Talk:Susan Lamb

British citizenship laws
Ok.

British citizenship by descent prior to 1983 requires that at least one parent be British (Her father was born in Scotland. He is a British citizen otherwise than by descent) and, in the case of the mother being the British one, married parents. (I might have gotten the mother and father mixed up. Considering she has at no point said her parents were unmarried, I think it's fair to say it's a moot point)

After this, British citizenship by descent is automatic. She was British from the day she was born. If we were talking about her children, given she hasn't spent three years in the UK, that would be a different question, but we're not.

Australian citizenship requires registration. British citizenship by descent does not.

At no point has she denied being British. The closest we have come to this is her claim that the British govt said she hadn't provided enough evidence to confirm this. Given the missing evidence was a marriage certificate, and given her parents were married, what doubt remains about her citizenship?

The only defence she has ever used is whether she has put in all reasonable effort (which is an exception based off previous precedent) to get rid of her citizenship.

See here for Fiona Nash, who was also born before 1983 to a Scottish father. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiona_Nash

Brayrobert201 (talk) 06:37, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * It appears that the British government requires two things to allow someone to renounce their British citizenship: 1) You must have some other citizenship 2) it must be convinced that you actually have that which you are trying to renounce. In Susan Lamb's case, she believed that she had it and did all that was necessary to make it go away. The British Home Office had/has not accepted that it has received sufficient evidence that it ever existed for her to have given it up. The Liberal Party wants her to resign from parliament (probably for political reasons, but I have never seen a suitable reference to say that), or it will push the point by referring it to the High Court for determination. Legal threats are almost always inappropriate. Ultimately, it will not matter whether the HC determines that she did all she could to give it up, or that she never had it. Either way would permit her to remain. --Scott Davis Talk 11:33, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

User:ScottDavis (talk)
 * Firstly, my apologies if this is a messed up edit. I don't wiki all that much.

Anyway, I believe you're misunderstanding her defence. She isn't saying she isn't British, she's attempting to use the exception created under Sykes v Cleary (http://www8.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1992/60.html) which basically says that if it was too difficult to renounce X citizenship, you can be a dual citizen and in parliament. (As a hypothetical, imagine if you have a country that basically will not, under any circumstances, allow someone to relinquish citizenship and that citizenship WILL be passed on to all descendants. At that point, you've got a choice between barring all people of that ancestry from political office or accepting that they've done enough. They chose to accept that if there's nothing else you could have done, it's good enough Her defence is that getting in touch with her estranged mother and asking for her marriage certificate would have been an unreasonable step.  Now, what the home office says about her attempt to give it up is fairly irrelevant (Unless they say that she'd done enough and she's no longer British) - It's a tickbox exercise. If you fulfil the criteria (She does in the same way as Fiona Nash did/does. I have no idea if she's renounced it since losing her seat) you are British. She didn't prove to them that she was British, but that's not the same as saying she wasn't British. If her parents weren't married, she'd have been in the clear, but it's fairly obvious they were. Just as it's obvious her Father (Unless there's some evidence of him renouncing his own citizenship before she was born. I can't imagine why he'd have done it though) was a British citizen. So to sum up her defence, it's "I'm British, but given I couldn't bring myself to talk to my mother, I took all reasonable steps to renounce it under Sykes v Cleary, so it's OK for me to be in parliament"  Now, as far as the high court goes. The question won't be "Is she British?" - She is. The question will be "Did she do enough to renounce it to satisfy us (not the Home Office, but the High Court) under Sykes v Cleary?"  So for that, I guess we'll find out what happens if she ever tests it in the HC. Sykes v Cleary might be enough, but it puts her into a grey area that needs testing. "I have renounced my citizenship and here's the piece of paper that proves it" is black and white. Brayrobert201 (talk) 23:02, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The problem is that all of this is Original research. You can't take your application of the law as you understand it to the facts of Lamb's case as you understand them and insert that into the article: Wikipedia very explicitly does not do this. Wikipedia relies on the conclusions of reliable sources about such things - which, as ScottDavis pointed out yesterday, are significantly less certain about all of this than you are. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 22:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Ok, let's take this piece by piece.

Was her father a British citizen otherwise than by descent? Yes or no. Her own maiden speech says he was Were her parents married? Yes or no. Her belief that her mother has a marriage certificate says they were. I would consider her to be a reliable source on both of these things If yes to both, she is British. The debate has never been about whether or not she's British, it's been about whether she's taken all reasonable steps to renounce it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nationality_law#British_citizenship_by_descent "Before 1983, as a general rule CUKC status was transmitted automatically only for one generation, with registration in infancy possible for subsequent generations. Transmission was from the father only, and only if the parents were married. (See History of British nationality law.)"

Even here: https://www.sunshinecoastdaily.com.au/news/i-took-all-steps-renounce-citizenship-susan-lamb/3212502/ She's using Sykes v Cleary. This isn't original research. It's taking publicly available information and applying it to a very simple tickbox. What further evidence would you require to say that she's British? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brayrobert201 (talk • contribs) 23:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Brayrobert201 (talk) 23:03, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Once again, this is Original research and explicitly banned on Wikipedia. You need to cite reliable sources making the claims you want to include in the article, and as other editors have previously noted, they do not share your certainty. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 23:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * You don't believe her own claims about her father's place of birth and her parent's marriage status to be reliable sources?

What would you consider to be a reliable source? Brayrobert201 (talk) 23:12, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

As User:Brayrobert201 correctly identifies, the issue with regards to the content update of this article is not if she is a British citizen. She is by default a British citizen. The origin of her parents is not under debate. She is, by law, a citizen, unless she has taken reasonable steps to renounce. The only institution capable of determining that is the High Court. Until her matter is seen by the High Court, her status as a British Citizen is not up for debate, its a matter of fact. "The Turnbull government yesterday called on Ms Lamb to resign “or at the very least be referred to the High Court”, insisting she was sitting in parliament as a UK citizen." The Prime Minister of Australia has declared she is, and is reported so by multiple reputable news sources, and is on record saying as much. This isn't up for debate. NorseStorm57 (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * As The Drover's Wife said, Wikipedia does not draw its own conclusions, it collates and summarises what has already been published in other places. The question is not what I believe, it is what has been published in WP:RS. But to respond to your collation of evidence, no, Susan Lamb is not a reliable witness as to the existence of her parents' wedding certificate. Her father is dead, she would have cleaned up his stuff, and she didn't find it. Her speeches are reliable sources for what she believes, and Malcolm Turnbull's speeches are reliable for what he believes, but he has no more evidence than I do. They are not necessarily reliable sources for objective facts. Oh - and the question for the High Court won't be either "is she British (or was she at the relevant time)?" or "did she do enough to renounce it?", it will be "Is there a vacancy, and if so, how should it be filled?". The court might consider the answers to one or both of the other questions on the way, if it chooses to. --Scott Davis Talk 23:31, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

To clarify again; her citizenship is not a matter for debate. The members own testimony identifies her citizenship. She _is_ a British citizen. No conclusions are drawn outside that already listed as citations. Her own admission is that she has been 'Unable to Renounce her British Citizenship' as cited. 'Labor MP Susan Lamb has tearfully recounted being abandoned by her mother at age six as she pleaded with the government to understand why she has been unable to renounce her dual citizenship.' NorseStorm57 (talk) 23:39, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * And there are (many) conflicting sources about what exactly the state of it is. So we report what they say: we do not report one version of a disputed issue as fact because of the personal investigation and arguments of a Wikipedian. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 23:57, 12 February 2018 (UTC)


 * What sources are there that suggest she isn't a British citizen? I'd be interested to have a look at those. The only ambiguity I've come across when looking at this is whether she'd done enough to renounce it (By the standards laid out in Sykes v Cleary. The British home office was pretty black and white in that her attempt to renounce had failed due to her not providing something there has never been any indication doesn't exist. This includes her own mother who has said she would have helped her get it if she'd been asked.)

Brayrobert201 (talk) 00:01, 13 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Again, please read Original research and familiarise yourself with the response of the Home Office. You are very welcome to cite the opinions of authorities on the subject: you are absolutely not welcome to add your own analysis instead. The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 00:12, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

To clarify, you are saying that the Members own public statement, as cited previously, is not a valid source?NorseStorm57 (talk) 00:26, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * To confirm: What she is reported as having said is a valid source for what she believes. It is not a valid source for what either the UK Home Office or the Court of Disputed Returns/High Court know or believe, and certainly not a source for absolute truth (especially since parts of what she said are contradicted by what her step-mother has said in the reference you provided above). --Scott Davis Talk 01:57, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

Update: ABC Fact Check has asserted she is in fact a British Citizen as attested to by Christopher Pyne. ′The verdict Mr Pyne's claim about Ms Lamb's citizenship status is a good call. Ms Lamb's own legal advice confirms that she obtained British citizenship by descent at birth.′ The assertion of this article is that until tested by the high court, her citizenship of the UK remains valid. Additionally, the article asserts that Ms Lamb provided 'some' documentation required to renounce but her application was rejected. 'After the election, she provided some documents, but her application was still rejected. On publicly available information, she has not sought a review of the Home Office decision or made a new renunciation application. There is no evidence that the British Secretary of State has registered a declaration of her renunciation, which the Australian High Court has described as "the moment at which British citizenship is lost".' --NorseStorm57 (talk) 02:23, 16 February 2018 (UTC)