blow up any incident and lay blame to INDIVIDUAL migrants, but would it not be fair to balance that by recognizing the positive actions that migrants contribute? That would at least be objective. The Dufus is disgusting when he highlights the bad behavior of one and assigns blame to all, that's the very definition of prejudice, red meat to his fellow racists and fear mongering fans. The very ones who ignore and fail to address the bad behavior amongst their own. That's the definition of racism.

I was hoping you had examples of whole populations of migrants who go against the rules, norms, or values of the country they migrate too. I think it's more accurate to acknowledge that good people have good values and bring them to wherever they go. I'm not saying all migrants are good, just saying they all are not bad. Not all Americans meet that same standard for sure in my own experience, and you probably could say the same for your own countrymen. Even The Dufus isn't ALL bad, but mostly! He sure says and does some awful things to others in the way of a lying, bully, racist.

You Aussies have a lot of upside already and GREAT future potential, for flawed humans. At the moment my own great nation is stuck in our own shat. Hopefully it's a temporary condition. That UN stunt leaves one wondering.

Sadly, Tal, the migrants seem to be the troublemakers, like the other day a group of Somali ran amok in Victoria. I'm sure we will find that the person who committed that atrocity in Melbourne yesterday was a migrant. You see we aussies aren't given to do such things, we would rather do something else.

I feel for you when the world stands up and shouts at you, but again you have the muslims and the fellow travellers doing the talking and really who cares what a bunch of nar do wells think, really. I remember well knowing a person from Burma, probably a rohingha, who told me of the jihad against Israel, you would have thought he had more problems to solve

You must'nt think of us as any more flawed than yourselves, the fact is we have, for the most part, an idyllic existence. The peace is sometimes times broken by idiotic acts of broken individuals

I don't think of Australians as anymore, or any less flawed than the US, or anyone else for that matter. For all the headlines and events though there is nowhere I would rather be and grateful for a very good life myself. On that note a blessed holiday season to you, and yours my Aussie friend, and to the AMHD family that has brought somuch joy into my life.

THANKS.

Yes, Tal, the very best, sorry I wasn't around at Christmas, visiting family, my tablet wouldn't allow me to log in, but a great New Year to you all.

I think there will be some jousting to do in the New Year, or at least tilting at windmills

It is unbelievable, the saga starts again, with a Labor resignation of a senior rep who just can't prove he is not a dual citizen, and Labor will refer some Liberal Halocaost family survivors in the hope of catching a sprat, or a mackerel. Shorten can't afford to fight several by-elections and it looks like he might have too. The Libs are going to stand back in the next one, and let Labor be mauled by the Greens as they fight it out in Melbourne suburbia, the Green heartland. As this by-election goes so might go Shorten

You would think that being under question as to citizenship and successfully resolving that in a by-election was enough, the deputy Prime Minister, Barnaby Joyce has proven he can't keep it in his pants and had it off with a staffer, impregnating said lady. Now he has been censured for his behaviour, causing the prime Minister to change rules and make it a sackable offence for any minister to behave in like manner, bringing the government into disrepute and so forth. However the big ego that is Barnaby isn't going to take it and now having been forced to step down as acting Prime Minister he may decide to break the coalition agreement, cross the floor and vote with the opposition effectively kicking an own goal and handing government to Labor. These country boys just don't know the rules of polite society

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-02-16/barnaby-joyce-fighting-like-cornered-tiger-to-hold-on-grattan/9454006

You guy's have scandals? How quaint that underneath the well heeled veneer Australians have the same foibles as ordinary citizens. Of course everyone knows you can put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig.

You guy's have scandals? How quaint that underneath the well heeled veneer Australians have the same foibles as ordinary citizens. Of course everyone knows you can put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig.

How inciteful of you Tal, but you are right Barnaby is a pig someone put lipstick on. Our citizens, and politicians, usually keep their predelictions private, we are not as outgoing about sex as the americans, but sexual harassment in the workplace is just as hot a topic here as there. We hold our politicians to a high standard so cavorting in the office space is fround upon. Back in 1975 another famous case of minister and staffer was one of the nails in the coffin of the infamous Whitlam government

Things have gone worse fro Barnaby he has been lampooned by John Oliver

John Oliver on Barnaby Joyce: Last Week Tonight (http://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/john-oliver-lampoons-barnaby-joyce-over-affair/news-story/59c90987f264b09c40ecf85fadc169d3)

I think they have nailed the coffin shut

Poor old Barnaby has gone, a victim of his own actions. We take in these KIWI and they revert to their ways

https://media.scribblelive.com/2018/2/23/4c36b311-29d8-4dd9-8da9-6d7658ecedef.mp4

We put up with weeks of grandstanding in the by-election and all the while Barnaby wasn't who he said he is, and now he can join his mate Tony on the backbench for a little or a lot of caaarping

The High Court has just thrown another Senator out of parliament and the Government is favoured by the heads of four reps. If we get rid of this lot the Government might be able to get past some of the obstructionism and give the big end of town a tax cut. However By-elections are dangerous territory as they act as a referendum on government policy and you can't allow the punters to comment of what you are doing, particularly after a budget showing some new directions, and a lack of care for the unemployed