On the Citizenship saga
Greg Poropat writes: Re.”Constitutional games showed this government is breathtakingly incompetent” (Monday)
Barnaby Joyce has proclaimed that because after the 2016 election he was declared to be the Member for New England, until the High Court’s decision last Friday he was entitled to be that as well as a Minister of the Crown and the Deputy Prime Minister. But at paragraph 111 of its decision, the High Court unanimously held that “At the date of his nomination Mr Joyce MP was incapable of being chosen or sitting as a member of the House of Representatives”.
At paragraph 139 the Court held that “in the event that Mr Joyce MP was incapable of being chosen as a member of the House of Representatives, the election of Mr Joyce MP was void”. These are the simplest of facts. Mr. Joyce, no longer MP, was incapable, and therefore not entitled, to sit as a member of the House of Representatives, he was not elected to the Parliament and these circumstances have existed throughout the term of this Parliament. Mr. Joyce’s statements are wrong.
While some rejoice in the de-Joyceing of the Parliament, matters arising from this are far from finished. While there might be challenges to some of the decisions he made while representing himself to have an authority and standing that the High Court has said he was incapable of having, there also are the not trivial matters of his use of taxpayer resources and monies that he was not empowered to use to influence and determine public policy that he was not empowered to either influence or determine as a Member of Parliament, Minister or acting Prime Minister. The candidate for New England’s claims should not go unchallenged.
On top of that, he will also no longer qualify for the various parliamentary pension that he was entitled to, retrospectively never having been qualified for them in the first place unless he gets elected in the future and accumulate the time needed to meet qualifying period for such pensions.
when are the claims circulating of alleged sexual harassment of young women by joyce going to be investigated, if untrue they should be put to rest, however if they have basis in fact a thorough investigation should be undertaken , there is no difference here and the peter slipper affair which was front page news and used by the Abbott opposition to shame the then government. is there one rule for coalition politicians and another rule for the others, if it was one nation , labor or the greens it would be front page on every newspaper .
I also read that the Libs likely replacement for Fiona Nash in the Senate is ineligible because of her AAT appointment which would bring up Jim Molan who may well be the recipient of a Commonwealth military pension and also ineligible ?
To your point, it rots my sox that some poor single Mum is put through a financial wringer by Centrelink to account for the odd thousand and then we have Baanarby being arrogant and seemingly incapable of filling out a simple form which will cost us millions in a by election. Does he have to pay us back ??
will baaaarnaby be paying maintenance and child support if the stories are true and his wife has left him, surely he cant claim them as a tax deduction, can he ?
If ever there were a more perfect contrast between the rulers and the ruled, it is the entitlements of the ineligible to be elected and those being harried by the robodebt.
Has anyone looked into the Todger’s citizenship? We can only hope.
“he was not elected to the Parliament and these circumstances have existed throughout the term of this Parliament”
… and the previous Parliaments that he has been a member of….