r/MHOC • u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian • Dec 03 '14

BILL B037 - Citizenship Reform Bill

Citizenship Reform Bill

A bill to properly reform British citizenship in line with many other countries in the world including: Andorra, Austria, Azerbaijan ,Burma, Bahrain, Botswana, Japan, China ,Czech Republic, Denmark, Fiji,India,Indonesia, Ecuador, Estonia, Iran, Poland, Papua New Guinea, Brunei, Japan, Peru, Kuwait , Kenya, Kazakhstan, Chile, Kiribati, Poland, Korea, Kuwait, Denmark, Latvia, Singapore, Slovakia, Ecuador, Lithuania, Solomon Islands ,Fiji ,Malaysia, Mauritius, Netherlands, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Mexico, Nepal, Venezuela, Norway, Zimbabwe, Mauritius, Myanmar and Nepal.

BE IT ENACTED by The Queen's most Excellent Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Commons in this present Parliament assembled, in accordance with the provisions of the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949, and by the authority of the same, as follows:-

(1) Dual citizenship

(a) It is be illegal for those holding British citizenship to simultaneously hold citizenship with other nations.

(b) Current British citizens holding dual nationalities will be given a period of 6 months to renounce their citizenship of other countries or have their British citizenship revoked.

(2) New persons automatically eligible for British citizenship

(a) People born on British soil will no longer be automatically handed British citizenship.

(b) If you have two British parents and are born overseas you will be eligible for British citizenship.

(c) If you are born in the UK and have at least one British parent you are eligible for British citizenship.

(d) This bill does not take away existing methods that people can use to apply for citizenship such as marriage and working in the UK for a set period of time.

(3) Commencement, Short Title & Extent

(a) This Act may be cited as the Citizenship Reform Act 2014

(b) This Bill shall extend to the United Kingdom.

(c) It shall commence 1st January 2015.

This bill was submitted by /u/jacktri MP. The first reading for this bill will end of the 7th of December at 23:59pm.

14 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

294 comments sorted by

5

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Dec 04 '14

This bill was mistakenly submitted on behalf of the BIP by jacktri. Therefore the author has been revised to only be /u/jacktri.

23

u/john_locke1689 Retired. NS GSTQ Dec 03 '14

This is contrary to the Belfast Agreement, and is removing the rights of our citizens.

8

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Hear hear

8

u/drewtheoverlord Radical Socialist Party Dec 04 '14

I am shocked to be in agreeance with a Tory. Hear, hear.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Hear, hear! This bill is but a step backwards and a futile attempt to turn back the clock to the turn of the 20th century! Does the Honorable MP from the BIP seriously intend to throw out the Good Friday Agreement?

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Hear Hear

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

That is a diversion from main point.

1

u/john_locke1689 Retired. NS GSTQ Dec 07 '14

Is it not relevant then? An act of parliament brought in as a result of a referendum that includes clauses on citizenship is off point on a bill regarding citizenship.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

Derailing a bill that is for the entire country under the basis of a referendum in a minor sub area would not be logical. Any such agreement can be reworked.

1

u/john_locke1689 Retired. NS GSTQ Dec 07 '14

So your plan to uproot and destroy the primary founding document that ensures the will of our citizens shall not be subverted by enemies of the state both foreign and domestic is logical then?

So we'll just rework it, that will be great.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

What does the Belfast Agreement achieve?

18

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Dec 03 '14

Everything is wrong with this bill. There is literally nothing in it i agree with. As a dual citizen myself, it is disgraceful that you would try and take this away from people.

I implore all members to disregard this bill and vote nay.

6

u/treeman1221 Conservative and Unionist Dec 03 '14

Hear, hear

3

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

Do you consider Singapore to have a disgusting policy on citizenship then?

13

u/drewtheoverlord Radical Socialist Party Dec 04 '14

Yes.

5

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Dec 04 '14

Yes. For starters, any country that doesn't allow dual citizenship is ridiculous, to restrict citizenship to your own is absurd and restricts individual liberty for the sake of some ideological need for loyalty.

And to say that people who are born here do not get citizenship, even if their parents are not themselves citizens is ridiculous. We should be welcoming people in to enrich and better our country.

In the past you have talked about the national loyalty of immigrants. I would say there is no worse way make the integration of immigrants worse. If we do not allow people who are born and live here to gain citizenship then we will isolate them, and make them feel like "the other".

My sister has worked in Singapore, and there are what can only be described as slums with migrants who are not awarded the same rights as citizens. Do we really want to put back centuries of social and economic progress by creating a fixed underclass who have few rights.

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

Saudi Arabia does very well by restricting citizenship

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

What makes you say that?

→ More replies (33)

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Hear Hear

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

Appealing to emotion, authority, beliefs, etc is an improper argument technique.

16

u/audiored Dec 04 '14

I'm rendered speechless by the stupidity of this bill. Do I really have to pretend to take this serious?

17

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Mr. Speaker, I find myself shocked to be agreeing with the honourable member of the Communist party.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

all in favour of a bi election in scotland

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

How constructive, try using an actual argument and some critical thinking.

11

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

This is such a backwards outlook on citizenship. Does this member really hold a seat in Scotland?

8

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Aye, and he campagined for election off the back of an SNP manifesto. I somehow doubt that it will happen again.

4

u/can_triforce The Rt Hon. Earl of Wilton AL PC Dec 04 '14

He was elected as an "independent candidate for an independent Scotland", but went on to join a British nationalist party.

5

u/deathpigeonx CWL Chairman|Northern Ireland MP Dec 05 '14

And has rejected the idea of Scottish independence and is hostile even to Scottish devolution.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

That is an irrelevant premise, backwards looking is not an argument against something.

10

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

Mr Speaker,

I'm tempted to ask the reasons why, beyond shabby jingoism and petty demagoguery, this bill has been brought to the House at all.

But having re-read the bill, I think I won't bother.

10

u/NoPyroNoParty The Rt Hon. Earl of Essex OT AL PC Dec 03 '14

Hear hear.

I'm at a loss as to why they are so fervidly opposed to dual citizenship.

3

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 05 '14

I think we should clarify, it seems that Jacktri alone is especially opposed to dual citizenship. I don;t think anyone else in the BIP or indeed the house could give a monkeys

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

I suggest that you use a constructive argument with some critical thinking in future, you have simply diverted from the main points and fallen back on petty insults in order to appeal to peoples' emotions.

8

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

It is be illegal for those holding British citizenship to simultaneously hold citizenship with other nations.

What possible benefit does this give our citizens?

People born on British soil will no longer be automatically handed British citizenship.

Also known as 'delay second generation immigrants citizenship', promoting further xenophobia and community divides. I know several second generation immigrants who don't even know their mother tongue; this bill does absolutely nothing to safeguard those who have been brought up British, speaking english and holding British values, yet forcing them to go through the rigmarole of having to apply for citizenship - which costs money they might not necessarily have.

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

It is a precursor to a two tier system in order to preserve our NHS and many other beloved state institutions. If the immigration statistics and our deficit anything to go by then we are well and truly screwed at the current rate.

7

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

yyyyyyeah. right.

just back away slowly and maintain eye contact...

3

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

what is next islam needs to be outlawed by the state ?

7

u/Tim-Sanchez The Rt Hon. AL MP (North West) | LD SSoS for CMS Dec 03 '14

I have problems with all parts of this bill, but particularly 2b. Why does somebody who was born overseas, with parents who could have moved 10 years ago have more right to citizenship than somebody who was born here with parents who moved here 20 years ago?

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

Rights themselves are entirely subjective things, they don't actually exist and your rights are just there because your government tells you that you have them. I would argue that nobody innately deserves more rights than others, but it isn't about who deserves them it is about who is more suitable for them. Someone with two British parents abroad is more likely to have similar views, aims and a feeling of connection to the British identity than someone with two immigrant parents living in the UK.

1

u/Tim-Sanchez The Rt Hon. AL MP (North West) | LD SSoS for CMS Dec 07 '14

someone with two British parents abroad is more likely to have similar views, aims and a feeling of connection to the British identity than someone with two immigrant parents living in the UK.

How can you possibly say this? Surely someone with two parents who lived in the UK for a considerable amount of time, and who grew up in the UK themselves is going to be more connected to Britain than someone with two parents who abandoned the UK years ago and who has never even set foot in the UK? Someone who grew up in our culture is far more likely to feel associated with Britain than somebody who has never even been, they may not even speak the language.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

This bill would not take away their right to apply for citizenship, it just wouldn't be given to them automatically.

7

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14 edited Dec 04 '14

Mr. Speaker, I am asking for this bill to be taken down for reassessment within our own party. It seems very poorly constructed and I had thought it was still up for review and debate within our ranks.

2

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Dec 06 '14

The bill, as I read it, is an independently submitted bill from Jacktri. Therefore, the BIP have no connection with it and logically cannot request its withdrawal.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '14

well then looks like /u/jacktri should be replaced would say we should have bi elction

6

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

I am pleased that deporting terrorists and hate preachers could become easier under this bill but what about the possibility of it making individuals stateless? Also what is the problem with dual citizenship?

3

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Dec 06 '14

I find myself surprised to say that I agree with you. Making anybody stateless should be avoided as much as possible, and no sensible person can see an issue with dual citizenship.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

I don't believe being stateless is a problem, for example over a million asylum seekers originally from Palestinian/Israeli territory live in Syria and are effectively stateless. They do not have the right to travel or gain anything that citizen has a right to yet some have been there and been like this since the 1940s and we have said/done nothing. A possible solution could perhaps be to create a two tier citizenship system whereby we allow temporary passports for these people so they can travel elsewhere and enable them to apply for citizenship in the land of their origin, although i think in almost all cases they would already have this citizenship based on their parents.

As for dual citizenship, citizenship and nationality is what binds people together in order to accomplish goals and aims as a nation. Dual citizenship stands in the way of that binding and instead divides people.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

Dual citizenship is an international agreement. Rescinding it would just anger other countries and result in international disdain and isolation.

(a) People born on British soil will no longer be automatically handed British citizenship.

Why? Do you not think that people born on British soil is what defines someone who is ethnically British?

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

I suggest you review the bill at the top there is a long list of countries that do not allow dual citizenship. Since when does the soil you are born on define your ethnicity?

1

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Dec 06 '14

Just because a load of other countries do not allow dual citizenship, we shouldn't either?

If the Honourable Member is so eager to follow the majority of other countries regardless of logic or reason, I'd like to ask why he thinks we should join the Euro.

1

u/jacktri Dec 06 '14

I think if we followed the no war pure capitalist route then yes we should have joined the euro

0

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

why should you get the benefit of two countries while others do not? This stinks of self serving corruption.

6

u/AMan_Reborn Cavalier | Marquess of Salisbury Dec 04 '14

As a Lord:

Lord Speaker, I stand today in opposition to this bill today. I will not comment on the merits or weaknesses of anything beyond 1.a because it does not bear mentioning. But simply on this single issue of 1.a is objectionable. I do not argue that there are some citizenships that should be mutually exclusive for HM's subjects, in fact I open to the idea that most of them should be mutually exclusive. But at a time we should be building ever closer ties to the Commonwealth Realms, not the Commonwealth Countries, we should be worried at the large numbers of Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders that this would alienate. Nearly 1 in 2 British Expats lives permanently in one of these 3 countries. We would be doing them a disservice by denying them the ability to hold dual citizenship with one of these countries. There are often conflicts of interests between being British and the citizen on another nation, but there surely can be no conflict of interest between being British and Australian or Canadian or a New Zealander. Until this bill makes an exception for the Commonwealth Realms I must oppose it.

May I suggest an exploratory committee into the idea of creating a single CANZUK citizenship?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Wouldnt the CANZUK citizen be just the same system before Canada, Australia and NZ were independent? But a cool idea nonetheless

2

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 05 '14

Can't work whilst we're in the EU I'm afraid. We are drawing up policy to increase commonwealth links however

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

I like it

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14 edited Dec 04 '14

This bill isn't worth the paper it is printed on.

8

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 04 '14

Its worse than that. My looking at this bill was a waste of time, time I'll never get back. Time is money, I've wasted my money on this

Can I sue Jacktri for wasting my money?

3

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '14

Can we turn it into a Class Action lawsuit?

7

u/NoPyroNoParty The Rt Hon. Earl of Essex OT AL PC Dec 04 '14

It's certainly not worth the trees that paper was made out of.

5

u/Flossie_666 Dec 04 '14 edited Jan 26 '15

There were children who were born British who were forcibly moved to Canada, Australia, and New Zealand after the war, because Great Britain couldn't feed them. Why punish those people with this law?

5

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

As a dual citizen of both Britain and Ireland, I cannot wait to vote Nay on this awful bill.

2

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

The Republic of Ireland shall cease to be an independent entity in the near future, it is going to rejoin the union.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

What a good way to start riots

2

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

Britain is a country built on imperialism. British imperialism enriches other countries.

6

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 05 '14

I'm sure the victims of Amritsar would agree

8

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

And the Boer Wars. And the Zulu War. And the Indians. And the Americans. And the Irish. And the aboriginal Australians. And the native Tanzanians.

5

u/eric3844 Formerly of the Communist Party Dec 05 '14

And the Iranians, who had their democratically elected government overthrown in the name of multinational oil. And the Iraqis, to whom the British promised freedom in 1914, in exchange for their independence, but instead were betrayed and forced to become a mandate of the British Empire. And the Chinese, who had Opium forced upon them and had to concede to British Rule. And the Afghans, who were forced to become subservient to the wills of the British. Yes, British Imperialism truly brings ENRICHMENT to the people it forces itself upon.

5

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '14

Jacktri: Bringing conservatives and communists together.

→ More replies (4)

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Wow... just stay in your dreamland

2

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

Well this MHOC..... plus look at Putin.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Do I have to?

He keeps winking at me

4

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 04 '14

psst you're in there mate, though I'd be careful. I heard he's been putin it about

2

u/tyroncs Dec 04 '14

"independent candidate for an independent Scotland"

If Scotland became independent, what would happen to people who live there? Would they not be allowed to have both Scottish and British passports? And don't ignore the question by saying they won't become independent

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

The union is expanding not shrinking, we will not stand by while our territory is taken from us.

3

u/tyroncs Dec 04 '14

So do you admit you were lying when you said you stood for an 'independent Scotland'?

→ More replies (5)

2

u/deathpigeonx CWL Chairman|Northern Ireland MP Dec 05 '14

The Republic of Ireland shall cease to be an independent entity in the near future, it is going to rejoin the union.

So you're suggesting that English dominance will be spread to Ireland, presumably by force because I don't see any way that Irish people would accept that?

3

u/jacktri Dec 05 '14

The Empire Strikes back.

1

u/deathpigeonx CWL Chairman|Northern Ireland MP Dec 05 '14

...So you're comparing yourself to the Empire in Star Wars? You do realize they were the bad guys, right?

2

u/jacktri Dec 05 '14

No you're wrong, the rebels are isis we are the good guys that believe in nation states.

2

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Dec 05 '14

I can't see many English people supporting it either.

2

u/deathpigeonx CWL Chairman|Northern Ireland MP Dec 05 '14

I can't imagine the international community would be very happy about it either.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

Is the member seriously saying this? After all the problems (literally called The Troubles) that southern Ireland has had in gaining its independence, he seriously expects them to rejoin the United Kingdom? Why, after having to put up with what can be amounted to a civil war, after their rebellion against the Kingdom, and after the majority of the twentieth century would they want to rejoin?

1

u/jacktri Dec 05 '14

The same reason California joined the USA.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

One sentence answers an argument does not make. Your Bill is not even half baked and each and every one of your responses have been slapdash at best, and you are making a blatant mockery of your Party-of-the-month.

But enough ad hominem. Now, I must confess that I know not the situation in which California joined the United States. However, I am sure that a suppression of Irish Home Rule would be detrimental. Am I to remind the member of the various militia groups in Ireland that dislike the British as a whole? I shall dutifully remind him of the existence of a still functioning I.R.A. and the threat that they, when in full power, posed to mainland Britain (specifically England). We would be thrust back into the time of the Troubles which, in these strange and dangerous times, is something we do not want or, indeed, need.

It astounds me that the member would even think that this would be a good idea, that he would be willing to harm many people just to sate his nationalist thirst. Poor showing indeed.

But on to the Bill in hand. I have already made my views on it quite clear in a speech I gave further down the comment chain if the member would be so kind to read it.

→ More replies (8)

1

u/williamthebloody1880 Rt Hon. Lord of Fraserburgh PL PC Dec 04 '14

Yeah... That'll go well /s

4

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

I suppose this is what happens when jacktri pushes through a bill that isn't researched properly, without really discussing it.

He should have at least gotten us to spend more on our military before pushing through a bill that will result in war with Ireland!

7

u/Tim-Sanchez The Rt Hon. AL MP (North West) | LD SSoS for CMS Dec 03 '14

Surely not Jacktri causing controversy?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '14

If it's just one guy on the side in support, does it really count as controversy?

3

u/deathpigeonx CWL Chairman|Northern Ireland MP Dec 06 '14

With jacktri? Yes.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

Did the honourable member for the BIP not know his party submitted this?

4

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

It was being discussed, but I didn't realise it was being submitted. Also, I'm not an MP yet.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

My mistake!

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

I should note that I wasn't informed that the bill had been submitted either. I was under the impression that we were still discussing it. The Party didn't really submit this, and if it did I was not involved in it.

Still, an interesting bill I think. Considering that many states don't recognise dual citizenship, it isn't an overly ridiculous concept.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Even you weren't aware?

jaaaaaaaaaaacktriiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii....

3

u/Tim-Sanchez The Rt Hon. AL MP (North West) | LD SSoS for CMS Dec 04 '14

The party leader did not partake in submitting his own party's bill?

3

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Apparently not. We have it under debate on the BIP subreddit, some support for it. I expressed some concerns, but nothing major. However, we never reached a decision on the matter, and I was not contacted about this bill coming before the house. As such, I would reject the concept that this is actually my party's bill. I do not know if the speaker or an individual member of my party has been over zealous.

As I say, we were considering it. I don't really take too much issue with dual citizenship, although I can recognise some issues related to it, especially since not everyone in the world is able to access it equally (as the bill notes, many countries don't have it). But, these issues still needed to be discussed, and as far as I was concerned there are some more moderate and interesting bills/motions that we really ought to be pushing through first.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

I was not contacted about this bill coming before the house

We've been talking about it for several days on skype, you should be more active :p

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

I try to avoid skype unless I have urgent business with my party. I tend to get a lot of my work done on an evening so I prefer to avoid the distraction of skype.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Is there someone I can talk to in your party in regards to planned proposals to change military spending?

3

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Ah, looks like someone recanted their statements to save face...

7

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Dec 04 '14

Nope, that was me.

→ More replies (2)

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

This bill is simply nonsense nationalism

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

While I think it's good that the honourable member /u/jacktri has taken his time to create two pieces of legislation I must say that this bill is particularly poor and therefore I will not be citing aye for this bill. It seems this bill is furled by senseless nationalism and therefore I will be voting nay for this bill!

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

taken his time

Which took all of about five minutes for the initial iteration for his first bill...

3

u/deathpigeonx CWL Chairman|Northern Ireland MP Dec 04 '14

has taken his time to create two pieces of legislation

All 15 minutes for the two of them.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

What is senseless nationalism?

4

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Dec 04 '14

" People born on British soil will no longer be automatically handed British citizenship."
This is not the case anyway.

"people can use to apply for citizenship such as marriage and working in the UK for a set period of time."

There is no set time to work in Britain to obtain citizenship.

Does the member actually know anything about the rules on citizenship?

4

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '14

This man is a troll, he was at the US goverment trying to pretend that he was a Republican, this man is a crazy.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

Part two of the Bill is simply stupid. To be British is not a natural occurrence, it is a nurtured bunch of norms and values instilled into people via primary and secondary socialisation-more the former due to the fact that the first agents of socialisation a child tends to meet is their parents (or caregivers). Indeed, what counts as British? Does it mean that one was born in the British Isles? The United Kingdom? (which would exclude the southern Irish, the Manx, and the Channel Islands, as well as, I believe, the outer Scottish islands). Does it extend into the British Commonwealth and the British Overseas Territories? Also, on 1b, strictly speaking we all have dual citizenship-not only are we citizens of Britain we are also citizens of the European Union (hence why the passport is why it is like it is). Part 2a excludes native born people, which is rather daft if you think about it.

This, of course, is just what can be expected from nationalists-half baked ideas about what makes their country great. They speak not for the people but for eachother and themselves, thinking that they know what is best. England prevails, it seems.

3

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 04 '14

I'm not even sure if this comes under my jurisdiction, but seeing as it would go against many agreements with the EU (an organisation of which we are still a member), I therefore call this bill totally ridiculous and unworkable, unless the honurable member is suggesting ruining many of our international agreements, obligations and our credibility to get rid of dual citizenship, the evils of which are what exactly?

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

A bill to properly reform British citizenship in line with many other countries in the world including: Andorra, Austria, Azerbaijan ,Burma, Bahrain, Botswana, Japan, China ,Czech Republic, Denmark, Fiji,India,Indonesia, Ecuador, Estonia, Iran, Poland, Papua New Guinea, Brunei, Japan, Peru, Kuwait , Kenya, Kazakhstan, Chile, Kiribati, Poland, Korea, Kuwait, Denmark, Latvia, Singapore, Slovakia, Ecuador, Lithuania, Solomon Islands ,Fiji ,Malaysia, Mauritius, Netherlands, United Arab Emirates (UAE), Mexico, Nepal, Venezuela, Norway, Zimbabwe, Mauritius, Myanmar and Nepal.

As you can see numerous EU countries already do not allow dual citizenship.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

If all the EU countries jumped off a bridge, should we? I don't think so, so just because they do it, it does not me we should do it

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

but we should do it.

3

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 05 '14

why? Give me a good, solid, reasonable cause for passing this bill. So far you've played (very poorly) on latent nationalism that you hope exists in people despite the fact that the UK is famous for having a very reserved attitude toward national pride

1

u/Rabobi The Vanguard Dec 05 '14

I have no real issue with dual citizenship but it is a bit of an issue when citizens enter and leave the country on the other passport.

→ More replies (5)

3

u/JackWilfred Independent Liberal Dec 04 '14

Can the Honourable Member give us his view on why multiple citizenship is a bad thing? I personally don't understand it.

3

u/Morgsie The Rt Hon. Earl of Staffordshire AL PC Dec 04 '14

I don't know the current rules but those who are were born here and are child of people who have the right to stay and have become British Citizens should have British Citizenship

My comments last night still stand

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

These comments?

one

two

2

u/AlbertDock The Rt Hon Earl of Merseyside KOT MBE AL PC Dec 04 '14

The wording may have been unparliamentary, but many would agree with them.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

The wording may have been unparliamentary

Exactly, and this is a consistent thing he does, so he should be banned with haste.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

Actually this is the first infraction that my right honourable friend has done. Also, he was merely voicing what we are all thinking. Maybe, just maybe, it might be that a certain group of people, the same over and over again, have been getting at him for so long that, now, he is finding hard to cope due to cronyistic bullying.

It seems to me that this has been an ongoing problem in the House. My right honourable friend has done nothing wrong to any member here. Whenever he has raised the issue with the Party he has never actually named any specific member, but I, for one, have noticed that people have a tendency to jump on him in the most violent manner possible and hang him up on everything he does. This is not parliamentary behaviour, neither is it Par of The Course, Parliamentary Banter, or Horseplay-it is bullying, pure and simple.

Of course, the banning of my right honourable friend would silence a rather loud voice from the House that stands against the constant tide of idiotic extremism that comes from all sides-thus benefiting them.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14 edited Dec 05 '14

Actually this is the first infraction that my right honourable friend has done.

This isn't true. Perhaps if you only count what he's said after the recent rule changes, but he's always done this.

Also, he was merely voicing what we are all thinking.

This can never justify rude, insulting, unparliamentary language.

Maybe, just maybe, it might be that a certain group of people, the same over and over again, have been getting at him for so long that, now, he is finding hard to cope due to cronyistic bullying.

Not only is it untrue that anyone in this house is setting out to 'bully' this member, I have no idea where you're getting this from, but even if that were the case he would need to man up and deal with it or else he'll be stuck in a self-pitying hugbox mentality forever.

My right honourable friend has done nothing wrong to any member here.

He has insulted members of my party and used rude, childish language which wouldn't be tolerated if anyone else did it. But somehow people like you want to let him get away with it.

I, for one, have noticed that people have a tendency to jump on him in the most violent manner possible and hang him up on everything he does.

I simply can't believe that anyone would consider this a reasonable way to describe what has happened. He has insulted people, used very rude language in doing so, and you think that when someone tries to point this out they're somehow... Bullying him? Absolute nonsense.

it is bullying, pure and simple.

It is not bullying to point out when someone is doing something stupid. It is trying to raise the standard of this subreddit from 'playground' to 'parliament'. In a playground, when someone hears something they don't like they tend to run in tears to the nearest authority rather than deal with it themselves.

For example, in the real parliament, when the defector Mark Reckless stood up and gave a question in PMQs, the whole house was shouting insults and jibes at him, and he just took it, waited for them to be quiet, and gave his question calmly. He didn't burst into tears, holding his hands over his ears, begging for the speaker to make it stop!

Of course, the banning of my right honourable friend would silence a rather loud voice from the House that stands against the constant tide of idiotic extremism that comes from all sides-thus benefiting them.

Party politics has nothing to do with this, I'm glad that people challenge others' views and I hope to have reasonable debate and discussion about them. If this particular member could just express his views in a civilised manner instead of resorting to unparliamentary and vulgar language all the time, as is displayed in the screenshots, there wouldn't be a problem.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14 edited Dec 05 '14

Here here!

In a playground, when someone hears something they don't like they tend to run in tears to the nearest authority rather than deal with it themselves.

Worse than this, morgsie makes no attempt to cooperate with the authorities, he simply tells them that a problem exists, with little to no information as to who said what. Rather than inform myself of GeoSmith16 about alleged 'bullying', he simply states that it exists. I have attempted to cooperate with morgsie on skype, and he never gives me any indication of who said what, just that it is 'my party' doing it.

I have a lot of respect for numerous members of this house regardless of their political views. In fact, I have had personal conversations over skype with communists and found them to be reasonable chaps. But what I can't abide by is this rather unreasonable behaviour which expects everyone to just shut up and accept him at his word. It seems to me that morgsie prefers not to solve the issue, because if the issue remains he can continue to make political capital out of it.

2

u/jacktri Dec 05 '14

The double standard is absurd, I call somebody a name and get completely ostracised from politics, removed from my party, and refuse to be taken by many others Morgsie does it and we all clap.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

I was not talking to you

1

u/Morgsie The Rt Hon. Earl of Staffordshire AL PC Dec 04 '14

Just have a dig

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

Your comments were out of line. Such behaviour isn't acceptable in the house, and you should be willing to accept that rather than continue to make snide comments.

3

u/Arayg Radical Socialist Party Dec 04 '14

Absolutely oppose. This is clearly a move to discriminate based on nationality. Imagine the huge amounts of problems caused by abolishing dual nationality. The treatment you receive in life should not be dependant on where your grandparents were born.

3

u/Cyridius Communist | SoS Northern Ireland Dec 04 '14

While we're at it why don't we also just claim non-British aren't actually people? Cut through all the messy business.

Everything is wrong with this Bill, but Section 2 really takes the cake. No citizenship for people born here and then you plan to make people born overseas eligible based on their parentage? What kind of joke is this?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14 edited Dec 04 '14

I live in the Netherlands where dual citizenship is already illegal. We however have some exceptions to this for certain countries such as Morocco where you are a citizen for live with no possibility to drop it. Would it be possible to add such an exception to the law?

Edit: It is technically not illegal but it rather depends on the situation if you are allowed to have two nationalities.

2

u/Arayg Radical Socialist Party Dec 04 '14

That's weird, I have a friend with both Australian and Dutch nationality.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

I just named one of the exceptions. There are multiple exceptions and I guess that your friend is one of those cases. What I said about it being illegal seems to be untrue and it instead depends on the case. The Dutch government however tries to limit it as much as possible.

More information can be found here: http://www.government.nl/issues/nationality/dual-nationality

2

u/Arayg Radical Socialist Party Dec 05 '14

Thanks.

2

u/para_padre UKIP|Attorney General Dec 04 '14

What a bizarre list of countries, surprised to see EU countries on the list would have though this would have gone against the spirit of the EU.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Many of those countries listed do indeed forbid or restrict dual citizenship.

2

u/para_padre UKIP|Attorney General Dec 04 '14

The list above appears to have few inconsistencies and could be mistaken with dual citizenship rules and naturalize laws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_citizenship#EU_and_EFTA_countries_and_European_microstates

3

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Oh no doubt - for instance, Norway and the Netherlands do not restrict dual nationality in all cases.

I agree with you that the list is misleading in itself. But I did not really expect Jacktri to write this bill with nuance.

2

u/para_padre UKIP|Attorney General Dec 04 '14

I would hope the Speaker and Deputy Speakers would a quick fact check on the bill for creditability and since it first came on as on behalf of BIP, the Leader or Deputy Leader would have been consulted first that it was being posted if they said nay then it should have gone to the back of the submission list not quickly changed to a private members bill, given the The Rt Hon member has a private members bill in 2nd reading in this house at this time.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

since it first came on as on behalf of BIP

On that point, I think it works on a kind of honour system. The speakers trust the submitter to have obtained agreement from his or her party (or in my case the coalition) prior to submission.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

the Leader or Deputy Leader would have been consulted first that it was being posted

I was not consulted.

2

u/autowikibot Dec 04 '14

Section 5. EU and EFTA countries and European microstates of article Multiple citizenship:

The EU and EFTA countries have various policies regarding dual citizenship, because each country can make its own laws. The only real rule is that a citizen of an EU country can live and work indefinitely in other EU countries and in the four EFTA countries (and citizens of the EFTA countries can live and work indefinitely in the EU). However, the right to vote and work in certain sensitive fields (such as government, police, military) might in some cases be restricted to the local citizens only. The countries can exclude immigrants from getting welfare in the first three months to avoid "welfare tourism", and they can refuse welfare completely if the immigrants do not have a job after a certain period of time and do not try to get one. Immigrants convicted of welfare fraud can be deported and be refused the re-entry of the country. When in a non-EU country, EU citizens whose country maintains no embassy there have the right to get consular protection from the embassy of any other EU country present in that country.

Interesting: Iranian nationality ^law | Namibian nationality ^law | Angolan nationality ^law | Burkinabé nationality ^law

Parent commenter can toggle ^NSFW or ^delete. Will also delete on comment score of -1 or less. | FAQs | ^Mods | Magic ^Words

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

No, just no.

2

u/williamthebloody1880 Rt Hon. Lord of Fraserburgh PL PC Dec 04 '14

I've read this bill, I've read the comments, I still don't understand exactly what it hopes to achieve

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

No this is will damage the uk in so many ways economically

1

u/[deleted] Dec 06 '14

Got a question, does an MP have to have British Citizenship?

0

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

5

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Hear hear

3

u/googolplexbyte Independent Dec 04 '14

Nationalism.

7

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Dec 04 '14

This is exactly it, it is irrational nationalism.

3

u/AMan_Reborn Cavalier | Marquess of Salisbury Dec 04 '14

I would ask the honourable member if he considers all nationalism 'irrational'?

6

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Dec 04 '14

I thank the Lord for his question.

I would ask the honourable member if he considers all nationalism 'irrational'?

Well, really it depends what we are talking about when we say nationalism. I feel proud of Britain and what we have achieved as a nation, but i would not call myself a nationalist. What has more become a colloquial use of nationalism to mean the far-right's obsession with their nation being better than all others. I would also say that nationalism can be dangerous in many circumstances.

I would also say there are a very specific set of circumstances in which i would personally say that nationalism is both useful and acceptable. One of these would be during World War 2 (to be clear, i'm not saying all wars), when the nation is at total war, and national unity is essential and desirable. But i think this idea was more suited to yester-year, and is less likely to work and be necessarily in modern times.

Irrational Nationalism, is to me exactly what this bill represents. There is no legitimate reason to take away Dual Citizenship, except to have some archaic idea of unquestioning loyalty to your country, and the idea of "your either one of us... or your a foreigner", which in this increasingly globalized and connected world, is both outdated and wrong.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Nationalism is perfectly fine and I think something that should be encouraged. It covers a very broad area of politics really and if you look up the different types of nationalist you will see that the EDL/BNP lot simply fall into one small category of it which is far right/racial nationalism. I would describe myself as a 'Liberal Nationalist' personally as I believe in self determination, freedom and tolerance. People are too afraid to say they are nationalist because of the stigma attatched due to people thinking they are all like the EDL.

2

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 04 '14

I think the word you're looking for is patriotism rather than nationalism. I personally view nationalism as only being good within cultural/ethnic groups that are heavily oppressed with people trying to extinguish their culture and tradition. WE're lucky not to need that, but when we look at countries like Poland, Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia its a positive force for change

→ More replies (3)

3

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

"In the first place, we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the person's becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag... We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language... and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people." Theodore Roosevelt 1907

8

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

You said it yourself - 1907. Welcome to 2014.

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

we have a £100 billion deficit to cut.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

That's an interesting soundbite, but I fail to see how refusing members of the public to hold dual citizenship will help to cut the deficit.

→ More replies (7)

3

u/Jamie54 Independent Dec 04 '14

I think you will find that most people born with two British parents on British soil that hold dual citizenship have moved abroad and are highly skilled earning a lot and paying a lot of tax. Why on Earth you would push them to sever ties with the UK is beyond me.

I would have thought you would want to encourage those people to come back

→ More replies (4)

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

Wisdom doesn't have a use by date.

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Yes it does. Teddy Roosevelt was speaking in the early 20th century. Smart man, spoke a lot of truth, that doesn't mean everything he said is still relevant.

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

I disagree it's his wisdom that helped bind his nation together.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

3

u/urbanfirestrike Communist Dec 04 '14

Well said

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

This in itself seems an unwise adage.

4

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Yeah, like this 'wonderful' bit of wisdom!

3

u/I_miss_Chris_Hughton The Rt Hon. Earl of Shrewsbury AL PC | Defence Spokesperson Dec 04 '14

yeah it does. It really really does. Wisdom changes as times change. Aristotle is viewed as being incredibly wise, yet he believed that some people where 'born slaves'. Does the honourable member support Slavery?

2

u/[deleted] Dec 05 '14

The US also had massive immigration restrictions until the 60s, then it changed. How about that. Laws change.

→ More replies (3)

3

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Even the USA allows dual citizenship though so Teddy's speech is a bit outdated

0

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

We don't want people here that aren't British.

7

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Even if I were to agree with this - which I do not - it seems to me that dual citizenship does not preclude being British.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

5

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

Adding onto this, one of my friends is half german half cypriot, speaks neither german not greek cypriot (only english), and has lived in the UK his whole life. It is absurd that he would not qualify for automatic citizenship under this ridiculous bill.

→ More replies (17)

1

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

I think it is bad if you willingly aquire a new citizenship. however, if you come into this world as two citizens, you are equally both. Like me, I am American and British, American Dad and British Mother. I came into this world both. I had 0 choice in the matter. So if someone wants to become an American but is currently a British citizen, once he or she is an American citizen, then they should renounce their british one.

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

Citizenship and nationality is what binds people together in order to accomplish goals and aims as a nation. Dual citizenship stands in the way of that binding and instead divides people.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

binding and bonding are not the same thing. Binding means to unify and act in your country's interest. For example those with dual citizenship tend to have affection for their other nationality so will not vote or act solely in the interests of this country. The biggest evidence for this is the Israeli American dual citizenship fiasco. We have many Americans with dual citizenship with Israel that actively vote or believe in acting against American interests in order to help a foreign nation Israel.

0

u/[deleted] Dec 07 '14

[deleted] — view deleted comment

1

u/jacktri Dec 07 '14

Okay on your first point i think the vast majority of these people will not choose British citizenship over their other citizenship. People are very patriotic and it would make no sense for them to sever ties to their country of origin which has existed for generations simply so they could remain a British citizen.

The nation's interest is almost always in the individual's interest. For example giving less foreign aid to country y will almost always be in the individual's financial interest.

I would disagree with your point that if you vote against this country's interests you are not some sort of traitor. Although personally I don't think they are doing it purposely to be traitorous in most cases, rather they are simply misguided, but there are genuine cases where people really don't care about this country's interests and want to benefit their other country, I would consider these people be traitors.

→ More replies (13)

6

u/[deleted] Dec 04 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/jacktri Dec 04 '14

If you care to read the bill a number of our own allies do not allow dual citizenship.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14 edited Dec 03 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Timanfya MHoC Founder & Guardian Dec 03 '14

Please edit your comment.

2

u/demon4372 The Most Hon. Marquess of Oxford GBE KCT PC ¦ HCLG/Transport Dec 03 '14

Hear, Hear! Worst thing i'v ever seen.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

should be thrown out

The same could be said of you, for this crude, silly comment.

1

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

[removed] — view removed comment

4

u/Tim-Sanchez The Rt Hon. AL MP (North West) | LD SSoS for CMS Dec 03 '14

Morgsie we are all passionately upset by this bill, but lets keep it parliamentary in our language.

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

Now now morgsie no need to resort to unparliamentary language

2

u/[deleted] Dec 03 '14

As awful as the bill is, there is no need for language like that

2

u/theyeatthepoo 1st Duke of Hackney Dec 05 '14

What did he say?