Pro­rogue Par­lia­ment

The West Australian - - LETTERS -

The dual cit­i­zen­ship saga en­gulf­ing Can­berra politics, with eight MPs and sen­a­tors now in­volved, is a con­sti­tu­tional cri­sis and, stick­ing to true form, cur­rent Can­berra lead­ers aren’t treat­ing the is­sue with the im­por­tance it de­serves.

Sec­tion 44 (i) of the Con­sti­tu­tion is crys­tal clear: any­one who is a sub­ject or a cit­i­zen or en­ti­tled to the rights or priv­i­leges of a sub­ject or cit­i­zen of a for­eign power can’t sit in the Aus­tralian Par­lia­ment. The rea­son this was writ­ten is be­cause there is a clear con­flict of in­ter­ests in gov­er­nance.

Cory Bernardi stated the ob­vi­ous when claim­ing there is only one way for­ward from this sit­u­a­tion and that is for the Prime Min­is­ter to pro­rogue the Par­lia­ment, ef­fec­tively end­ing this ses­sion pend­ing the out­come of the High Court and any by-elec­tions needed.

This is to­tal com­mon sense and a con­ser­va­tive ap­proach to take. To have dual cit­i­zens gov­ern­ing in our Par­lia­ment, clearly vi­o­lat­ing our great Con­sti­tu­tion, is an at­tack on the in­tegrity of our Fed­eral Par­lia­ment and is caus­ing peo­ple to lose faith in our sys­tems of gov­ern­ment.

Trevor Whit­tred, Como

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.