Scott Ludlam

Scott Ludlam is a dual New Zealand and Australian citizen. He is therefore ineligible to be elected to the Australian Parliament. But since July 2008 he has been collecting a substantial salary and employing four staff and enjoying two suites of offices paid by the Australian taxpayer.

He and Rod Culleton have at least one thing in common. They have never been senators. If you are ineligible to be a senator, by definition you cannot have been a senator. While Bob Day was ruled ineligible for the 2016 election he was eligible when he took office as a senator on 1 July 2014 and so can correctly be described as a former senator.

But Scott Ludlam and Rod Culleton have no right to be called former senators.

In most areas of society a person who has collected benefits by deception or ignorance will be forced to repay those benefits plus a penalty. But it seems that Ludlam expects to be relieved of that responsibility.

No. A thousand times no.

He should be pursued by the Commonwealth for those illegally paid moneys. If that bankrupts him, so be it. He will then be an undischarged bankrupt and ineligible for being appointed as a senator.

The worst thing would be for him to now renounce his NZ citizenship, be forgiven the debt he owes the Commonwealth, and then be slotted into the senate by the Greens.

How someone can be in the senate for ten years and not realise that they have dual citizenship is beyond me. It is common knowledge and clearly in the Constitution that a person cannot be a dual citizen and be elected to parliament.

That lack of judgement (common among the Greens admittedly) should block Ludlam from any attempt to come back to Canberra. The Government can ensure this by not relieving him of his responsibility to repay the salaries etc.

About Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus

I'm a retired general who occasionally gets called back to save the republic before returning to my plough.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

81 Responses to Scott Ludlam

  1. A Lurker

    It is obvious that he would have known about this at least three years ago.

    Follow the link to the petition and note the following text:

    This petition was delivered to:
    Scott Ludlam”

    Surely he would have cast his eye over the petition – or a staff-member would have alerted him to its existence. So, in effect, he would have known about the illegality at least three years ago, did nothing about it, and in fact was re-elected as a Senator in last year’s Federal Election still aware of it.

  2. alexnoaholdmate

    How someone can be in the senate for ten years and not realise that they have dual citizenship is beyond me.

    Considering a petition was delivered to Scott Ludlam requesting he prove he was no longer a NZ citizen…

    … frankly, I have difficulty believing him when he tells us he had no idea until some random lawyer alerted him to the fact the other day.

  3. RobK

    I completely agree with the post, particularly that he shouldn’t be allowed to be a senator in the future. He must have known. Shame on him.

  4. Tintarella di Luna

    RobK
    #2441939, posted on July 15, 2017 at 7:17 pm
    I completely agree with the post, particularly that he shouldn’t be allowed to be a senator in the future. He must have known. Shame on him.

    I agree, though the Greens cannot understand the concept of shame.

  5. Shy Ted

    Flogging is too good for him. However… it shows the torpor in the LNP that they don’t have someone going over the “enemy” details with a fine tooth comb. This is what the ALP do with vigour. Grow up you incompetent centrist/conservative/slightly left in name only Liberals. It’s war. And we don’t employ you at the cost of $2m p.a. to play nice. Take them out. Start with Tanya Plibersek and her criminal husband. Then move onto Albo with his brothel visits. Take them out.

  6. Sinclair Davidson

    Okay – I can understand the argument about repaying the salary he earned. But why make him repay the office and staff costs? Those costs would have been incurred anyway – the taxpayer isn’t out of pocket for those costs.

    The other point is think about is the people he displaced from being Senators as a result of his unlawful election. Shouldn’t they have an action against him (or the AEC?) for lost or foregone income?

  7. Eyrie

    I suppose standing him against a pock marked wall is out of the question?

  8. herodotus

    That lack of judgement (common among the Greens admittedly)

    Having dual citizenship is comparatively trivial compared to the Greens’ major flaw: none of them really have any useful ideas with which to serve Australia, either in our parliament or elsewhere. One could go further and opine that they more often have views which are contrary to the ongoing well-being of Australians, regardless of their citizen status.

  9. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    The worst thing would be for him to now renounce his NZ citizenship, be forgiven the debt he owes the Commonwealth, and then be slotted into the senate by the Greens.

    I hate to say this, but I’ll bet good money that’s exactly what will happen. I could write the Greens campaign for them “Health issues..an honest mistake…why should he be penalized when no -one else has been..dened natural justice..not fair..”

    And, yes it does show the “Marquis of Queensberry Rules” mindset of the Liberal Party. Start with Tanya, go onto Albo with his brothel creeping, re – open the Royal Commission into Trade Union Corruption. The only fair fight is the one you win.

  10. Tel

    But why make him repay the office and staff costs? Those costs would have been incurred anyway – the taxpayer isn’t out of pocket for those costs.

    So if I steal you car then as long as I fill it back up with petrol and leave it back where I found it when I’m done, you are no worse off.

  11. H B Bear

    Bankrupting Dudlam would be useful pour encourager les autres.

    There can never be enough heads on sticks around Lake Burley Griffin.

  12. Rabz

    Once more into the breach – from last night’s OT. It remains my view, funnily enough.

    Re: Dudlam – go after the government agencies (and bureaudents) that sheltered him for so frigging long.

    The more details that emerge, the more rank this looks. That greenfilth fuckwit’s ineligibility for the unrepresentative swill chamber was obviously common knowledge for many years.

    No payout, no pension, no running for public office, again, evah.

    Fuck off and pay it back you vile piece of braindead drug addicted greenfilth excrement.

    Otherwise, it’s off to gaol – which is where in a just world, the staggeringly stupid stinky rodent would be heading, regardless .

    Enough.

  13. Rabz

    There can never be enough heads on sticks around Lake Burley Griffin.

    Indeedy.

  14. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    I suppose standing him against a pock marked wall is out of the question?

    I’d volunteer for the firing party that shot him at dawn , and go on to eat a hearty breakfast, with every evidence of enjoyment.

  15. Sinclair Davidson

    So if I steal you car then as long as I fill it back up with petrol and leave it back where I found it when I’m done, you are no worse off.

    No – I don’t think that analogy works. The parliament would have paid the salaries of staffers for whichever senator was elected.

  16. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Bankrupting Dudlam would be useful pour encourager les autres.

    Didn’t Baldrick tweet on the open thread that they were chasing Rod Culleton, as well?

  17. Michel Lasouris

    I WANT MY MONEY BACK! ALL OF IT!

  18. rickw

    No – I don’t think that analogy works. The parliament would have paid the salaries of staffers for whichever senator was elected.

    Given the impact of 10 years of a knowingly illegitimate greens senator, I think we’re looking to do a little more than square the ledger.

  19. RobK

    Sinc,
    No – I don’t think that analogy works. The parliament would have paid the salaries of staffers for whichever senator was elected.

    The point is no legitimate senator was elected. The money was paid falsely.

  20. Infidel Tiger

    All legislation passed since Luldlam entered the Senate should be annulled.

    He can keep the money.

  21. Sinclair Davidson

    The money was paid falsely.

    To Ludlam – yes. To his staffers?

  22. Infidel Tiger

    Have there been any bills since Ludlam became a Fraudulent Senator that have passed or been defeated by 1 vote?

  23. A Lurker

    The parliament would have paid the salaries of staffers for whichever senator was elected.

    Fair enough, but what about special trips away…ahem, ‘fact finding missions’ and other lerks and perks (like Sarah Sea-Patrol’s whale watching jaunt) which were above and beyond regular Senatorial duties.

  24. John64

    The other point is think about is the people he displaced from being Senators as a result of his unlawful election. Shouldn’t they have an action against him (or the AEC?) for lost or foregone income?

    Ludlum was twice elected – 2007 and the rerun of 2014 – as No 1 on The Greens ticket.

    So the only people he ever displaced were The Greens 2nd candidates.

  25. Steve trickler.

    Memories ! Never forget.

    2010 Sydney Launch: Zero Carbon Australia: Stationary Energy Plan

    The Stationary Energy Plan Launch in Sydney:

    Addresses by:

    Malcolm Turnbull: Federal MP for Wentworth
    Bob Carr: Former NSW Premier
    Senator Scott Ludlam: Federal Senator WA
    Matthew Wright: Executive Director Beyond Zero Emissions
    Allan Jones MBE: Chief Development Officer, Energy & Climate Change, City of Sydney
    MC: Quentin Dempster : Journalist and broadcaster
    Video of Malcolm Turnbull’s speech the launch

    Video provided by Maryella Hatfield from The Future Makers & UWS Media Production Students; Ben Weaver & Matt Grech (School of Communication Arts, UWS). Thanks.

    Sydney Town Hall, 483 George St, Sydney
    Thursday 12 August 2010 6 pm

    A full Transcript of the Addresses

    Quentin Dempster:

    We welcome our guest speakers tonight, we’ve got a packed program. We’ve got the Honourable Malcolm Turnbull; Bob Carr; now introducing Senator Scott Ludlam from the Greens in Western Australia, he’s not up for re-election this half-senate, so he can get over to the Eastern states; we’ve got Matthew Wright the Chief Executive Officer of Beyond Zero Emissions and a driving force behind this publication, the research and the advocacy; Alan Jones, welcome from London, Alan is the Chief development officer Energy and Climate Change. On this side we’ve got a panel of experts who are going to, in front of you, critique this hypothesis that’s been put up about Zero Carbon Australia. Dr Keith Lovegrove, Solar Thermal Group Leader, Australian National University; Lane Crockett, general manager Australia Pacific Hydro, Professor Robyn Batterham, former Chief Scientist of Australia, and Roger Dargaville, Energy systems Analyst University of Melbourne.

    Ladies and gentleman we have a visionary discussion and debate ahead, eight days from an Australian national election, which has plonked the greatest moral challenge of our times motherless last on the political agenda. This is Australia, we’re standing in it. But the United States isn’t much better it seems. I went to a news conference with the great Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz last Friday in Sydney and he bagged Australia for not having the foresight to move on domestic laws to put a price on carbon through an ETS, an Emissions Trading Scheme. Japan has one, Europe has one, including the United Kingdom, New Zealand has one. While China doesn’t have one, it was pumping 34 billion dollars, in 2009, into renewable energy technology, more than any country in the world and double the investment in the United States. China is now selling renewable energy technology, solar, and soon wind turbines to the rest of the world. I protested that while Professor Stiglitz was making Australians feel guilty, what about the US, where the Carey Leadman carbon price legislation was effectively abandoned by the Congress. It’s too hard apparrently, given high unemployment in the United States, and the de-leveraging still underway post the Global Financial Crisis. Professor Stiglitz acknowledged the point, apologised for the United States’ recalcitrance and emphasised that the United States needs to make the paradigm shift to a low carbon future as a fundamental way to lift itself out of its current economic malaise. So says the winner of the Nobel prize. But still I don’t think anyone’s listening in the United States and that adversarial constituency politics, with the predictable scare campaigns about higher electricity prices are in full force.

    I’m sorry neither the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, nor the alternative prime minister, Tony Abbott are with us tonight, but the discussion here, and a stimulating debate it will provoke about a zero carbon Australia will get, as we journalists say, “into the ether”. As you can tell, this discussion is not in the mainstream of political debate in this Federal election campaign, so we’ve got a panel of political pariahs, but as Marge Simpson once said, “there’s no shame in being a pariah”. Please welcome Malcolm Turnbull. **Audience Applause**

    Malcolm Turnbull:

    Well thank-you very much Quentin, I’m priviledged to be categorised as a pariah here tonight.
    **Audience laughter**

    You know, It’s an interesting thing, Quentin made the point that this issue, this issue of clean energy and climate change has not been at the forefront of this election. And Bob Carr just said to me a moment ago that he didn’t think there were any media covering this meeting tonight, I don’t know whether that’s true or not. But it is remarkable that on a cold winters night this issue has managed to fill the town hall. And that tells you something *Audience Claps* that tells you something about the extent of the concern that Australians have about climate change and the interest in and hunger for information and knowledge about the way we can deal with it and the way we can move, as we must move, if we are to effectively combat climate change to a situation where all or almost all of our energy comes from zero or very near zero emissions sources. Now our response to climate change must be guided by science. The science tells us that we have already exceeded the safe upper limit for atmospheric carbon dioxide. We are as humans conducting a massive science experiment with this planet. It’s the only planet we’ve got. We are dealing in scientific terms with enormous uncertainty. There is a tendency for people to point to the forecasts for the future, sea levels, temperatures, other impacts of climate change and say oh well you know they’ve over egged the pudding a little bit, it’s probably going to be less dramatic than that. But we are dealing with uncertainty and it may well be and indeed there is considerable evidence, that it may well be that many of these forecasts that we’ve become so used to, in fact err on the conservative side. We are told that 2010 will be the warmest year on record since records began in the late eighteen hundreds. We know that the consequences of unchecked global warming would be catastrophic. We know that extreme weather events are occuring with greater and greater frequency and while it is never possible to point to one drought or one storm or one flood and say that particular incident is caused by global warming, we know that these trends are entirely consistent with the climate change forecasts with the climate models that the scientists are relying on. Just in the last month floods and landslides have killed thousands in Kashmir, Poland, Pakistan, Korea and China. Russia has lost at least 30% of its grain crop due to the worst fires in that countrie’s history. Now sometimes the task of responding to the challenge of climate change may seem too great, too daunting. It is a profound moral challenge, because it is a cross generational challenge. We are asking our own generation to make decisions; to make sacrifices, to make expenditures today so as to safeguard our children, their children and the generations that come after them. It truly requires us to think as a species, not just to think as individuals. We are not, as Edmund Burke reminded us so many years ago, like flies of the summer that just come and go without any knowledge of what went before and what will come after. We as a human species have a deep and abiding obligation to this planet and to the generations that will come after us **Audience Applause**

    http://bze.org.au/2010-sydney-launch-zero-carbon-australia-stationary-energy-plan/

  26. RobK

    To his staffers?
    Given they weren’t senator’s staffers. I wouldn’t suggest staffers repay their remuneration but it could be argued they weren’t senator’s staff on account of he not being a senator.

  27. A Lurker

    To Ludlam – yes. To his staffers?

    Well, if Ludlam hadn’t been elected, then presumably they wouldn’t have been employed by him…

  28. Tel

    No – I don’t think that analogy works. The parliament would have paid the salaries of staffers for whichever senator was elected.

    Sure, you already bought the car before I stole it, so that money would still have been paid whether it was stolen or not.

  29. Steve trickler.

    We will remember.

    Scott Ludlam:
    Thank you. Well it’s my good fortune and priviledge to be the last of your political speakers before we throw to the engineers and the people who we are actually going to be asking to build this technology. It’s wonderful that you’ve all come out tonight, I heartily concur with Quentin’s comments at the outset that this issue, considering how much it was at the forefront of the 2007 campaign, it’s simply disappeared and I think that’s a real sign that somebody’s gone missing in the media, and something very sad has happened to the quality of our public debate, but here you all are, it looks like we’ve only just brought enough chairs and that absolutely gives us hope. I would also, as our previous speakers have done, really want to congratulate Beyond Zero and your partners on this extraordinary report which is going to be for sale for the very cheap price of $30 out the front. It’s actually a really wonderful mix of urgency and hope and also pragmatism. They’ve deliberately only chosen technologies in here that are either commercialised already or so close to large scale base load commercialisation that you can model the economics. So we haven’t gone off into some fusion fairy tale or imagined some sort of technology that doesn’t exist yet is going to save us, here it is and I think the key importance of a document like this and the fact that you’ve all turned out to attend the launch is that it shows us that it can be done.

    The most persistant and most dangerous myth that we’ve struggled with here in Australia is people who say oh well it can’t be done, you can’t do it. We’ll wait for China to figure it out; we’ll wait for India to figure it out. Maybe they’ll get off their bicycles and we can all drive around in our four wheel drives a little bit longer, but actually it can’t be done, even though we’re sitting in Australia in what’s been termed the Saudi Arabia of sunlight. We’ve got such extraordinary renewable energy resources right here in this country and you’ve seen over the last 10 or 15 years some of the best minds in engineering and science going overseas commercialising this technology, we’re at risk that we’re going to be buying it back and I think we can do a lot better than that. It still seems that the political discourse in this country has been, not withstanding the previous two speakers, but where have we been over the last couple of years and this debate in an election campaign in particular we are still suffering from being in the race to be the slowest, the race to be the last, the ones who will take the step back and wait for other people to take the risks and the Australian Greens have right from the word one saying this is not about risk, this is about opportunity. We’re all very aware of what’s happening North of the Arctic circle. We’re very aware of what’s happening on the Tibetan plateu, the risks that our farmers face from changing rainfall patterns and that’s something for me that’s very close to home, in the South West of Western Australia. But let’s spend a little time talking about opportunity. That is what this document that we’re launching tonight is doing.

    I think that you could suggest that the 2007 Federal election was a referendum on a party that did nothing for 13 years, that watched that flight of ingenuity – we kept some of it, fortunately, and there’s some folk here tonight to tell us about it, but really we sat on our hands and did nothing for 12 years. The 2010 election is a referendum on a party that thought it could get away with the appearance of doing something. And what we’ve seen with the CPRS and the foundation that we voted against that proposal was that it was a 22 billion dollar plan to smash our country into the iceberg at exactly the same speed that we’re travelling at the moment. If you’re going to put a carbon price into the system, then don’t smother that price in 22 billion dollars worth of handouts to the people who need to feel that carbon price. **Audience Applause**

    And so this proposal changes the debate, and so maybe the best thing that can happen is that it will provoke a debate about well if it’s too cheap it’ll be more expensive than that and it’ll take longer and that is exactly the kind of debate that we want to be having to move us beyond that idea of it can’t be done. I would have liked to have some of the remarkable wave energy generators that they’re trialling off Fremantle Carnegie was putting has already put into the water; there’d probably be some players in the geothermal industry who would have liked to be at the table. There are some technologies that are only just behind the curve and I understand why they’re not here, but I think in a way what it’s done is it’s painted a picture that if anything is conservative; we can do this if we choose to and we can do it right here, we’re not going to be needing to be buying this technology from someone else. This is something that Australia absolutely can do. We do draw huge inspiration from what people have done overseas, but when does Australia get to lead? We’ve got Alan Jones here tonight who’se done extraordinary things in the UK, I’m continually scouring the ‘net looking at the best and largest scale examples of zero carbon communities around the world and it’s actually happening, they’re just sprouting up all over the place, not just in the obvious places where you’d expect but everywhere and it’s about time that we were at that table.

    I might take issue a little bit with Bob’s point about the carbon price being the only mechanism. It’s an essential mechanism and is something that we need. We will be pushing very very hard if we’re given the honour of balance of power in the Australian senate after the election of next week to put a carbon price into the system as rapidly as possible. It is essential, but it’s not the only thing. We also need infrastructure. Australia is our proposal to take a lead in taking documents like this and modelling how much it’s going to cost, how long it will take, and actually putting these plans into action and take the work that’s been done here – this should have been done by the Commonwealth fifteen years ago, thank goodness these people have put it together, now we have it. Now the next stage is to put it into action.
    **Audience Applause**

    One of the things that you’ll notice in here when you’re going through it in detail is the central importance of energy efficiency and it’s this invisible and hidden gift in energy policy that we have neglected for a long period of time. This plan’s not possible unless we get very serious about the electricity that we don’t need to generate in the first place and of course that is our hedge against rising electricity prices, if they come to pass, is that we can be using a lot less and wasting a lot less than what we’re doing at the moment. We spend a lot of time in this campaign talking about electrified mass public transport, whether it be a bullet train linking the east coast capitals together, or modern 21st century light rail in our cities. Get our transport out of oil, in fact get it out of fossil altogether, get it into electricity and then we can run bullet trains on sunlight, it actually can be done, we can do it right here. The other thing of course, the key mechanism about getting renewables onto the grid is a feed-in tariff. Preferably a national, harmonised standard that actually pays you if you put PV on the roof it should pay you, it should pay you a price premium for taking that load off the grid and generating at home and that’s the other way, apart from a carbon price, of paying people who do the right thing and generate electricity themselves, whether it’s at the household scale, at a farm, or at a utility scale. That’s the way that Germany got so much PV onto the rooftops in Western Europe was with a feed-in tariff and that’s not rocket science, we’ve had a bill in the senate that’s been parked there because we couldn’t get major party support for it, and that’s been there for more than a year. So from here on we simply cannot afford to take no for an answer and if the leadership can’t be found in parliament, then civil society has to continue that push, because we can’t always expect the light to come from Capital Hill, that’s why it’s so important that you’re all here tonight.

    In the next parliament we really do need to shake things up and that’s why I’m saying that, as a person who is in there, is that we can’t hear you. The corridors are crawling with coal lobbyists and the gas industry and all sorts of special vested interests who managed to neuter the CPRS, we’re not hearing you, we need you to make more noise. **Audience applause** We really look forward to working with you all, whether it be the crew who are working out how to close down Hazelwood and some of the dirtiest power stations on the planet, the farmers who are trying to protect their countryside and the Darling Downs from being overrun by coal mines, the business groups and the engineers who just want to get cracking and get this stuff built, we really look forward to working with all of you. The people who say it can’t be done need to get out of the way of those who are doing it. Thank you very much. **Audience applause**

    From link above.

    And where are we today Ladies and Gents?
    **Audience applause**

  30. Dr Faustus

    The parliament would have paid the salaries of staffers for whichever senator was elected.

    By the same argument, the parliament would have paid for the salary/superannuation of a Greens Senator – so no harm done.

    The official purpose of the Artist Formerly Known as Senator Ludlum’s staffers was to “facilitate the conduct of their duties and responsibilities as elected representatives of the Australian public.”

    It now appears that he had no such duties or responsibilities to facilitate. That being the case, (assuming he was, or should have been, aware of his NZ-ness) he wasted significant public resources due to his course of conduct.

    Given that responsibility for damages usually goes to conduct, it’s hard to see why he shouldn’t be required to compensate me for hoovering my bank account.

  31. Jannie

    If he has known about his ineligibility for three years (at east), then his act of negligence becomes an act of knowing misrepresentation, or fraud. Its not just a technicality anymore, its a crime.

  32. Jannie

    According to Wikipedia Ludlam has been on leave of absence since November 2016 for depression and anxiety. Looks like he has been waiting for the axe to fall, I almost feel pity for him. But he knew what was going on so he cannot plead ignorance so no doubt he will plead insanity or similar medical condition.

  33. Some History

    According to Wikipedia Ludlam has been on leave of absence since November 2016 for depression and anxiety.

    He’s been on 2 weeks sick leave for 7 months.

  34. Steve trickler.

    Oh the mood has changed.

    Scott and Malcolm. A song for you.



  35. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    According to Wikipedia Ludlam has been on leave of absence since November 2016 for depression and anxiety. Looks like he has been waiting for the axe to fall, I almost feel pity for him

    “Hubris” is a word that springs to mind.

  36. RobK

    Can we send him back to NZ?

  37. EvilElvis

    Electoral fraud?

    And wtf are the parliaments administrators doing? Surely you fill out at least one form and have at least a small check done on new parliamentarians? Ffs

  38. Andrew

    Why is there a question of the #3 on the ticket (who is black AND disabled; wheelchair bound from cerebral palsy) being bullied not to take up his seat? It appears he was duly elected and considered the 3rd best candidate. Now it seems he was a placeholder for a Freo councillor. Isn’t THAT a crime? If I’m elected to the Sen8, it can’t be legal to bully me to rescind the seat for a FacelessMan ™ who didn’t even stand for election?

  39. John64

    According to Wikipedia Ludlam has been on leave of absence since November 2016 for depression and anxiety.

    He resumed his place in the Senate foto the Budget sitting.

  40. Infidel Tiger

    According to Wikipedia Ludlam has been on leave of absence since November 2016 for depression and anxiety.

    He’s been on 2 weeks sick leave for 7 months.

    Rehab.

  41. Arky

    Its absurd to expect NZers to relinquish their citizenship in order to sit in the senate.
    It’s ahistorical stupidity.
    Half you bastards will retire to NZ if things go tits up here.
    And I came here because S&G thevtime things were shit over there.
    Just like people move interstate to get what they want.
    How fucking insular and parochial do you want to get?
    Hearing you fuckers crisp on about “Victorians” or “Queenslanders” you probably want passports between those states too.
    The blog owner is onto his second ex-British colony isn’t he?

    Arseholes.

  42. Arky

    S&G?
    “At the time” that should read.

  43. EvilElvis

    And here we have the elusive ‘Fucktard’. One normally descended from the land of the wrong white crowd…

  44. Arky

    EvilElvis
    #2442041, posted on July 15, 2017 at 9:20 pm
    And here we have the elusive ‘Fucktard’. One normally descended from the land of the wrong white crowd…

    ..
    Fuck you.
    My family has a history going back 155 years in this country.
    Go fuck yourself c***.

  45. Pedro the Ignorant

    Bit harsh, Arky. Them’s the rules.

    I am wondering what the procedure will be to insert Ludlam’s replacement into the red chair.

    Will the AEC conduct a recount of WA Senate votes, allocating and cancelling using preferences, and declare a “winner”?

    Is the number three on the ticket automatically anointed, or do the Federal Greens just get to nominate the lucky contestant.

    Any politically savvy Cats got the answer?

  46. Oh come on

    Okay – I can understand the argument about repaying the salary he earned. But why make him repay the office and staff costs? Those costs would have been incurred anyway – the taxpayer isn’t out of pocket for those costs.

    I think there’s an argument to be made that he ought to repay any money he was responsible for in the maintenance of his position.

    And beyond argument, screw it. I’m sick of being even-handed with people like this. Throw the damn book at him.

    The other point is think about is the people he displaced from being Senators as a result of his unlawful election. Shouldn’t they have an action against him (or the AEC?) for lost or foregone income?

    Good point. Let them come after him, too. I’d even go so far as to offer them Legal Aid to do so.

  47. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    And beyond argument, screw it. I’m sick of being even-handed with people like this. Throw the damn book at him.

    After the Green who didn’t declare an investment property, Di Natalie paying his au pairs a bowl of gruel a day, Sarah Hanson Young and THAT whale watching trip, I would suggest that the dull thud of the book, bouncing off a Greenie noggin, might just serve as an example. Ludlum shouldn’t find it too hard finding work in the civilian sector, should he?

  48. EvilElvis

    Fuck you.
    My family has a history going back 155 years in this country.
    Go fuck yourself c***.

    Gee, I miss dealing with kiwis on a daily basis haha. Smug, over confident, arrogant, self absorbed pricks with a superiority complex. A bit like the greens.0

  49. dauf

    The damage this quite nasty individual has done over recent years is more than enough reason for the people of Australia to want their many back…at least his salary etc. But i’d argue the whole lot for staff etc…let the green rich sponsors settle their debts…or perhaps the chinese?!

    With the petition in the past it defies credibility that he did not know…throw the book at him! The only thing they can ever agree on is protecting each other. He’s a germ and always has been

  50. Tel

    And beyond argument, screw it. I’m sick of being even-handed with people like this. Throw the damn book at him.

    But it is even-handed… you know perfectly well what he would do to you if the boot was on the other foot.

    Heck, the boot HAS been on the other foot when it comes to electricity prices and industry in Australia.

  51. Texas Jack

    A prediction. Scott Ryan will come up with some “middle ground” arrangement that sees Ludlum off the hook. Any imposts will be covered by a wealthy benefactor.

  52. Pedro the Ignorant

    Why would Scott Ryan (Lib Senator for Victoria?) have anything to do with Ludlam’s malfeasance?

  53. duncanm

    Any news on his pension?

  54. Texas Jack

    Pedro the Ignorant
    #2442065, posted on July 15, 2017 at 10:10 pm
    Why would Scott Ryan (Lib Senator for Victoria?) have anything to do with Ludlam’s malfeasance?

    Good question Mr Ignorant. Ryan as Special Minister of State gets to determine whether Ludlum cops full-freight repayment or some Turnbull-inspired cop-out.

  55. Hearing you fuckers crisp on about “Victorians” or “Queenslanders” you probably want passports

    Works for me.

  56. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Any news on his pension?

    I’m a self funded retiree, paying tax at the rate of 30 cents in the dollar. This fvcking waste of rations can fund his own pension!

  57. Leo G

    It is common knowledge and clearly in the Constitution that a person cannot be a dual citizen and be elected to parliament.

    But is that really true?
    The grounds for foreign allegiance in s44i has two strands: acknowledgement of foreign allegiance and entitlement to the rights of a subject to a foreign power.
    If Ludlam has used a New Zealand passport after the age of 18, that would be an instance of such acknowlegement. I doubt that Ludlam has ever acknowledged his allegiance to New Zealand.
    Where he may have a problem is with his entitlement to the rights of a New Zealand citizen. The High Court ruling is that a he should have taken ‘all reasonable steps to divest himself of any conflicting allegiance’.
    He was apparently unaware that his New Zealand citizenship was unaffected by his immigration to Australia and that he should have requested that his name be removed from the NZ Citizenship register after reaching the age of 18.
    So did he take reasonable steps to divest himself of a conflicting allegiance which he never acknowledged, never exercised, and probably never realised? I could add that his employer also failed to take reasonable steps, considering the 40 % of Australians who have or are entitled to dual nationality.
    I believe Ludlam possibly should not have resigned as he did, but should have allowed the issues to be determined in the courts.

  58. Pedro the Ignorant

    It’s unclear whether he will have to repay the money he earned during his tenure, a decision Mr Turnbull has left to Finance Minister Mathias Cormann.

    -quote from the Weekend Oz.

    All very confusing. Who really decides whether Ludlam gets to keep his ill gotten gains?

  59. arrrrr

    He’ll get away with this. Malcolm and liberals don’t have the fortitude to pursue it.

  60. Yohan

    The Greens no 2 coming in has already said he will step aside to let Ludlam back in. So once his legal issues are sorted out, except to see him back.

  61. a reader

    Bit harsh, Arky. Them’s the rules.

    I am wondering what the procedure will be to insert Ludlam’s replacement into the red chair.

    Will the AEC conduct a recount of WA Senate votes, allocating and cancelling using preferences, and declare a “winner”?

    Is the number three on the ticket automatically anointed, or do the Federal Greens just get to nominate the lucky contestant.

    Any politically savvy Cats got the answer?

    Pedro my understanding from listening to ABC and Antony Green (and my apologies if I didn’t correctly get the gist) is that it will depend on whether the Senate chooses to send Ludlam’s election to the court of disputed returns.

    If it gets flicked to the High Court of Australia sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns recent precedent shows that the next on the list will be elected. Case in point: Senator Gichui once Bob Day was disqualified.

    If the Senate chooses to accept the resignation of the senator and doesn’t flick it over then it will be up to a joint sitting of the WA Parliament to nominate a senator and as per the 1977 referendum that person will need to be a representative of The Greens. I don’t believe however that there is any requirement for the joint sitting to choose the member that The Greens put forward.

  62. Sydney Boy

    The same argument raged for years about Obama- was he really born in Nigeria and not Hawaii – making him ineligible to be POTUS? The people running this anti-Obama campaign were knwon as “birthers”. The same argument was pushed by the anti-Abbott crowd claiming that he had not not renounced his British citizenship, although it didn’t generate much discussion. A

    nd now Scott Ludlum falls for failing to renounce his NZ citizenship. Yes, I understand it’s a “thing”, and the Constitution is a most important document. But the real “thing” is that is not where Obama was born that made him a shit President, just as it is not which countries Ludlum holds citizenship to that makes him a prime f*ckwit. If he had renounced his NZ citizenship, he would still be a prime f*ckwit – and he will be replaced but another Green who will be an equal prime f*ckwit.

    I just wonder if Ludlum was part of the Abbott UK citizenship crowd – the greens are well-known for their hypocrisy.

  63. True Aussie

    No foreign born person should ever be allowed to hold political office. That will prevent any further ‘mix ups’.

  64. Pingback: Scott Ludlam | Catallaxy Files | Cranky Old Crow

  65. Penguinte

    Infidel Tiger
    #2441978, posted on July 15, 2017 at 7:59 pm

    All legislation passed since Luldlam entered the Senate should be annulled.

    Now this is a scenario that makes eminent and logical sense!

  66. Deplorable

    According to Wikipedia Ludlam has been on leave of absence since November 2016 for depression and anxiety. Looks like he has been waiting for the axe to fall, I almost feel pity for him. But he knew what was going on so he cannot plead ignorance so no doubt he will plead insanity or similar medical condition.

    It would be interesting to see what date he removed his assets from the public arena as he states he only has a computer. I smell a rat . It does look as if he was expecting the axe to fall and as a lawyer he would know the time limits for recovery of monies.

  67. Absolutely agree. This turnip would be made to repay the money, even if it takes him the rest of his life. For him to now say “stiff cheddar” and claim that he has no money to repay with, go after every place he has secreted it, whether in spouse or family names, property or trusts etc. Nobody on his salary for 10 years can possibly claim to have “nothing” now, or if they truly can, then they’re too stupid to be in any senate or government position. Given that he had ample warning some 3 years ago, you can be he’s been hiding every cent he can ever since, knowing this day had to come eventually.

  68. ian3029

    Lots of commenter have said that Ludlam is a lawyer. I can find no record of his ever studying Law, even on Wiki. Is it correct?

  69. Des Deskperson

    “It would be interesting to see what date he removed his assets from the public arena as he states he only has a computer. I smell a rat . It does look as if he was expecting the axe to fall and as a lawyer he would know the time limits for recovery of monies.”

    Indeed, although as I understand it – since it doesn’t say differently on the APH website – Senators and Members who have taken leave of absence continue to be paid, which means that Ludlum would have received a gross fortnightly payment of around $7,783 as late as last Thursday.

    BTW, here’s the AEC definition of electoral fraud:

    http://www.aec.gov.au/footer/fraud.htm

    From what we know, there would seem to be a prima facie case for Ludlum to answer to. If convicted, he would almost certainly lose his super but, as I have said before, the will to lay charges has to be there.

  70. Dr Fred Lenin

    Just imagine the screams if luddite is made to pa y back the salary and expenses he fraudulently obtained the global ,soros communists will go spare . He shpuld be prosecuted too for knowingly obtaining reward by false pretences . His mental issues should only be considered as if he were a normal criminal.
    His staff should also be made to pay back any moneys they recieved and tham]n encouraged to sue the greens for repayent of the money forgone . It would cost a bit to recoup this money ,but there can be no price on justice , and it would be a salutory lesson for career political maggots . If possible the vacancy shpuld not be filled till the next election,saving a millionor two dollars .

  71. mh

    You’re on a roll, Quinny.

  72. New Chum

    Pauline Hanson would know what happened with Heather Hill who was elected to the Senate as a One Nation Senator about 1998.

  73. Habib

    Okay – I can understand the argument about repaying the salary he earned. But why make him repay the office and staff costs? Those costs would have been incurred anyway – the taxpayer isn’t out of pocket for those costs. If launching him from a trebuchet at very close range to a particularly solid stone wall is out of the question, pursuit of every single razoo expended on this chinless douche, and prosecution for electoral fraud will have to do. Politicians can’t be treated badly enough in the best of circumstances, if one of the vile fuckers gets sprung diddling us they should have the entire library thrown at them. Weakness is not a virtue.

    And of course the S.F.L.P. will let the odious twerp walk, and probably get parachuted back in. Pity, I was looking forward to an actual spastic in the senate, as opposed to the current crop of wanna-bes.

  74. Habib

    I almost feel pity for him. I sure as hell don’t, if he had any decency and honour he’d excuse himself, retire to the reading room with a Webley.

  75. Habib

    I for one wish we could deport every microcephalus Victorian from Qld, they’ve enabled extremely awful labor governments to be elected here, where previously they’d be lucky to escape being incinerated. Not only do they bring their ugly, lumpy, pasty bodies and peculiar shaped heads here, they bring their luggage, and lots of it- horrible Crazy Clarks woven polyetheline zip up bags packed to the brim with idiocy, dependence, an adoration of rules, and their dull and rather gay version of football. The bastards deserve Danograd. Kiwis can fuck off an’all.

  76. Haidee

    Excellent comment, Habib. My wish too.

  77. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    NATIONAL AFFAIRS
    George Brandis says he won’t be shedding tears for Scott Ludlam
    Scott Ludlum at the state parliament. Picture: Ian Munro.

    The Australian
    2:07PM July 16, 2017
    Rachel Baxendale
    Reporter
    Canberra
    @rachelbaxendale

    Attorney-General George Brandis says he won’t be shedding any tears for former Greens senator Scott Ludlam following his resignation on Friday.

    Senator Brandis indicated Mr Ludlam could be forced to repay his senator’s salary and allowances after running for the Senate at three elections despite still being a New Zealand citizen and therefore ineligible to hold office.

    “Mr Ludlam, as he now is and as it turns out always was, through his own negligence has got himself into this trouble,” Senator Brandis told Sky News.

    “He knew he was born in New Zealand obviously when he stood for Parliament. He must be taken to have been aware of the constitution and yet he never took the trouble to ensure that he had relinquished his New Zealand citizenship.”

    Senator Brandis said Mr Ludlam was a “very ungracious” colleague who had been “extremely mean spirited” towards former Family First senator Bob Day, who was forced to resign last year after becoming bankrupt.

    “I don’t think we should shed too many tears over the consequences of Mr Ludlam’s own negligence,” he said.

    Senator Brandis said Mr Ludlam was by his own admission ineligible to stand for election under Section 44 of the Constitution, and that the consequences would be similar to those of Mr Day’s situation, with the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns likely to order a count back of the vote for the Western Australian Senate election last year.

    He said that was highly likely to result in the election of another Greens senator, with Greens WA senator Rachel Siewert being moved to the Number One spot on the party’s ticket and Number Three candidate Jordon Steele-John moving to the second spot.

    Senator Brandis said there were well established precedents which meant that there would be no impact on legislation which previously passed with Mr Ludlam’s vote.

    He said that while Mr Ludlam’s conduct was extremely negligent, he had no reason to believe that the Green had been dishonest.

    Amid speculation that Mr Ludlam could be asked to pay back his senator’s salary, Senator Brandis said it would ultimately be a matter for Special Minister of State Scott Ryan.

    “First of all we have to have a declaration by the High Court to the effect that he was not capable of being chosen and a count back, then as I’m advised, the President of the Senate has to raise the debt, the debt being the salary and allowances that Mr Ludlam was paid during all those years when he was under colour of office, to use the legal expression, but in fact was not eligible to sit as a senator, that debt would be a very substantial amount of money,” Senator Brandis said.

    “There’s also by the way, under Section 46 of the Constitution, a fine of 100 pounds to use the language of the time of federation, for every day that a person not eligible to sit does sit in the Senate.

    “Now, whether or not that debt would be waived, as it has been on previous occasions, is a matter for the Special Minister of State, it’s within his discretion so I’m not going to pre-empt anything that he might decide.”

    Update, from the Oz.

  78. Andrew

    Does anyone know – are pollies made to sign an actual declaration of eligibility to contest an election? Anything that could be used for false statement charges later? I know it’s not a crime to make a false statement without realising, but Grublam would be in a lot of trouble now if he has. Or do we just let them self identify as Sen8rs with no penalty?

    Also, how did he earn $200k with all expenses paid and have nil assets? He’s not even working since Nov!

    Did he dispose of assets knowing people were onto his kiwiness, to avoid repaying? Put it all in a partner’s name?

    Can the govt claw back any super they contributed? Even if we can’t recover a cent of salary I’d feel good knowing the scumbag has no super and will eventually retire in abject poverty. (He was a drug addicted dope bludger before the Sen8 so no super in that.)

  79. H B Bear

    “Bookshelves” Brandis talking tough but it “… is a matter for the Special Minister of State, …”

    We all know where this is going.

  80. sisypus

    “Go fuck yourself” unusual to have a Kiwi so well balanced. A chip on both sholders.

  81. Justin

    I don’t know how one could try and accurately analyse this but my first thought is how many pieces of legislation have been impacted / horse traded and passed on the basis of Scott Ludlum’s vote and hence how many other cross bench senators were required to get certain legislation passed?

    I know that if not Scott Ludlum it would have another Green so perhaps it makes no real difference.

    On the other hand we have had a disqualified foreigner determine the outcome of Australian legislation for 9 years! This to my mind creates a credibility gap on all legislation passed influenced or determined by his vote. That is a shocking occurrence.

    Russian “interference” in an election (actually unproven and PR only) creates hysteria but a foreigner actually sitting in the Australian Senate influencing and passing Australian legislation causes at most mild curiosity. The thought he could just renounce his New Zealand citizenship and reapply is an insult to our sovereignty and democracy.

    Where is the Left outrage that a foreigner has duped our parliament, and interfered, influenced and ultimately decided on matters of national importance?

    For good measure he should also be forced to pay pack with penalty interest all his travel entitlements (and that of his staff).

Comments are closed.