Seventh Australian senator referred to High Court as citizenship crisis deepens

[tonbridgebrit]

Xenephon, xenophobia.

Do people reckon that Xenephon is xenophobic, is that why they are against him ?

[halloween]

35 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

This is getting ridiculous. Xenephone is an Australian who is also a bit British. They should just simply leave him alone, and let him get on with his job.

The law on dual nationality has been put there to prevent Australians with passports from certain countries (like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Lebanon, China, etc) being politicians. Why not just say this, and get this media story over and done with ?

Do you think Nick Xenophon, son of Theodoros Xenophou and another Greek citizen might be a bit more Greek than British? At least he had the sense to revoke that unwanted citizenship.

[tonbridgebrit]

19 minutes ago, halloween said:

Do you think Nick Xenophon, son of Theodoros Xenophou and another Greek citizen might be a bit more Greek than British? At least he had the sense to revoke that unwanted citizenship.

Well, Nick Xenephon might be a bit more Greek than he is British, but it is his British nationality or citizenship that is causing this silly media story.

If Nick Xenephone had parents who were Pakistani, or Lebanese, or Bangladeshi, or etc, and he's born in Australia, and his one and only passport is Australian, in that case, the media would not be bothering to raise any issues. And if Pakistan, Lebanon, Bangladesh, if they're okay, surely, Greece is also okay.

I think it's absurd that Australia does not totally allow Australians who are also British (or part New Zealanders) to be politicians. Most Australians are British people who are in Australia. Lots of Australian women have got names like Bethan, Gwynneth, Bromwin. I think these are Welsh peoples' names.

Edited August 20, 2017 by tonbridgebrit

[halloween]

2 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Well, Nick Xenephon might be a bit more Greek than he is British, but it is his British nationality or citizenship that is causing this silly media story.

If Nick Xenephone had parents who were Pakistani, or Lebanese, or Bangladeshi, or etc, and he's born in Australia, and his one and only passport is Australian, in that case, the media would not be bothering to raise any issues. And if Pakistan, Lebanon, Bangladesh, if they're okay, surely, Greece is also okay.

Ah, no, we're not Pom bashing, the law applies to any foreign citizenship. Barnaby Joyce is also in the news for being entitled to UnZud citizenship (I knew there was something suspect about the bugger!)

AFAIK we don't have an MPs descendant from immigrants from the countries you mention.

[tonbridgebrit]

2 minutes ago, halloween said:

 

AFAIK we don't have an MPs descendant from immigrants from the countries you mention.

You might have some in about ten years time. 

[Richard W]

10 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

The law on dual nationality has been put there to prevent Australians with passports from certain countries (like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Lebanon, China, etc) being politicians. Why not just say this, and get this media story over and done with ?

That's mostly gross ignorance.  In 1900, most of the inhabitants of each of the UK, Australia, the Punjab, Sindh and Bengal were British subjects.  So, prior to independence, were most of the people who became citizens of India.  The first citizenships within the British Commonwealth were Irish and Canadian.

[simple1]

12 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

This is getting ridiculous. Xenephone is an Australian who is also a bit British. They should just simply leave him alone, and let him get on with his job.

The law on dual nationality has been put there to prevent Australians with passports from certain countries (like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Lebanon, China, etc) being politicians. Why not just say this, and get this media story over and done with ?

Considering Pakistan and Bangladesh didn't exist when the Constitution was written might wish to revise your thinking

[tonbridgebrit]

2 hours ago, Richard W said:

That's mostly gross ignorance.  In 1900, most of the inhabitants of each of the UK, Australia, the Punjab, Sindh and Bengal were British subjects.  So, prior to independence, were most of the people who became citizens of India.  The first citizenships within the British Commonwealth were Irish and Canadian.

 

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

Considering Pakistan and Bangladesh didn't exist when the Constitution was written might wish to revise your thinking

I'm trying to say this. In Australia today, the vast majority of Australians don't have a problem with Australians who are part British or part New Zealander becoming politicians. Lots of Australians simply don't want somebody who is Australian and who also has a Pakistani passport to be a politician. By the way, I'm not supporting those Australians who want to see a burka ban. And I haven't got a problem with British Pakistanis going to Pakistan, getting a Pakistani wife, and bringing that wife into Britain. I'm not against these people.

So, today, that law on dual nationality and politics in Australia, it's suppose to be interpreted in a way that says, "we're very wary of Australians who also have Pakistani (or Bangladeshi, Indian, Lebanese, Chinese) passports becoming politicians".

[simple1]

9 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

'm trying to say this. In Australia today, the vast majority of Australians don't have a problem with Australians who are part British or part New Zealander becoming politicians. Lots of Australians simply don't want somebody who is Australian and who also has a Pakistani passport to be a politician. By the way, I'm not supporting those Australians who want to see a burka ban. And I haven't got a problem with British Pakistanis going to Pakistan, getting a Pakistani wife, and bringing that wife into Britain. I'm not against these people.

So, today, that law on dual nationality and politics in Australia, it's suppose to be interpreted in a way that says, "we're very wary of Australians who also have Pakistani (or Bangladeshi, Indian, Lebanese, Chinese) passports becoming politicians".

14 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

This is getting ridiculous. Xenephone is an Australian who is also a bit British. They should just simply leave him alone, and let him get on with his job.

The law on dual nationality has been put there to prevent Australians with passports from certain countries (like Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Lebanon, China, etc) being politicians. Why not just say this, and get this media story over and done with ?

Nonsense. If someone from say Iran, with Australian citizenship and wishes to become a Federal politician they only have to cancel their Iranian citizenship. There are Muslim politicians in the Oz parliament who have cancelled their dual citizenship to comply with current Constitutional Law. 

Edited August 21, 2017 by simple1

[mfd101]

58 minutes ago, simple1 said:

Nonsense. If someone from say Iran, with Australian citizenship and wishes to become a Federal politician they only have to cancel their Iranian citizenship. There are Muslim politicians in the Oz parliament who have cancelled their dual citizenship to comply with current Constitutional Law. 

Yes, exactly. And unless the High Court reinterprets s.44 of the Constitution in ways that haven't happened before, then there's a major problem for those who have not FORMALLY renounced the foreign citizenship they mostly didn't know they had. The ALP ones haven't come out of the woodwork yet but I'ld be surprised if there aren't a few of them too.

 

The Australian Constitution was written in 1900. Changing it is extremely difficult - majority of voters in a majority of states, noting that the 3 small/distant states [Tasmania, Sth Oz, W Oz] hate the thought of Constitutional change because it might threaten their status vis-à-vis the 3 big states.

 

Those who talk about the 'laws' and as though it can all be fixed with the flick of a pen or three don't know what they're talking about. The problem is not for future Parliamentarians but for those already there.

 

 

Edited August 21, 2017 by mfd101

[Haso]

present and previous pollutes should be checked.. how will that affect their enormous pensions if found to be duel citizens and their fraudulent declarations? could open a whole new can of worms to go fishing with.

[Richard W]

22 hours ago, simple1 said:

Nonsense. If someone from say Iran, with Australian citizenship and wishes to become a Federal politician they only have to cancel their Iranian citizenship. There are Muslim politicians in the Oz parliament who have cancelled their dual citizenship to comply with current Constitutional Law. 

If said person is an Iranian man who has not done his Iranian national service, he doesn't have to renounce his Iranian citizenship.  I read up on the Sue v. Hill judgement.  Renunciation is not required if it is impossible or the process is unreasonable.  So I was wrong about those born Thai being excluded from the Australian Parliament.

[simple1]

5 minutes ago, Richard W said:

If said person is an Iranian man who has not done his Iranian national service, he doesn't have to renounce his Iranian citizenship.  I read up on the Sue v. Hill judgement.  Renunciation is not required if it is impossible or the process is unreasonable.  So I was wrong about those born Thai being excluded from the Australian Parliament.

OK, thanks for the detail in this instance. but the point I made is not incorrect