It is utterly pathetic that a join censure motion from all major parties will be debated on April 2.
That is the earliest date politicians could act without adding unnecessarily drama. But instead of acting they are merely denouncing.
He is plainly seeking to attract attention as a rallying point for neo-nazis. Denunciation without other measures only helps provide the notoriety.
Doubtful whether he could or should be prosecuted for what he said and that could help him get attention.
Casually expelling him from the Senate without fuss or ceremony is a gesture less likely to assist him.
Not much of a gesture since he will be out very shortly anyway.
But at least as useful as other gestures of solidarity against the mass murder of muslims by neo-nazis.
Requires amendment of Parliamentary Privileges Act 1987 which abolished the power of either House to expel a member.
Simply add a section to the effect that notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this or any other legislation he is expelled forthwith.
Both houses meet immediately after April Fools day. Could be done by suspending standing orders etc and rushing it through both Houses without wasting more than a few minutes on voting, with GG standing by to proclaim it a few seconds later. A few seconds extra for him to attempt to say something and get ejected for whatever he says.
No need to worry about setting a precedent or getting overturned for unconstitutionality as he would be out anyway by the time he could get to Court.
Instead they are deliberately choosing to virtue signal while not actually doing anything against open mobilization for neo-nazi terrorism.
This must be taken seriously. It should be qute feasible for public outrage to force politicians to just shutup and act.
C21st Left 
Barry,
1. Perhaps media (eg The Australian) or at least OLO would be interested in this? I haven’t seen any reference to simplicity of just amending the Act that prevents expulsion.
2. No reaction on Grounds for Suspicion at OLO. I expect discussion will break out again after appeal declares verdict manifestly unsafe and would like to try again for both media and OLO.
3. Glot clipping thanks. Enjoyed reading it.
LikeLike
With your approval, I can try the OZ and also Canberra Times, if OZ don’t take it. How does that sound? Glad you liked old clipping.
LikeLiked by 1 person
FYI : https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-03-16/could-fraser-anning-be-expelled-from-parliament/10908860
LikeLike
Thanks Glen.
I think I covered it but if media expresses interest could add a specific reference that lawyers like that one suggesting it cannot or should not be done by Senate should have mentioned how easily and rapidly it could be done by both Houses together and confine their argument to why not for this specific case.
LikeLike
Arthur, today’s Australian has an article by George Williams in which he points out that the parliament could expel Anning, along your lines. However, Williams thinks this would be a bad thing to do, and favours the ‘virtue signalling’ approach instead. Might this provide opportunity for a rejoinder from you if you are able to update your article in light of Williams’ piece?
LikeLike
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/house-can-oust-anning-but-thats-best-left-to-voters/news-story/8e4267c51d0b1a58da52538c59709a8f
LikeLike
Thanks. Link requires subscription. Will look at hardcopy over brunch shortly.
Update would be entirely new article as main point was to get across the fact now admitted by Williams.
Not sure whether I could write a convincing rejoinder as the virtue signallers will be able to justify their ongoing attraction of attention to Anning instead of doing anything by the inevitability of a debate on Williams arguments about it being a bad precedent (which is a legitimate argument unlike claims that it could not be done).
Key point is that getting it over in a few minutes would require shutting down debate which would be ok and feasible against Anning and any opponents of censuring him, but won’t work against virtue signallers who agree with Williams. So there will be more attention to Anning than from a censure motion if they debate expelling him rather than just give him the flick without debate.
Is it possible Canberra Times asked Williams for opinion after seeing this post?
LikeLike
Arthur, Williams’ article is in The Australian, not the Canberra Times. The latter does have your original article and told me they’d be back in touch in a couple of days, which may (or may not) mean they’ll run it on Saturday. I share your posts widely via my facebook and other connections, which include a few prominent right-wing conservatives, so who knows? Maybe it did end up influencing Williams, though I am not a facebook friend of his.
LikeLike