Time for another - and I doubt it will be the final - roundup of the issues created by ineligible Senators (or in one case, a Senator-who-never-was). I have had many questions about the Lambie situation but today's resignation of Skye Kakoschke-Moore also requires detailed comments.
Hollie Hughes (Candidate, NSW - disallowed)
The High Court's decision that Hollie Hughes should not be seated in place of Fiona Nash (apparently because of her intermediate holding of an office of profit while the original election was still open, though reasons are yet to be released) creates a new issue. Hughes was eligible at the time of the original election but her subsequent employment renders her ineligible to fill the position vacated by Fiona Nash. The Commonwealth is waiting to see whether the court rules that Hughes was incapable of being chosen, or capable of chosen but incapable of sitting. If the former, Hughes will be replaced by a special count (resulting in controversial Abbott backer Jim Molan becoming a Senator) but if the latter there is some thought (I'm not convinced) that it might be a casual vacancy.
Showing posts with label office of profit. Show all posts
Showing posts with label office of profit. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 22, 2017
Friday, October 27, 2017
Section 44 Strikes, But The Government Hasn't Lost Its Majority Yet
Many news sites have now claimed that, in light of today's dramatic Section 44 disqualification of Barnaby Joyce from Parliament by the High Court, the beleagured Turnbull government has now lost its majority.
This is an exciting claim, but it isn't actually correct.
Pending the holding of a by-election for the seat of New England, the government will, when the House of Representatives next sits, hold 75/149 seats, with one vacant. 74 seats will be held by other MPs. 75 is larger than 74. 75 is larger than half of 149. 75 divided by 149 is 0.5033557... . It is more than 0.500000.
The government's new and very temporary position is no different mathematically to that of the Cook Liberal government in 1913, which won 38/75 seats. The Cook government is widely referred to as having had a one-seat majority.
This is an exciting claim, but it isn't actually correct.
Pending the holding of a by-election for the seat of New England, the government will, when the House of Representatives next sits, hold 75/149 seats, with one vacant. 74 seats will be held by other MPs. 75 is larger than 74. 75 is larger than half of 149. 75 divided by 149 is 0.5033557... . It is more than 0.500000.
The government's new and very temporary position is no different mathematically to that of the Cook Liberal government in 1913, which won 38/75 seats. The Cook government is widely referred to as having had a one-seat majority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)