Pollies citizens of another country

[ronje]

The supposed solution that Malcolm Turncoat came up with yesterday is as useful as 2 squirts of cats' urine in a sandstorm.

The proposed statement using words like "to the best of my knowledge and belief" and " at this time" are weasel words to allow a pollie to get off any claims.

To make matters worse, the slippery buggers are let off having to pay back any/all salary that they received when they had no right to be there.

The answer? Simply enforce the penalty provision of Section 46 of the Constitution which already provides a punishment for sitting when disqualified.

The punishment is 1/4 of their salary PER DAY to EACH PERSON who sues them for it. At the time, a pollies salary was 400 pounds per year. Therefore the punishment of 100 pounds was 1/4 of their salary.

What's a plies salary today? $300,000? 1/4 = $75,000 PER day fine PER person who sues. THAT'S good incentive for these people to get their citizenship status sorted out BEFORE the put their hands up as a candidate for election.



COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA CONSTITUTION ACT - SECT 46 Penalty for sitting when disqualified

                   Until the Parliament otherwise provides, any person declared by this Constitution to be incapable of sitting as a senator or as a member of the House of Representatives shall, for every day on which he so sits, be liable to pay the sum of one hundred pounds to any person who sues for it in any court of competent jurisdiction.

Unless the parliament has provided otherwise, then a class action could be undertaken (or a simple civil action by an individual) against these buggers and the proceeds donated to a charity (maybe) or the proceeds reimbursed to the government.

THEN they'd take notice.

[nomad]

I wonder about the validity of any laws passed by a person who isn’t legitimately entitled to sit in the house and vote.
Just a matter of time until the lawyers throw that up as a defence

I reckon that Shorten must have grilled his members to make sure they aren’t dual citizens. (or at least he should have)

I can understand the minor parties not having the same due diligence of their members but its unthinkable that the major parties don’t have that as part of their list of ‘to dos’

[ronje]

Absolutely.

These guys have been thinking that they're bullet proof.

They're not.

Voting on legislation when they shouldn't have been shows how bad Malcolm Turncoat's handling of this issue has been.

You can bet that the G/G has been talking to him saying " Fix it or I'll intervene".

Which will put Malcolm in the same class as John Kerr. A bumbling fool.

Aus doesn't need this rubbish that they've dreamed up about making statements. Malcolm can't fix it so the public should.

Sue these mongrels armed with the High Court decision. Bit hard to defend against the unanimous decision of 7 high court judges.

The only decision to be made is how much costs are as the penalty is fixed at 1/4 of their salary per day that they sit while disqualified.

First cab off the rank should be Barnaby Joyce. If he has to pay out $3m or so as punishment, then THAT'LL focus their minds to stop playing around with the laws of our country.

THAT'LL make sure that they sort out their citizenship status BEFORE they nominate. The onus has always been on the candidate.

[nomad]

yes someone has had a quiet word to him which would explain the about face in quick time.

[dannett]

Given that they were never eligible to stand, than at a minimum they should have to repay all monies received from the Commonwealth for electoral campaigns, office refurbishments, travel, and any other entitlements. The government has not hesitated to go after law abiding citizens who have made honest mistakes with their welfare claims, nor have they hesitated to fine people retrospectively for a change in conditions that makes them ineligible for certain benefits or that has resulted in over payment. There is no difference here.

[Matt Flynn]

The government has not hesitated to go after law abiding citizens who have made honest mistakes with their welfare claims, nor have they hesitated to fine people retrospectively for a change in conditions that makes them ineligible for certain benefits or that has resulted in over payment. There is no difference here.

Exactly.

[nomad]

Given that they were never eligible to stand, than at a minimum they should have to repay all monies received from the Commonwealth for electoral campaigns, office refurbishments, travel, and any other entitlements. The government has not hesitated to go after law abiding citizens who have made honest mistakes with their welfare claims, nor have they hesitated to fine people retrospectively for a change in conditions that makes them ineligible for certain benefits or that has resulted in over payment. There is no difference here.

I suggested the same but was shouted down by a few mates. I still think they cheated so they should have to pay back OUR money

[Matt Flynn]

Politicians only make "honest mistakes".

Everyone else who makes a mistake should be punished ...

[dannett]

I am a little on the fence about it, I mean afterall they did their job. And in the case of a couple, it's not like they actually had anything to gain from it. But as I said, Centrelink would not hesitate to go after you if they discovered you were ineligible for a claim, for whatever reason.

Also, this is a safeguard of sorts that helps ensure that we don't end up with radicals in our parliament determining laws that are not in our interest. And for this reason alone a tough stance is necessary, else we set the precedent that deceit is acceptable at the highest level of government office.

[mickkk]

I feel a little sorry for the first lot, eventnothey should have known. I also think that there shouldnt be any reimbursement of cost (to the party who caused the bi election) for the bi election as it’s their own fault.
However I think those that are getting done now should pay all high court cost, and loose all payments when they were knowingly deceiving the parliament ( from the date of the first high court rulings where they all should have owned up.) along with all court cost of any court cases trying to reverse things that they have voted alpine whilst knowing that they were ineligible to do so.
It is a joke.
I some how think that theres a lot more to come. It seems impossible that there’s so many senators,yet only one lower house member where it could really make a difference. I think that because of this issue, they will drag it out,then call yet another double d as they know they will loose government anyway

[ronje]

My 2 bob's worth.

I don't think that the founding fathers in the years leading up to 1901 were in any mood to tolerate "outsiders" (citizens of another country) trying to take over the residents' brand new country of Australia.

That's why they made such a fuss about "outsiders".

The 1/4 of their salary punishment was meant to be a penalty (and still is, I think) and nothing to do with reimbursement of salary or other costs to the nation.

The Constitution is silent on reimbursement. I reckon that's why the Govt has run dead on the issue and let all the affected ones off. Because it can't be enforced.

What about the snouts in the Fed Parliament's superannuation trough when they shouldn't have been? Barnaby Joyce for example had no right to be there since his election in 2007 (was it?). 10 years of accumulated super etc.

I reckon that's also why the penalty for breaching the citizenship rules was potentially so severe.

Meanwhile we are left with the mess of Governor General Cosgrove signing off (on the Queen's behalf) on legislation coming from a unconstitutionally elected (yet sitting) Parliament.

Sure is a mess.

Parliament should be shut down until its sorted out to the stage where its no longer unconstitutional. Get rid of the law breakers.

Then call another double dissolution to go back to the stage we were at before the 2016 election.