up-into-the-air Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 New movement for #aviation New England by-election New England by-election Found this material today. Barnaby Joyce has a worthy adversary who is putting aviation front and centre. We should forget about politics in this and get behind the principle of what aviation needs and get it in front of as many Journo's that we can. An opportunity for change and proper publicity Ian Britza enters fray for by-election in New England 1 1
fly_tornado Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 Country people love Barnaby because he's such a bigot.
Bernie Knight Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 I'm amazed that constituents are put through this expensive voting process across Australia in what must be one of the greatest waste of time and money exercises in our political arena... There are so many urgent items parliament needs to address - not to mention the terrorist campaign being a priority and top of mind of us all. I'm gob smacked that a parliamentary sitting member didn't move a change to the constitution to just get on with the business of the day. How the Australian and New Zealand dual citizenship even gets parliamentary speaker time amazes me and is an insult to both Australians and New Zealanders who fought side by side in the war. Have we forgotten the ANZAC history. What the hell was Barnaby going to do to jeopardise our security if he did in fact have New Zealand citizenship? Get sheep banned or the rugby banned to our advantage I do understand conflict exists if one had dual citizenship with a country that was considered hostile.. Mmmm go figure - ill get off my soapbox now.. Just my Sunday morning coffee rant 4 1
old man emu Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 It is ironic that over 120 years after the writing of the Australian Constitution that this dual nationality matter has arisen in a nation of immigrants. How many of the first parliamentarians were first generation immigrants? Take one of the shining lights of Federal Parliament from 1903 to 1917 - King O'Malley. He claimed to have been born in Canada, but more likely to have been born in the USA. He didn't arrive in Australia until 1893, and after sitting in the South Australian and Tasmanian parliaments, was elected in the Tasmanian Federal seat of Darwin in 1903. His record in parliament is mainly positive - Trans-Australia Railway, selection of the site of the capitol, promotion of a government run bank (Commonwealth Bank). His only sin was making the ACT a dry state, since he was an evangelical teetotaler. Apart from him, Billy Hughes wasn't born here. Henry Parkes, the Father of Federation, wasn't born here. And the list goes on. I think that the idea of persons being strictly Australian citizens did not become law until the Hawke/Keating Labor years. Prior to that, most parliamentarians were native born, British Empire/Commonwealth born, or naturalised from other countries. At those times, I doubt if much notice was taken of the effects of one's parents not being native born. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to lower yourself into the role of politician, then as long as you are either natruralised, or born here, I don't care how big you passport colelction is. OME 1
Old Koreelah Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 Country people love Barnaby because he's such a bigot. I'll bite, FT. Do some homework. The people of New England chose Tony Windsor as their rep. He enjoyed an enormous level of support and improved his vote over time. Can you provide any evidence of his being a bigot? The turning point for Windsor was when he chose to support the Gillard government. Even though he achieved more for rural people than his National Parry predecessors ever had, many voters were hoodwinked by the grubby campaign unleashed against him and Gillard by Tony Abbott. Mud sticks, and Windsor had not hope against the vast campaign budget given to Barnaby Joyce. Let's give this new bloke some support. He'll need it. 1
fly_tornado Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 What the hell was Barnaby going to do to jeopardise our security if he did in fact have New Zealand citizenship? now, of course, if it was a Chinese or a Muslim senator, that would be a different story. its this sort of thinking that creeps into the electorate, so what if the senator is voting on an amendment that could land a windfall profit to his wife's company? a little bit of corruption is a small price to pay. New Zealand devalued its currency in 2011 and is in the process wiping out our dairy industry and the Nationals won't lift a finger to save dairy farmers. Can you provide any evidence of his being a bigot? The nationals are voting NO regardless of the outcome of the plebiscite, that by definition is bigotry. They support the NO campaign because there are a lot of votes in hating the gays in regional areas. Have you heard the rumours about a certain New England local who's wife has kicked him out after he was caught having an affair with his staffer? Apparently, the staffer is pregnant? 1
Yenn Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 It was up to the politicians to prove they were not citizens of a foreign country. I would like to see voting for our lollies restricted to Australian citizens with no foreign allegiance. I would have to renounce my English citizenship, but that would not be hard.
Jaba-who Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 It is ironic that over 120 years after the writing of the Australian Constitution that this dual nationality matter has arisen in a nation of immigrants.How many of the first parliamentarians were first generation immigrants? Take one of the shining lights of Federal Parliament from 1903 to 1917 - King O'Malley. He claimed to have been born in Canada, but more likely to have been born in the USA. He didn't arrive in Australia until 1893, and after sitting in the South Australian and Tasmanian parliaments, was elected in the Tasmanian Federal seat of Darwin in 1903. His record in parliament is mainly positive - Trans-Australia Railway, selection of the site of the capitol, promotion of a government run bank (Commonwealth Bank). His only sin was making the ACT a dry state, since he was an evangelical teetotaler. Apart from him, Billy Hughes wasn't born here. Henry Parkes, the Father of Federation, wasn't born here. And the list goes on. I think that the idea of persons being strictly Australian citizens did not become law until the Hawke/Keating Labor years. Prior to that, most parliamentarians were native born, British Empire/Commonwealth born, or naturalised from other countries. At those times, I doubt if much notice was taken of the effects of one's parents not being native born. As far as I'm concerned, if you want to lower yourself into the role of politician, then as long as you are either natruralised, or born here, I don't care how big you passport colelction is. OME The ABC had a segment a few weeks back talking to an ex-high court judge or constitutional lawyer ( I forget which) but essentially he said two things. Firstly that almost every parliament since federation probably had large numbers of members who were actually ineligible. Secondly that if a malign country wanted to completely cripple Australia they could make every Australian citizen an automatic citizen of their country and we would be rendered government less and if that country simply refused to accept any denouncement of that citizenship there is absolutely nothing we could do because we need a government to change the constitution. The way it is worded means that you don't even have to want it or accept it. As soon as you are eligible you have to step down from parliament. I'm expecting North Korean citizenship any day now!
robinsm Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 now, of course, if it was a Chinese or a Muslim senator, that would be a different story.its this sort of thinking that creeps into the electorate, so what if the senator is voting on an amendment that could land a windfall profit to his wife's company? a little bit of corruption is a small price to pay. New Zealand devalued its currency in 2011 and is in the process wiping out our dairy industry and the Nationals won't lift a finger to save dairy farmers. The nationals are voting NO regardless of the outcome of the plebiscite, that by definition is bigotry. They support the NO campaign because there are a lot of votes in hating the gays in regional areas. Have you heard the rumours about a certain New England local who's wife has kicked him out after he was caught having an affair with his staffer? Apparently, the staffer is pregnant? I think your definition of a bigot needs to be reevaluated. Just because someone votes no in opposition to your supposed line does not make them a bigot, it makes them a follower of their parties line. Rightly or wrongly that's politics, not bigotry... 1 1
shafs64 Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 I'm amazed that constituents are put through this expensive voting process across Australia in what must be one of the greatest waste of time and money exercises in our political arena...There are so many urgent items parliament needs to address - not to mention the terrorist campaign being a priority and top of mind of us all. I'm gob smacked that a parliamentary sitting member didn't move a change to the constitution to just get on with the business of the day. How the Australian and New Zealand dual citizenship even gets parliamentary speaker time amazes me and is an insult to both Australians and New Zealanders who fought side by side in the war. Have we forgotten the ANZAC history. What the hell was Barnaby going to do to jeopardise our security if he did in fact have New Zealand citizenship? Get sheep banned or the rugby banned to our advantage I do understand conflict exists if one had dual citizenship with a country that was considered hostile.. Mmmm go figure - ill get off my soapbox now.. Just my Sunday morning coffee rant How many Australians have died by the hands of terroists compared to the amount of people who die at work. And if you want to talk about waste let’s talk about f35s
fly_tornado Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 I think your definition of a bigot needs to be reevaluated. Just because someone votes no in opposition to your supposed line does not make them a bigot, it makes them a follower of their parties line. Rightly or wrongly that's politics, not bigotry... Barnaby knows what's bigots want
robinsm Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 Barnaby knows what's bigots want he may do, he may also know what non bigots want...
red750 Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 We're getting away from the fact that here's a candidate with a passion aviation. Any other political discussion belongs on the other forum. 3
Bernie Knight Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 Red750 Oops guilty of probably starting this off track discussion.. Back on track we need more politicians on side .. I saw a sticker on a car the other day it summed it up perfectly "Don't vote for them it only encourages them"..
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now