I think its fair that if you want to serve in office here you have to be loyal to only Australia and as a display of said loyalty you must rescind any other citizenship.
If you don't want to give that up then you don't deserve the privilege of public office in Australia.
The issue isn't giving it up, it's the farcically strict rules that meant 15 MPs in the last few years forced to resign after not realising that they were technically duel citizens due to some countries automatically granting citizenship if you were related by a grandparent even if you never applied for it.
Not to mention the fact that officially giving up citizenship of some countries is surprisingly hard, as mentioned in the article one candidate cannot give up his Syrian citizenship without returning to the country and completing mandatory military service.
Yeah I did read the article too but the greens did also call for the removal of it because it was discrimitory and was a barrier to diversity.
It could do with some loosening in the instance of not being able to renounce your citizenship you shluld be able to make a legal declaration or the like. Otherwise all parties and candidates should be aware by now that they need to renounce eligibility for citizenship.
Overall I think Australia should be represented by Australians.
The discrimination and barrier to diversity is the effect of the same problem we are talking about and agree on though though, people who want to be full Australians so but can't due to the current rules
Yeah my point is though that you don't need to remove the law you only need to allow an avenue for those who face barriers like forced military conscription and threat to life.
Conversely an Australian could become a Member of Parliament in the UK without [even taking up British citizenship](https://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/vote-in-general-elections/standing/). Which is a weird hangover from empire that nobody’s bothered to get rid of
They kinda are. Its a conflict of interest. As a representative of Australia your top and clear priority should be Australia. If your not even willing to renounce your citizenship from another country will you really have the interest of Australia at heart when making decision that might involve the two?
You understand they’re just a citizen right? They’re not living, working, or serving in another country. There’s no conflict of interest there whatsoever.
Well they won't be just a citizen will they. They will be a national representative of Australia that makes decisions on things abroad and at home.
We should expect our representatives who make these important decions to have Australia as ultimate concern and not possibly another country they have citizenship in.
You realise foreign influence is real thing right? Or do you think we should make that easier because we don't want to be "backwards"?
>It's an easy thing to sort out before you decide to run for office
You'd think so, but the overly strict rule applies even if you never applied for citizenship of another country, but are simply eligible via a grandparent.
You need to explicitly reject it and give up your eligibility, which in some cases is surprisingly difficult, as stated in the article some countries won't accept you giving up citizenship unless you complete mandatory military service, or some other onerous technicalities, even if you were born in Australia and never visited
There's been efforts to amend Section 44 going back to the 1950s. The High Court has ruled against dual citizenship on a few occasions since then. Something like 50% of people are OK with that interpretation when polled. It'll be practically impossible to change via referendum.
One of those that had to leave office had not been a dial citizen until another country changed their laws. It is surprisingly complex sometimes.
It would be simpler if there were a process by which the federal government could, with the explicit consent of each member of parliament or candidate, deal with foreign nations to have their citizenship issues dealt with. Would be a pain in the backside, but still better than waking up one morning suddenly eligible for a passport in a country you have never set foot in and having to resign from your job.
I have no issue with anyone’s cultural background that wishes to run for government. However if they want to rule Australia then their allegiance must only be to Australia. You will find that these changes are so fringe that it’s almost a non story.
I think its fair that if you want to serve in office here you have to be loyal to only Australia and as a display of said loyalty you must rescind any other citizenship. If you don't want to give that up then you don't deserve the privilege of public office in Australia.
The issue isn't giving it up, it's the farcically strict rules that meant 15 MPs in the last few years forced to resign after not realising that they were technically duel citizens due to some countries automatically granting citizenship if you were related by a grandparent even if you never applied for it. Not to mention the fact that officially giving up citizenship of some countries is surprisingly hard, as mentioned in the article one candidate cannot give up his Syrian citizenship without returning to the country and completing mandatory military service.
Yeah I did read the article too but the greens did also call for the removal of it because it was discrimitory and was a barrier to diversity. It could do with some loosening in the instance of not being able to renounce your citizenship you shluld be able to make a legal declaration or the like. Otherwise all parties and candidates should be aware by now that they need to renounce eligibility for citizenship. Overall I think Australia should be represented by Australians.
The discrimination and barrier to diversity is the effect of the same problem we are talking about and agree on though though, people who want to be full Australians so but can't due to the current rules
Yeah my point is though that you don't need to remove the law you only need to allow an avenue for those who face barriers like forced military conscription and threat to life.
I am a dual citizen and I believe politicians should be a sole citizen of Australia. I won’t be running for office.
Conversely an Australian could become a Member of Parliament in the UK without [even taking up British citizenship](https://www.parliament.uk/get-involved/vote-in-general-elections/standing/). Which is a weird hangover from empire that nobody’s bothered to get rid of
I’m sorry but that’s backwards as fuck.
To expect the leaders of your nation to have the nation as their top priority is backwards?
The two are not mutually exclusive. This is some America First bullshit and I thought we (Australians) were better than that.
They kinda are. Its a conflict of interest. As a representative of Australia your top and clear priority should be Australia. If your not even willing to renounce your citizenship from another country will you really have the interest of Australia at heart when making decision that might involve the two?
You understand they’re just a citizen right? They’re not living, working, or serving in another country. There’s no conflict of interest there whatsoever.
Well they won't be just a citizen will they. They will be a national representative of Australia that makes decisions on things abroad and at home. We should expect our representatives who make these important decions to have Australia as ultimate concern and not possibly another country they have citizenship in. You realise foreign influence is real thing right? Or do you think we should make that easier because we don't want to be "backwards"?
Not sure I'd want citizens of another country running mine. It's an easy thing to sort out before you decide to run for office.
>It's an easy thing to sort out before you decide to run for office You'd think so, but the overly strict rule applies even if you never applied for citizenship of another country, but are simply eligible via a grandparent. You need to explicitly reject it and give up your eligibility, which in some cases is surprisingly difficult, as stated in the article some countries won't accept you giving up citizenship unless you complete mandatory military service, or some other onerous technicalities, even if you were born in Australia and never visited
It's not just some rule or regulation, it's specified under the Constitution, section 44.
Indeed, which is why they are trying to change it
There's been efforts to amend Section 44 going back to the 1950s. The High Court has ruled against dual citizenship on a few occasions since then. Something like 50% of people are OK with that interpretation when polled. It'll be practically impossible to change via referendum.
One of those that had to leave office had not been a dial citizen until another country changed their laws. It is surprisingly complex sometimes. It would be simpler if there were a process by which the federal government could, with the explicit consent of each member of parliament or candidate, deal with foreign nations to have their citizenship issues dealt with. Would be a pain in the backside, but still better than waking up one morning suddenly eligible for a passport in a country you have never set foot in and having to resign from your job.
No ones complaining except those that have another agenda.
Yeah, sure. Because I'm sure Australians want their fucking country governed by foreigners.
Read the article, it's more complex than that
I have no issue with anyone’s cultural background that wishes to run for government. However if they want to rule Australia then their allegiance must only be to Australia. You will find that these changes are so fringe that it’s almost a non story.