Dual Citizenship Crisis - s 44(i)
Moderator: bbmods
- David
- Posts: 50683
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:04 pm
- Location: the edge of the deep green sea
- Has liked: 17 times
- Been liked: 83 times
^ Just to clarify, Joyce has renounced his citizenship and will presumably run in the by-election. The senators are technically gone, but whoever's next in line could hypothetically step aside to allow the other senators to regain their spots.
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange
How certain are "we" that there'll be a by-election?
I assume (without, frankly, much caring) that Tony Windsor is joined to the suit because he intends to submit that, if the High Court were to rule that Joyce's candidacy was invalid, all the votes cast in Joyce's favour are informal as cast in favour of an invalid candidate and the rest of the votes should be recounted - whereupon Windsor would win (since, as I understand it, he was clearly in second-place). Why - he would, no doubt, ask - would one compel the Commonwealth to take the time and meet the cost of a by-election, if there's a pool of formal votes from which a candidate may be selected?
Since, amongst many other things, the present Government's Parliamentary majority is on a knife-edge and, further, a Minister can't hold office unless they become a Parliamentarian within three months of appointment and since it's going to be difficult to organise a by-election before February, when everyone who matters gets back from Portsea after Australia Day, there's a fair argument for dealing with it much more promptly than that by a recount.
Funny stuff.
I assume (without, frankly, much caring) that Tony Windsor is joined to the suit because he intends to submit that, if the High Court were to rule that Joyce's candidacy was invalid, all the votes cast in Joyce's favour are informal as cast in favour of an invalid candidate and the rest of the votes should be recounted - whereupon Windsor would win (since, as I understand it, he was clearly in second-place). Why - he would, no doubt, ask - would one compel the Commonwealth to take the time and meet the cost of a by-election, if there's a pool of formal votes from which a candidate may be selected?
Since, amongst many other things, the present Government's Parliamentary majority is on a knife-edge and, further, a Minister can't hold office unless they become a Parliamentarian within three months of appointment and since it's going to be difficult to organise a by-election before February, when everyone who matters gets back from Portsea after Australia Day, there's a fair argument for dealing with it much more promptly than that by a recount.
Funny stuff.
- Jezza
- Posts: 29545
- Joined: Sun Sep 05, 2010 11:28 pm
- Location: Ponsford End
- Has liked: 271 times
- Been liked: 354 times
LOL apart from breastfeeding her baby in Parliament and trying to ban gender-based toys, what else did she achieve for the betterment of the country?Tannin wrote:Waters was another good'un but won't be missed as much because her replacement is, if anything, even better.
| 1902 | 1903 | 1910 | 1917 | 1919 | 1927 | 1928 | 1929 | 1930 | 1935 | 1936 | 1953 | 1958 | 1990 | 2010 | 2023 |
- David
- Posts: 50683
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:04 pm
- Location: the edge of the deep green sea
- Has liked: 17 times
- Been liked: 83 times
Fought for renewable energy in a country whose government is still on the fence as to whether climate change is real, campaigned for an end to discrimination against same-sex couples, helped reform our electoral laws and bring an end to undemocratic group tickets, helped expose our worst corporate tax-avoiders, consistently called for an end to our reprehensible treatment of asylum seekers and, with the help of the other crossbenchers, ensured that Abbott's brutal austerity measures died in the water. So, not all that much really.
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange
- Tannin
- Posts: 18748
- Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:39 pm
- Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
Well spoken, David.David wrote:Fought for renewable energy in a country whose government is still on the fence as to whether climate change is real, campaigned for an end to discrimination against same-sex couples, helped reform our electoral laws and bring an end to undemocratic group tickets, helped expose our worst corporate tax-avoiders, consistently called for an end to our reprehensible treatment of asylum seekers and, with the help of the other crossbenchers, ensured that Abbott's brutal austerity measures died in the water.
And Jezza, feel free to belittle the right to breastfeed when you have breastfed a baby yourself, not before.
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
C'mon guys - you know what Jezza meant - what did this woman do that wasn't part of her own political agenda? From what you guys have noted, she obviously did absolutely nothing for climate-change-deniers, homophobes, people who believe in pork-barrelling and gerrymanders, tax avoiders, those who dislike foreigners, those who hate the poor and those who prefer women to stay at home and breed. Since those, right there, are most of our population, you do have to ask - in all fairness - who she has been representing.Tannin wrote:Well spoken, David.David wrote:Fought for renewable energy in a country whose government is still on the fence as to whether climate change is real, campaigned for an end to discrimination against same-sex couples, helped reform our electoral laws and bring an end to undemocratic group tickets, helped expose our worst corporate tax-avoiders, consistently called for an end to our reprehensible treatment of asylum seekers and, with the help of the other crossbenchers, ensured that Abbott's brutal austerity measures died in the water.
And Jezza, feel free to belittle the right to breastfeed when you have breastfed a baby yourself, not before.
- stui magpie
- Posts: 54842
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 132 times
- Been liked: 168 times
Fair summary.David wrote:Fought for renewable energy in a country whose government is still on the fence as to whether climate change is real, campaigned for an end to discrimination against same-sex couples, helped reform our electoral laws and bring an end to undemocratic group tickets, helped expose our worst corporate tax-avoiders, consistently called for an end to our reprehensible treatment of asylum seekers and, with the help of the other crossbenchers, ensured that Abbott's brutal austerity measures died in the water. So, not all that much really.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
- stui magpie
- Posts: 54842
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 10:10 am
- Location: In flagrante delicto
- Has liked: 132 times
- Been liked: 168 times
My take on that is the last bit.
they should do a full audit of all federal MP's and present that to the High Court to make some decisions.
I can't see the right to return being an issue, some shitty country that no one wants to go to could legislate that anyone who can spell the counties name can have citizenship to attract immigrants. Do we kick out all the politicians who can spell? That's at least 30% of the parliament gone.
they should do a full audit of all federal MP's and present that to the High Court to make some decisions.
I can't see the right to return being an issue, some shitty country that no one wants to go to could legislate that anyone who can spell the counties name can have citizenship to attract immigrants. Do we kick out all the politicians who can spell? That's at least 30% of the parliament gone.
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down.
- Tannin
- Posts: 18748
- Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 7:39 pm
- Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
^ We don't find it necessary either. Everyone with half a brain (on any side of politics) admits that it's ridiculous. Unfortunately, it's not something the government or even the entire parliament can do anything about. You can't change the constitution without a referendum, and referendums are hard and time-consuming.
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives!
- David
- Posts: 50683
- Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2003 4:04 pm
- Location: the edge of the deep green sea
- Has liked: 17 times
- Been liked: 83 times
^ What do you think of the idea of holding some kind of omnibus referendum? Say, chucking it in with a few other questions about Indigenous recognition (and whatever other hot topics there may be)? I'm pretty sure they've done that in the past...
My biggest concern, though, is that, even if a referendum were held, provincialism would win the day and most people wouldn't vote for the proposal.
My biggest concern, though, is that, even if a referendum were held, provincialism would win the day and most people wouldn't vote for the proposal.
"Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence." – Julian Assange