GarryP

Quite true. Bang to rights - ineligible to stand.

The 'I didn't know' attempt at a defence isn't going to fly, since anyone could claim they 'didn't know' - ignorance is no innocence. The onus is on you to meet the requirements and not be :
if you want to stand.

And even you could answer this for Joyce and get the appropriate answer.

https://www.govt.nz/browse/nz-passpo...e-a-citizen-2/

Beoz

Of course the "I didn't know" defence will fly when the section states "acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power"


Well Garry, you just screwed your own argument with that.

I just went through and answered as Joyce would.

The tripper "Was at least 1 of your parents a New Zealand citizen when you were born?" In Joyce's case, he would honestly answer "No" because his father was a British subject when he left NZ.

The result "You are not a New Zealand citizen. You may not meet the requirements for NZ citizenship. Check the requirements."

GarryP

You're going to need to get better at reading legalise. Here, let me help you parse it :See? They are all independent elements. And the third one is the the one that applies directly to Joyce. It doesn't say "and he knew about it", or "and he wasn't crossing his fingers". It simply states they aren't allowed to stand if a subject or a citizen. He was and is, so he isn't (an MP).

Sorry, nope. Joyce, and his father, would know he was as a New Zealand citizen because all those born there got citizenship when they created it. Thus you would have (purposely) answered incorrectly.

Seriously, his father was born in NZ, it's not a complex one.

Here, how about this viewpoint :Give you two guesses who's words those are ....

cresta57

I hear what you are saying but if the case was reversed and he had to prove he was a citizen he'd have to pay a fee as do numerous other Kiwis born here. No fee has ever been paid.
I personally think a dubious claim that a person born in Australia can be adopted by another country without his/her consent is ridiculous. Kiwis consider all Aussies to be their citizens so imo as their [NZ] legislation stands at the moment every prospective member of parliament would need to renounce citizenship of NZ in order to be eligible to stand, you only need look at their wording.
I also further contest that his father was ever a NZ citizen it didn't exist in 1947 when he left. He moved here as a British subject, then, when the citizenship act came into force in 1949 he automatically became an Aussie citizen. You can't be something that didn't exist. Follow the link in the NZ citizenship application and when you get to the bit that says was either of your parents a NZ citizen at the time of your birth his 100% honest answer would be no. Unless he'd applied for it after 1949 [and before 1967] when his Aussie citizenship had been conferred upon him his father went straight from British subject to Aussie citizen.

Beoz

Its already been said the legal teams will use "Is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power,"

How would his father know what was going on in NZ if he was in Australia? News? When does the news in Australia report anything in NZ?

GarryP

That line doesn't get a look in. He's out because of the line above it. That line only exists in case a country doesn't call it 'subject' or 'citizen', as a catch all. It doesn't apply.

So you have no idea what's happening with brexit?

Beoz

Of course it applies.

Brexit?

So how would his father know he was a Kiwi in 1948? Internet?

See post 94 if you don't like mine

GarryP

Oh dear, looks like another lib one, Ann Sudmalis, is a British citizen by descent :

Gilmore MP embroiled in dual citizenship scandal | South Coast Register

She currently 'looking to clarify' .... ahem.

cresta57

He's applying a 2017 24hr media perspective to 1947 Tamworth, be lucky to even get a reliable radio signal back then, crikey they can't even get a mobile signal in 2017. Maybe they trained Kiwi birds as carrier pigeons

cresta57

Once again she's entitled to it by virtue of her mother but hasn't applied for it. When you're getting down to semantics of foreign states automatically conferring citizenship upon unwitting recipients you're really starting to clutch at straws. What next are we going to go to grandparents and great grandparents? If we go back far enough the only eligible MP's will be the 5 Indigenous Australians.

carcajou

Being "entitled" to citizenship does not make one a citizen. You cannot renounce an entitlement as the Sydney Morning Herald suggested. That is absurd.

She is either a citizen or not; being eligible to become a citizen, but not taking that up, means she is not a citizen.

If she is a citizen she should resign.

carcajou

PS - If we start declaring as ineligible anyone who could theoretically apply for foreign citizenship, that would also knock out Penny Wong as well. Oh the irony!

carcajou

Kiwis consider all Aussies to be their citizens so imo as their [NZ] legislation stands at the moment every prospective member of parliament would need to renounce citizenship of NZ in order to be eligible to stand, you only need look at their wording.


This is inaccurate. Australian Citizens in New Zealand automatically get PR but are not considered New Zealand Citizens and do not have the same rights and privileges as New Zealand Citizens.

The rest of your point I understand. I also heard someone explain that New Zealand reinstated a citizenship law a few years ago that retroactively made Barnaby an NZ citizen, but he may not have been one in 2005 when he investigated it.

Beoz

Don't worry about that. There's 5 over in the loonies with big question marks.

It must be said, its a shame you would rather a country run by a team of dirty tactics. Those colluding with a foreign political party, union scandals, mediscare. Shame on you.

GarryP