Editorial: Senate exodus calls for look into archaic rules

TO POTENTIALLY lose three Australian senators in the space of a fortnight smacks not so much of carelessness but of a model that is perhaps not working as it was originally intended.

Senator Matt Canavan (right) at yesterday’s media conference with Attorney-General George Brandis. Picture: Sonia Kohlbacher/AAP

PLAYWRIGHT Oscar Wilde, not normally a prominent feature of public debate in Australia, has been overquoted and misquoted to the point of tedium in the past 10 days. The variations on the theme have largely suggested that to lose one senator may be considered misfortune, but to lose two looks like carelessness, in reference to the Australian Greens losing both deputy leaders in the space of a week.

To potentially lose three Australian senators in the space of a fortnight, however, smacks not so much of carelessness but of a model that is perhaps not working as it was originally intended.

The latest senator to be caught in the dual citizenship storm is Queensland’s Matt Canavan, the federal Minister for Resources and Northern Australia. For the moment he has stepped aside from Cabinet, but intends to remain in the Senate until issues relating to his citizenship are clarified.

Mr Canavan, like now departed Greens senators Larissa Waters and Scott Ludlam, claims he was unaware he may have held dual citizenship until very recently. In Mr Canavan’s case you are looking at a bloke as Queensland as they come: born on the Gold Coast and now living in the central Queensland hub of Rockhampton and a passionate advocate for the state. He may have Italian parentage, but he has never
even set foot in the country.

The intricacies of his potential breach of Section 44 of the Constitution will emerge in due course, but at this stage he claims that his mother had applied for his Italian citizenship in 2006, while also applying for herself. Further he stressed that the application was made without his knowledge or consent, and he was not yet certain if the dual citizenship was binding.

Ultimately it will be up to the High Court to decide, but under the strictures of Section 44 ignorance is unlikely to prove an excuse. Both Scott Ludlam (who left New Zealand at age three), and Larissa Waters (brought to Australia from Canada as a baby) were more guilty of sins of omission, assumption or negligence than any intent to subvert our constitutional requirements.

Minister Matt Canavan becomes the latest senator embroiled in a citizenship crisis. Picture: Tim Marsden/AAP

This is the section, written more than a century ago in the age of Empire, that dictates that any person who “is under any acknowledgment of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power” is disqualified from being a Member of Parliament.

The 21st century reality of this 19th century document is that three hardworking senators who have had no relationship with a foreign country, which the accidents of ancestry now dictate they could have “allegiance” to, are likely precluded from contributing to public life in Australia.

There is an argument to be had that in some instances the citizenship oversights result from a lack of due care and attention and poor party process, and would have been wholly unavoidable with more rigorous systems in place.

In the case of all three senators you can, on technicalities, contend it is at least partly their fault for not double-checking the legal fine print of their already clearly demonstrated loyalty to Australia and the democratic process.

There is, however, an equally valid case to be had for natural justice and common sense when deciding just who is eligible to represent Australian voters in our Federal Parliament.

We are, after all, a nation of immigrants and their sons and daughters, and all the richer for the contributions that the likes of Canavan, Waters and Ludlam – proud and committed Australian citizens all – make to our country.

The time may well be due to revisit some of the more arcane and archaic elements of our Constitution with a view to modernising and clarifying sections that may have been overtaken by the modern era. A Senate committee inquiry could be a good start, if in fact we have enough senators left to conduct the exercise.

Beattie in a league of his own

PETER Beattie is an excellent choice as an independent commissioner of the Australian Rugby League.

The former Queensland premier understands and loves the game, and is also a passionate promoter of all things Queensland, which will not go astray at the senior management level of a sporting code that has historically been dominated by New South Wales and Sydney self-interest.

He has played the game, followed it all his life, and often said Friday night football telecasts were one of the things that helped keep him sane during nearly a decade as premier. Right now his immediate focus is on the demands placed on him as chairman of the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games Organising Committee, a tenure that will end after the Games in April.

Logically that should leave Mr Beattie, who brings experience in balancing the public interest with those of politics and business, well placed to possibly replace ARL chairman John Grant when his term expires next year.

It is also welcome to see another Queenslander, Professor Megan Davis, appointed as a commissioner. These are the sort of appointments that should place the game in good stead.