JCC HEY AUSTRALIA

Yes which is precisely the problem that most people have with Turnbull, he is being held captive by the Abbott freaks and is unable to show leadership as a result. Everybody knows that Turnbull is in favour of same sex marriage, but everybody also knows that he has had to do a deal with the right fundies to get the votes to knife Abbott. He came into the job of PM the wrong way and the pact he has made with the Abbott faction has made his time in office a disaster. Which is a shame as he is actually the kind of person I could support if he was able to lead the party in the same way as Howard was able to lead. Unfortunately those days seem to be over.

 

I can't argue this.

The sense from those around me is that America's eating its tail again, but I can't shake a feeling that a massive conflcit is coming our way soon. I know what happened in Charlotte can't happen here; that most Australians find Reclaim Australia repugnant and that we may carry systemic bias with us but genuinely support multiculturalism as a way of enhanced life. That we'd take Sam Dastayari's halal packs over One Nation any day.

But what if our Queenslanders racists are emboldened by the yanks?

 

Well we had the Cronulla riots to make us proud - There seems to be a bit of view that Abbott and his conservatives are literally taking their instructions from US conservatives on strategy concerning the same sex marriage debate, to immigration, free speech and all of the social aspects of religious conservatism. Certainly Abbott's pronouncements that voting against same sex marriage is a stand against 'political correctness' is a message taken directly from the opponents of same sex marriage in the US. Trump has given the racists massive amounts of hope and joy no doubt.

 

If anything, I think the horror show in the U.S. may push us further away from that path. We can see, plainly, what that kind of rhetoric represents: swastikas, armed militias and murder. America is helping make that worldview seem less attractive, not more.

Or maybe I'm being naive.

 

No I tend to agree with both of you. Labor have been importing Democrat rhetoric too, which is equally as silly but not quite as repugnant.

Lost is right; we had Cronulla, in 2005. I remember, because I've never been especially "Australian" and was in Singapore at the time, being grateful mine is the kind of accent that doesn't get picked easily.

But we also have whole segments of the population who categorically reject that and embrace with both hands the multicultural diversity that makes us who we are.

As a really simple point, perhaps overly simple; we have the trades union movement, who are corrupt and unethical bastards in most respects but who have taken a stand against bigotry and they have the power here that they don't in the US. We have the two major parties, who haven't had a real leader since John Howard, but who can agree this stuff is un-Australian. And we have our profound shame at the kind of Australia Pauline Hanson speaks for. You know what I mean - the cringe you get inside when Malcolm Roberts tries to take on Brian Cox. "You cannot possibly ever speak for the Australia I want to live in" as your reaction.

I believe it can't happen here because we have at least better non-state actors to ensure it didn't. A middle class. A union movement. A fearless state broadcaster.

 

As a Queenslander my vote is YES.

 

So how red faced is Barnaby at the moment?

 

Redder than he usually looks.

The "ironing is delicious" right now.

The Majority of One speech was excellent.

 

It's bizarre how this has become such a thing. Not an issue for decades but now threatens the government.

 

It's a stupid law. Well, let me qualify it - losing Malcolm Roberts is ok, because he's a moron - like any of the hard right are. But the rest of it's silly.

You can just imagine the insipid Lee Rhiannon calling the AFP daily to anonymously report Richard di Natale.

 

Yeah it is kind of stupid. Paranoid even. Still when dual citizenship disqualifies you from being a member of Parliament you would think a political party would have a system of checks in place to ensure the disqualification criteria does not apply. Somebody in the Liberal party needs refresher on the principles of ERM ISO 3100.

 

I really wish though it got that piece of **** Doug Cameron out of parliament. If he got cancer I'd actually be happy.

But I think it either needs precedent to diminish the scope in the Barnaby Case, or we need to bite the bullet and have a referendum and junk that section of the Constitution. I don't particularly care about Joyce, I do however think in a multicultural, immigrant society it's a silly clause.

 

I don't know much about him - what's his story?

 

Manky Scots git Labour senator who thinks it's still the 1890s and is happy to use worksite deaths to further his agenda against the ABCC. When people died before ABCC and under Labour governments, he's silent but he's happy to trot them out in pursuit of his old country socialist nonsense.

 

Sounds like 90% of trade union Labor.

 

So I guess Pauline Hanson was sick of Trump getting all the attention.

 

The good thing about that little stunt was the response from Brandis (who is normally somebody I detest) which was just wonderful.

 

And it was immediate, too.

 

Yeah, it great when politicians who are also distinguished barristers can put their eloquence and intelligence to good use. It happens so rarely.

 

NZ law means no Australians are able to be Members of their own Parliament*.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/am...s-may-be-disqualified-from-parlia_a_23078690/


* Depending on how literally you take the Aussie eligibility law.

 

I imagine the High Court will look at the history of s44 and apply a version of the "mischief rule" to determine its scope. The "mischief rule" just looks at the actual "mischief" the statute was intended to overcome. The relevant issue at the moment is the question of dual citizenship so presumably the "mischief" that dual citizenship brings into question is the loyalty of the parliamentarian to Australia. Where dual 'citizenship' turns out to be a freak result of the application of foreign law then I can't imagine the intent behind the statute arises at all and so the relevant provision will be read down accordingly. However, if there is evidence of Joyce and others being actively involved in advocating NZ interests over Australia it is less certain. Basically, a stupid provision with unintended consequences.

 

It's outdated. Who cares these days if someone has dual citizenship, so long as they're living in Australia and can represent its people?

 

More importantly, I don't see how renouncing citizenship actually changes anything. If you've still got relatives in Country X, that's going to give you a lot more of a bias than whether you're technically a citizen of somewhere you've never even visited.

 

Nick Xenophon comes out:

http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...hon-british-overseas-citizen-citizenship-saga