As related by The Guardian, Essential Research’s fortnight rolling average result for this week has Labor’s two-party lead at 53-47, down from 54-46 last week. As usual we will have to wait until Essential releases the full report later today for the primary votes.
On the same sex marriage survey, an excessive 86% report having voted, of whom 64% say they voted yes, 31% no, and the rest declining to answer. On the question of support for “an indigenous voice to parliament”, 45% expressed support with 16% opposed, while 47% expressed support for an indigenous treaty, with 16% opposed.
Also featured is the latest in the pollster’s semi-regular series on party attributes, with results similar to those from the previous outing in March. Even the Liberal Party’s rating as “divided” is unchanged at 68%, although it is down six points on being “too close to the big corporate and financial interests”, now at 65%. Labor’s biggest change looks to be a six point drop for “moderate”, to 52%. If I understand the report correctly, the Liberal Party is up six on this measure to 53%.
I have harped on about economically dubious toll roads here in recent years. Here is another example. The NSW Libs are planning to spend more than $40 billion on 3 toll road tunnel projects in the next 6 years. By comparison, greater Paris (pop 12 million) will spend less than that expanding the Metro system over the whole city for the 2024 Olympics.
http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/smokes-stacks-for-beaches-link-new-harbour-tunnel-at-top-of-list-of-concerns-20171107-gzgxu3.html
CTar1 says:
Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 1:30 pm
I hope it was a deserted part of the highway otherwise the locals have my unreserved sympathy. 🙂
daretotread @ #1270 Thursday, November 9th, 2017 – 10:33 am
No doubt about the power of DTT!
She has now rearranged the continent of Europe so Slovenia, formerly part of Yugoslavia, is now a Baltic nation. 😆
‘In no part of the HC decision is there any reference to Roberts steps to renounce as being unreasonable.’
Because the decision about Roberts’ steps had already been made in Keane’s previous ruling.
Although not using the words ‘reasonable steps’ in his findings, Keane outlines actions Roberts could have taken and finds, in the case of the email sent before the election (the only action Roberts had taken at that time) —
‘this email could not be effective as a renunciation
because it was not sent to the appropriate authority, namely the Home Office in
the United Kingdom. In addition, as I have found, this email could not be
effective as a renunciation of his UK citizenship because it did not contain a
declaration of truth, and it was not accompanied by the prescribed fee’
‘Senator Roberts could have made effective inquiries of the British High
Commission by which he would have been informed of the steps necessary to
renounce his foreign citizenship. He could have obtained and completed a form
of renunciation declaration, such as Form RN,and returned it with the required
fee to the Home Office as he belatedly did’
http://eresources.hcourt.gov.au/downloadPdf/2017/HCA/39
The implication here seems to be that, if Roberts had taken these actions, he might well have been safe.
Socrates
You are in a bad way when people from light and fluffy Morning Television feel brave enough to bark at you . Truffles now left with just the domesticated CPG lizards.
Poroti, socrates
Karl has been giving Turnbull (and the govt) shit for a few months now
Better than Leigh “lettuce leaf” Sales
I didn’t say there was anything fishy about duel citizens. There is not. I said there are people in Parliament that were honest and followed the highest law of the land and renounced their foreign citizenship, and then there are all of those foreign nationals sitting in Parliament that did not. That is “fishy” because they conveniently ‘forgot’ to check their parents nationalities.
Geez, I’d hate to have you with your foot in my front door canvassing during an election campaign, Briefly.
That’s meant as a compliment.
Two arguments, for and against:
For
We are a multicultural country and dual-citizens should be allowed to be parliamentarians. Dual citizens are being discriminated against by s44.
Against
Yeah, but what if the dual-citizen’s primary allegiance is to his “other” country? Like a Chinese national who’s bought Australian citizenship for the very purpose of getting into the Australian parliament and influencing legislation towards China? (there’s a lot of similar stuff going on behind the scenes in our universities right now). And anyway, plenty of other people can’t be MPs either: bankrupts, criminals, government employees and contractors. We don’t hear anyone whingeing about justice for bankrupts or crims.
For
s44 depends too much on the whims of a foreign power. What if Kim Jong-un declared all Aussies to be North Koreans, and then took his time processing (but did not refuse to process) the renouncements? Where would those precious “reasonable steps” be then? When would enough be enough in renouncingNorth Korean citizenship? Putting in the form? Waiting for an acknowledgement? Answering follow-up questions? Relying on the North Korean Postmaster General (if there is one)? Better to just get rid of the whole thing.
Against
Well, we just go off to the High Court and get matters like this cleared up, with test cases.
For
“Allegiance” is not a matter of a piece of paper. “Allegiance” is in the heart. Philby, Burgess and McLean were British to their bootstraps, in manners and upbringing, but that didn’t mean they gave Britain their primary allegiance.
Against
The piece of paper is at least a start. It means that it’s more difficult for a traitor to flee the country, or to seek consular protection and support of their “other” homeland if caught in a criminal act.
———
Seems to me there are thousands of scenarios for both sides of the argument. The High Court keeps answering only questions they are asked, not that need to be asked, or will be asked in future. They keep eking out their “wisdom” and it’s driving us nuts. They are making as big a fool of themselves are they are of our politicians.
The Commonwealth has jurisdiction over matters of citizenship and immigration. The parliament alone changed the definition of “Australian” from “British subject” to “naturalized Australian” without a referral to the High Court. Why can’t some form of words be found to make other changes that clarify the matter?
Aqualung
The article makes some reasonable-ish points about Nuclear Power, best raised in the Australian context in oh say 1996 (which is before the Greens were in any way a political force), to be even vaguely relevant today.
But it’s mostly a rant about how democracy is best served by keeping it as far from the demos as possible and how representative democracy is better than icky direct democracy.
That would be the junction that even the private sector aren’t interested in building because of the size and complexity. But mostly because it’s going to be underground.
If Gladys wasn’t so beholden to the private road sector this is actually a project that was screaming out for a metro or rail line that reclaimed the eastern lanes of the Harbour Bridge and terminated at the existing platforms under the Menzies Hotel. Those platforms are about to be lost forever due this governments stupidity.
Soc
‘I thought One Nation usually broke down squabbling shortly AFTER the election?’
WA was similar, they fell apart before the election.
I wonder what if Pauleen will be on Insiders with Cassidy before the Queensland state election?
Some posters have been canvassing the possibility of forcing a login before we are allowed to post. I want to log in (or possibly “on”) but my understanding is I can’t because I don’t have an old Crikey account. Can anyone correct me on this?
I wanted to get this question in before the policy is implemented and I lose my chance to ask it.
Ante
I am in the same boat re the login situation
Kold Konnection says:
Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 1:51 pm
There is nothing “fishy” about dual citizens
I didn’t say there was anything fishy about duel citizens. There is not.
S.44(i) makes the presumption that dual citizens are necessarily of dubious tenor and imposes a universal impairment on their political rights. That is “fishy”.
Windhover @ #1333 Thursday, November 9th, 2017 – 12:25 pm
Didn’t they dismiss his ineffectual steps as being ineffectual?
While I’m sure the court would never hold that not following the proper process is anything other than unreasonable, I also tend to think that had Roberts’s unorthodox steps had managed to produce an acknowledged renunciation anyways he would have been in the clear.
The court wants to see confirmation that the citizenship was gone prior to the close of nominations, or evidence that reasonable steps were taken to get rid of it and that the only reason it’s still retained is due to some failing (or malice) of the overseas administration. If someone can prove beyond doubt that they correctly took every step within the required process to renounce prior to nominating, I think the HC will conclude they’re eligible.
But that’s never been ruled on before, so the case should absolutely be referred.
Allegiance is also something that a foreign power can demand of you, regardless of what you hold in your heart. Renunciation strips them of that ability, and shields you from things like conscription into a foreign army or extradition to face charges in a foreign court for breaking one or more laws that a foreign nation may place against its citizens residing abroad.
Allegiance means being bound by the laws of a foreign power. Renunciation is the only way to break that bond.
Savva today actually seems to criticise Turnbull.
Though hedging saying the problem is due to previous party administrators and the ‘Capital B black letter judgement ‘.
Also the 21 day period is necessary because some members need that time to check and get the necessary documents.
Apparently coalition MPs have complicated family histories.
Thanks zoomster,
That’s what I was referring to.
If Windhover is correct then that whole discussion was pointless, the fact he had not renounced his citizenship was all that mattered.
I agree with you that it leaves the suggestion that there is, at least within Keane’s thinking, a relevance of what you do to dispose of any citizenship in deciding eligibility.
Bushfire
Good point about the Chinese cits. (One I made a few days ago)
Bushfire
” Like a Chinese national who’s bought Australian citizenship for the very purpose of getting into the Australian parliament and influencing legislation towards China?”
If the Chinese government wants to get there own people into our parliament they could “accept” any renunciation made to comply with S44. There is nothing to stop them forgeting about it at a later date.
If china wanted to influence parliamentarians they could just chuck about some expensive watches.
Ante Meridian , @William
Yes, you seem to be correct and there doesn’t appear to be an option to register a new account anywhere (unless maybe by becoming a patron ? But that seems like a fairly high bar to ask )
As I mentioned the other day I mostly use the phone and got sick of having to login every day in spite of selecting remember me. Hence my anonymous status.
Looking at the evidence compiled by William and others, Trump may have succeeded where HClinton failed: getting out the minorities and the youf and the female vote.
Who said he could not do anything?
Duelling citizen MPs are just as illegal as dualing citizen MPs.
To the account challenged:
I think if you go to WordPress.com and create a wordpress account, you can log on to PB with that.
IE use the user ID and password from the wordpress account to log on to PB
I suspect William’s preference is not to have ‘log on’ at all as prospective new commentors are put off by having to go through the process before they can comment.
We seem to have gained a number of new repeat participants since the change.
Sorry Bemused
I thought Tanya was from one of the Baltic Nations but could not recall which. Not too much basic change mind you. Change Baltic to Balkan !!!!!
My point still remains.
Up in the top left corner on my screen there is ‘Dashboard’ which includes a profile: name, email address. I assume this can be used by new posters. Does it include ‘log on’?
The problem of a mobile logging you out is one I meet occasionally, but thank goodness not often.
I only found out I was eligible to be a Baltic dual citizen about 3 years ago. After spending several months acquiring the right documents, it still took an additional 2 years after applying to get it!
Internet speed whinge:
This morning I connected to the internet at the local hospital via ACT Health’s free internet wifi.
Download speed 16+ Mbps, Upload 20Mpbs.
At Home ADSL2 Download speed 5.2 Mbps, Upload .08 Mbps.
:angry:
Looks like some moderates in the Government are finding their courage.
How long will that last?
Hopefully long enough to get the legislation through.
I liked Wong’s comment at the end.
🙂
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-11-09/birmingham-slaps-down-conservative-colleagues-same-sex-marriage/9134220
There’s no dashboard on the top left of my screen. I’m using Firefox on Windows 8.1.
And I tried logging in with WordPress credentials, and it didn’t work.
CTar1 @ #1374 Thursday, November 9th, 2017 – 2:22 pm
I think you are entitled to be a little angry about your service.
Are you well ❓
My sister in law Doreen is in a Canberra hospital with her son spending hours per day with her.
Doreen is relatively happy to have waiter service.
I miss having a long, looonnnggg chat twice a week but hope she will soon be home again.
Be good to yourself.
☮☮
Ante Meridian @ #1369 Thursday, November 9th, 2017 – 1:29 pm
I don’t think you can have a dashboard until after being logged in?
CTar1 says:
Thursday, November 9, 2017 at 2:22 pm
I can see your concern.
The the adverse health implications are clear to see.
Increased stress and anxiety can have serious health implications on leaving hospital.
Half in jest.
KayJay
Canberra Hospital – A bit of a lottery. Some parts good, other parts, I’d guess equivalent to hospitals in Soviet Russian regional city hospitals in the 1980’s.
I’m a little impaired at the moment but trucking along OK.
CTar1
Of Mayfair ?
.
I hope this works.
Now I’m logged out and can’t log in. !!!!!
Phew! I’m back. That was strange.
a r @ #1378 Thursday, November 9th, 2017 – 2:35 pm
Yes. Dashboard comes with log in.
I just tried to log in with one of my secondary email addresses. No go.
HELP WILLIAM
A short talk on the process of new posters logging is required.
Ante Meridian
Can you find a log in facility on the RHS of the screen?
So, there has been a mass migration of gerbils!
My advice would be not to poke the gerbils.
Sometimes the site seems to automatically refresh and log me out. Anyone else?
Bonza
Finally got evidence of my father’s birth in Lithuania – in the end had to appeal to one of my aunts, a bit of a process, as she doesn’t speak or write English so has to take letters off to be translated.
She did a sterling job, however, not only finding and paying for the relevant documents but then having them professionally translated as well.
Lizzie, you Don’t know how confused I was when I read your post:
‘Now I’m logged out and can’t log in. !!!!!’
BGID and Zoomster:
Keane only decided factual issues “relating to Senator(sic) Roberts state of mind(sic) and his knowledge of his British citizenship at the relevant times.” An application was made, opposed by Roberts counsel, to expand the facts to determine whether what Roberts did was effectual. Keane at [13] of his judgment specifically rejected the application to expand the issue.
In order to determine the issue of dual citizenship the HC judgment is all you need to look at. The HC has drawn a very sharp and easy to follow line in the sand.
Step 1: Was the candidate a dual citizen at the relevant times? The answer to this question will depend on the foreign law evidence. In Canavan’s case the HC found on the expert evidence that his application for citizenship was a pre-condition to becoming a citizen of Italy and not simply a procedural step to a citizenship to which he was entitled
Step 2: If the candidate was a dual citizen then do the laws of the second country reasonably permit renunciation? This enquiry is NOT dependent in any way on the actions taken by candidate to renounce.
Step 3: If the answer to step 2 is “yes” then the candidate is ineligible. End of story. See Barnaby, Roberts.
Step 4: If the answer to step 2 is “no” then AND ONLY THEN the candidate must show “reasonable steps” have been taken to renounce the foreign citizenship. The purpose of taking reasonable steps is to enable the candidate to demonstrate overt willingness to forego any allegiance to the foreign country. The purpose of taking reasonable steps is NOT to save candidates taken by surprise by the calling of the election, or unaware of their second citizenship, or because they have made half-arsed efforts to renounce timeously.
AR is right in stating the HC found that the steps Roberts took were ineffectual to renounce his British citizenship. Whether the steps he took were reasonable or not was irrelevant. Which is why the HC judgment does not refer to them.
What I have stated above is not, IMO, controversial. There are no more interesting Constitutional law cases to be heard on the operation of s.44 in respect of dual citizenship. The HC decision removes all doubt.
The only cases that might well be referred to the HC for consideration are those which require a determination of the application of foreign law (as in Canavan’s case). Fraudenberg’s situation is interesting in that regard. Most cases: Parry, Keay, Lambie, etc will be determined by a very simple factual finding: were they dual citizens at the relevant time?
Whatever minor quibbles re logon I have I am massively happier (:poor grammar emoji) with the new digs than the other place so I’m not going to offend our overlord by whinging.
PeeBee
At that moment I was posting as an anonymous.
Later I found a login box. 🙁