For finding invalidly elected MPs, as far back as anyone willing to do so.
For the decisions of the now known invalidly elected, as far back as they were ministers or were involved in divisions (close votes), if anyone wants to raise an objection, such as the business interests mentioned in the story.
This is the problem with the system relying on trusting any moron who signed a nomination form.
I think going back through every decision these members have been a part of for their entire career and potentially undoing any good work etc⌠is unreasonable and a huge waste of time and money.
Things clearly need to change and ensure that it doesnât happen again and all current members need to make sure they are 100% in the clear but I donât think we can delve back and change the past, we just have to move on with it and whatâs done is done. This could have affected any of the parties and could have blown up at any time, itâs definitely something people will be aware of now and also that itâs not all clear cut. e.g. People thinking they are born and bred Australian, finding out they do in fact have other heritage.
While what youâre saying sounds reasonable, letâs remember several of these cases were obvious like Malcolm Roberts, and Barnaby Joyce (he knew his father was a New Zealander at the time Barnaby was born).
Except it already went before the High Court two decades ago, Labor lost an MP/candidate, and with their internal vetting changes since then, thatâs why they seem to be OK now.
Given the LNPâs appallingly hypocritical (& stupid) behaviour on multiple topicsâŚ
LNP federal ministers have been attacking the Labor opposition (federal MPs) while wanting their cooperation (bipartisanship)
They are also attacking the states while demanding state law changes to implement the LNPâs NEG policy
Plus last weekâs ROC/AFP raids debacle to attack Shorten for stuff from a decade ago.
âŚwhy should Labor to ignore this, let alone private business interests who could get an unfavourable decision overturned?
Why should politicians be above the law?
Asking to ignore their past false declarations, undeserved salaries, ex-MP âpensionsâ & travel allowances, while the DHS/Centrelink ârobodebtâ programme continues to menacingly demand money from people who donât owe anythingâŚ
Thatâs not fair nor reasonable.
Just try suggesting to the ATO or DHS that they shouldnât look back at forms you submitted to them beyond last year and see what sort of reaction you get.
Itâs not over yet, thereâs another one. Liberal Senate President Stephen Parry. If heâs out, it could lead to Richard Colbeck gaining back his spot which he lost last election after being relegated to the unwinnable 5th spot on the Liberal ticket but came very close to claiming the last spot after very high first preferencing from those voting below the line.
Reaction in Tasmania appears to be shock and disappointment⌠that it wasnât Eric Abetz but we still hold out hope!
I think all of the senators who were found to be ineligible should not have to pay their salary back.
I mean, they all worked for their salary - it was their job. They should not have to pay back their salary if they did the work, even if it was found that they were eventually ineligible.
The problem lies with the Commonwealthâs process, not requiring people who are nominated to prove they did not hold dual citizenship. Yes, these people were negligent (Malcolm Roberts is an exception - more on that later), but they were accepted through the electoral process and did the work under the impression that they were perfectly OK to do that work.
Malcolm Roberts is a special case. The evidence shows that he was clearly aware of the issue when being nominated, yet he continued with his nomination anyway.
For example, imagine you apply for a job which, as a supplementary requirement, requires a first aid certificate. Youâre under the impression that your first aid certificate is valid ad infinitum and so you pop that in your resume and show it in your initial interview (the interviewer doesnât check the dates).
About a year later after an incident where someone didnât perform first aid correctly which resulted in someoneâs hospitalisation, HR requests everyone send in their first aid certificates. You send yours in (dated 5/3/2009 or something) and HR calls you in after they see how old the certificate is.
They say your first aid certificate expired 5 years ago (as theyâre only valid for 3 years) and that you should never have been hired in the first place without one, so they ask you to pay back your salary. Is that fair?
Exactly what Barnaby did about the Greens when it first happened. Itâs things like this you just shut your mouth and hope for the best because if it comes back to bite you, karma is a bitch!
For those that shouldâve known (like Roberts, Joyce), they should have to pay it back.
With the cases of subtle changes in foreign laws (like Waters), yes Iâd waive the repayment as thereâd clearly have been no intention of defrauding the Commonwealth.
If the govât was as forgiving to the rest of us taxpayers, people on welfare, etc., then I donât think people would have a problem, but when you have the DHS ârobo-debtâ, ATO âcrackdownâ audits on work expenses, the comparison with MPsâ abusing their entitlements and now this isnât a good look.
PS:
This clown shouldâve done these further checks with the UK Home Office months ago when the others had been revealed, not after the HC decision.
Do you think Scott Ludlam should have to pay back his salaries and entitlements?
After all, he was born in NZ himself and lived there until he was eight years old - surely thatâs a bit more obvious than Barnaby Joyceâs lack of awareness that his dad was an NZ citizen at the time of his birth?
Regardless, I donât think either Scott Ludlam or Barnaby Joyce intended to defraud the Commonwealth and so they should not have to pay their salaries back.
Malcolm Roberts was clearly aware of the citizenship requirement prior to nomination, and was aware that his citizenship status was murky, so I think he should have to pay his salary and entitlements back.
Yes, as you said; anyone born overseas shouldâve actually checked/confirmed before signing a false declaration (a crime I believe).
Youâre right his case is especially inexcusable - more than Joyce - having lived there for years.
I think the same as tax law should apply: Guilty until proven innocent; you have to pay back what you owe plus a penalty.
Iâm not asking for them to be persecuted, just treated the same way as with the laws they inflict on the rest of us.
If not, then itâs starting to look like the rulers vs the ruled again.
Oh and perhaps let their lawyers defend a charge of defrauding the Commonwealth before a court? (Like when an ordinary person is accused of breaking the law?)
Sounds like there could be a media release from (ex?) Senator Parry shortly as he has received advice as to his citizenship status now and will be talking with colleagues.
Read an interesting article this morning from Antony Green which was saying that it will be likely former Tourism Minister Richard Colbeck will be back in but due to his high first preferences (I think about 4 times that of any other Liberal on the ticket) and the way the recount would have to go that it could lead to other interesting results including the unelection theoretically of Greens Senator Nick McKim, however that would not occur as it would go to court and rather than getting two new Senators (depending on how the votes and preferences now distribute) that it would be Colbeck in and McKim retaining. Although more High Court drama could be exciting!
And heâs gone, another one bites the dust. Surely itâs now time to audit every member of Parliament to sort it out once and for all before it drags on further.
âŚbuilding throughout has been a sense of anger: that basic checking was not done by so many people. And that more responsibility has not been taken by those we elect to do the very solemn, important (and well-remunerated) job of being a parliamentarian.
âŚBarnaby Joyce and Fiona Nash, shamelessly continued to sit in cabinet, make ministerial decisions and take their mighty ministerial pay even though things looked iffy. Stephen Parry, over there in the Senate presidentâs chair, didnât say a word about his British father.
And when authorities ⌠officially confirmed Joyce and co. were ineligible, there was no hint of apology or personal responsibility. Rather, youâd be forgiven for thinking they are the victims here.
After the High Court declared her invalid, Nash issued a statement about how she had put in â12 years of hard workâ and was âreally proud of the things Iâve been able to achieveâ. Nowhere in the detailed list of her achievements did she give the slightest snippet of regret that she sat in the Senate for more than a decade when she was not entitled to be there.
Parry should definitely be forced by the Department of Finance to pay back all the money paid to him since at least the last election, and probably since he was first elected. He deliberately withheld from the parliament for some months (years?) that he suspected (knew?) he was a British citizen. Totally unacceptable behaviour.
Thatâs the only way to change it. To pass, a referendum requires a majority of support in a majority of states. As a result, only 8 of 44 have been passed successfully.
Iâd imagine itâll be added to the next referendum day held as itâs the only way to solve it.
(1) An audit of the citizenship of every member of parliament.
(2) A federal anti-corruption commission.
(3) Royal commission into banks.
Malcolm, Iâll cut you a deal. Do two of those three things and Iâll perhaps consider the possibility of potentially exploring the chance of maybe voting Liberals.
i want all 3, along with a royal comission into the NBN. i also want a formalised complaint handling proicedure at the NBN with external oversight. at the moment they are not mebers of the TIO so you canât complaon to them and NBNco is get up as a government owned corperation so you can;t complain to the commonweath ombudsman
AlsoâŚcouldnât Labor find anyone in Tamworth or Armidale? They had to go to my old neck of the woods? Seriously, Scone should be part of Hunter. Ewings is toast, unless Barnaby is caught doing something other than his missus,