Double Passports in the Government

[The Stranger]

I dont know if there already is a thread about this but recently it has come to my attention that our government, who previously pleaded that people in the Government should be completely loyal to the country (valid point) and therefore they should not have a double passport (debatable point), has a member which has a double passport. The person who this concerns is the State Secretary and has another passport from Sweden next to her Dutch one.

Now the Prime minister's response to the question why she would be allowed to stay while they were so against people in the Government with a double passport was this: A passport from Sweden is alot different than from example Turkey (this example is given because a Turkish State Secretary was cause for this debate when Wilders put forward a motion of Distrust because he doubted her loyalty to Holland.) because Turkey still has Military Service for her subjects outside het country and also hereditary law (erfrecht) and Sweden does not (I dont agree that this is a valid point but it is true) and also Turkey follows her subjects that have politcal carreers abroad and makes sure that they do not do anything that goes against the interest of Turkey (while this might be true he doesn't know it to be true, it is mere assumption and therefor an invalid argument. And i can presume that Turkey would not be the only country to do so.) and he claims Sweden doesn't.

He thinks he is not discriminating when he hints at the point that a Turk is not loyal to the country he or she lives in merely for being Turkish while a Swede is...

Boy oh Boy! And to top it off already Wilders has put forward a motion of distrust against the State Secretary (merely for show ofcourse, but atleast he is consistent) so the hunting season has begun and we can now all sit in front of our televisions and enjoy the sitcomedy called The Dutch Parliament!!

[al Roumi]

First off, I assume the "State Secretary" is an elected politician, not an official (civil servant)?

A politician's legitimacy is provided by the electoral vote. In matters of national security, the UK does perform background security checks on its ministers (politicians in charge of a government department/govt business), as on it's officials.

Banning multiple passports sounds rather like not trusting people simply becasue you perceive them as foreign. There have been plenty enough traitors who are not "foreign" to a given state.

[HoreTore]

Yeah we've had a case like this too, completely idiotic.

Our case concerned a French born woman, and being from a colony she was dark-skinned. Our "immigrationally challenged" party of course jumped on her instantly, but when we had a Dane a few years earlier they were silent as the grave...

The fact is that a Dane or a Swede is actually more of a "threat" than a Turk or a Caribbean French, because Norway and Denmark and Dutchistan and Sweden(being neighbors/EU members) have a lot more dealings with each other than the Netherlands and Turkey, and Norway and French Guyana(or whatever).

[Fragony]

It's an inconsistency that's very unfortunate to say the least. Rutte is of course right Turkey is always meddling. Also, Dutch Turks still have to serve in the Turkish army. But he should have made stand.

[Hax]

Then for crying out loud, do something about it. I have the Algerian nationality, but I don't want it. If Rutte-Verhagen can make people lose their nationality, let them talk to the Arabic countries. Pressure them.

[The Stranger]

this might be true but, for point 2 she is a woman so i doubt she has to serve in the army. and for point 1 turkey is most definitly not the only country, and for while it might be true that the swedes do not it is still a trivial point because the notion made clear is that the double passport standard only applies to non western countries for reasion which are dubious to say the least.

and to adress the other double passport point, they cannot just evict people who commit crimes AND happen to have a double passport. for who are they to decide which nationality weighs more, what will happen if the other country doesnt want that person either and does the opposite. Or how would holland react if dutch people with double passports would be evicted from canada or australia or south africa (if the it has to be non-western) when they commit crimes, they would talk of outrage. And even then I do not understand while it should only apply to non-western nationalites, why not to americans? and i doubt sincerely they would dare to evict a chinese criminal and take away his dutch passport and send him to china with a card which says": Here he is your problem now, he is half chinese and since whiteness is the receeding gene he is more chinese so you deal with it" signed "Poor Europe"

[rory_20_uk]

Yes they can, if it's like the UK. Those with two passports can loose their UK one and then technically should be deported. Those with only one passport can not be treated in this way. I don't know how often this happens in reality.

[al Roumi]

Yes they can, if it's like the UK. Those with two passports can loose their UK one and then technically should be deported. Those with only one passport can not be treated in this way. I don't know how often this happens in reality.

Not quite. UK courts have a responsability of duty of care for the people they prosecute. The Uk can't just extradite criminals willy nilly, there has to be an assurance from the country to which the individual is returning to that the said individual will be treated humanely and not subject to toruture etc (i.e. that they will be subject to conditions similar to those in the UK).

This concern for the rights of prisoners is why not everyone, even the real nasties like convicted terrorists, cannot be deported and have to be kept in UK jails.

[rory_20_uk]

Something that should be urgently rectified.

"Commit crimes in the UK and get this - we can't get rid of you! Bunk in a 'Prison' that's nicer than a house where you come from and when you come out feel free to do it all again!"

[gaelic cowboy]

Yes they can, if it's like the UK. Those with two passports can loose their UK one and then technically should be deported. Those with only one passport can not be treated in this way. I don't know how often this happens in reality.

Not true there are loads of people in UK with British and Irish passports I never heard of any problems of deportation.

[rory_20_uk]

Nevermind

[al Roumi]

Not true there are loads of people in UK with British and Irish passports I never heard of any problems of deportation.

He was continuing the Stranger's point regarding extradition of convicted criminals.

[gaelic cowboy]

He was continuing the Stranger's point regarding extradition of convicted criminals.

Many IRA members living in the North have Irish passports because that is there right but they are technically British and can have both passports if they wanted too.

There were various rules like you could have one if your parents or grandparents were old enough to have been born in a unified Ireland then under British rule and various others.

The rules have since changed slightly now but essentially UK never deported these people even if they never applied for a British passport ever.

[Fragony]

Then for crying out loud, do something about it. I have the Algerian nationality, but I don't want it. If Rutte-Verhagen can make people lose their nationality, let them talk to the Arabic countries. Pressure them.

Agreed. It's an ugly situation, especially in Turkey's case since you lose Dutch nationality for serving in a foreign army. Dutch government pays Turkey off, which they should imho, but it's also madness. Also worried about pressure, Turks are proud people, calling someone a bad Turk is a major insult (that is my experience at least), having just one nationality would relieve part of it. As it is, as harsh as it may sound, we can't trust them on key positions.

[al Roumi]

As it is, as harsh as it may sound, we can't trust them on key positions.

Are there no Dutch Turks serving in the Dutch armed forces?

[Andres]

First off, I assume the "State Secretary" is an elected politician, not an official (civil servant)?

A politician's legitimacy is provided by the electoral vote. In matters of national security, the UK does perform background security checks on its ministers (politicians in charge of a government department/govt business), as on it's officials.

Isn't it so that in a representative/parliamentary democracy, the members of the government aren't directly elected, only the members of Parliament are? And the Parliament choses the members of the government? Don't know about the Netherlands, but, technically, in Belgium it is possible to put people in government who aren't elected. If the majority of the Parliament e.g. elects X for minister of finances, then X will be minister of finances, doesn't matter if X took part in the elections or not.

If it works the same in the Netherlands as here, then I guess you'll have to look in your legislation and see if double nationality is forbidden or not; and change the legislation if you don't want somebody with two passports as minister/secretary of state.

Personally, I think it's reasonable to demand that in order to get such an important position at the head of the country, you need to have the nationality of the country. In case of double nationality, the candidate should be forced to chose one. We're talking of a member of the government, not the local low grade civil servant who puts stamps on documents from 9 am until 4 pm, with a lunch break and three coffee breaks.

[al Roumi]

Isn't it so that in a representative/parliamentary democracy, the members of the government aren't directly elected, only the members of Parliament are? And the Parliament choses the members of the government? Don't know about the Netherlands, but, technically, in Belgium it is possible to put people in government who aren't elected. If the majority of the Parliament e.g. elects X for minister of finances, then X will be minister of finances, doesn't matter if X took part in the elections or not.

I think the UK is rather different to most other European countries (in this in particular), the top jobs in all government departments are given to elected representatives -or individuals given a title (e.g. Lord or Baroness) so as to enable them to sit in either the House of Commons or Lords and in so doing be publicly responsible (to other MPs or Lords) for their department.

Personally, I think it's reasonable to demand that in order to get such an important position at the head of the country, you need to have the nationality of the country. In case of double nationality, the candidate should be forced to chose one. We're talking of a member of the government, not the local low grade civil servant who puts stamps on documents from 9 am until 4 pm, with a lunch break and three coffee breaks.

My personal opinion may be biased here, having both British and French nationality, but I'm not convinced that insisting on a single legal nationality would really help much keep a government "safer". In practical terms, not having an additional nationality/passport would not hinder anyone from e.g. passing on state secrets, let alone being prone to "external influence"*. You'd have to insist on allegiance to the state or whatever -which is exactly why UK MPs are required to swear an oath of fealty to the Queen, and why Sinn Fein cannot sit in Parliament (becasue they won't swear such fealty, for obvious reasons).

*Edit: That is, assuming someone already has multiple nationalities/cultural ties. Lets also not forget ideology, the key divider from the cold war.

[Andres]

I think the UK is rather different to most other European countries (in this in particular), the top jobs in all government departments are given to elected representatives -or individuals given a title (e.g. Lord or Baroness) so as to enable them to sit in either the House of Commons or Lords and in so doing be publicly responsible (to other MPs or Lords) for their department.

I see.

Well, I would have the same opinion if it the official would have been directly elected and had been open about his/her nationality during campaign. If the British people want a Turk/Russian/Belgian/whatever to be their Prime Minister and he is directly elected by the people, then I see no objections. It wouldn't be my choice, but if that is what the majority of the people truly want

My personal opinion may be biased here, having both British and French nationality, but I'm not convinced that insisting on a single legal nationality would really help much keep a government "safer". In practical terms, not having an additional nationality/passport would not hinder anyone from e.g. passing on state secrets, let alone being prone to "external influence". You'd have to insist on allegiance to the state or whatever -which is exactly why UK MPs are required to swear an oath of fealty to the Queen, and why Sinn Fein cannot sit in Parliament (becasue they won't swear such fealty, for obvious reasons).

Matter of principle, perhaps?

Dutch secretary of state should be Dutch. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. I've never been a fan of double or triple nationalities and I think it should not be allowed to have more than one nationality, but that's just me.

[al Roumi]

Matter of principle, perhaps?

Indeed, I can't really see a non-national politician being elected in the first place though, so the issue is usually around those with more than one nationality. We only have to look at the myths around Barak Obama to see how even a nation famously open to meritocracy and immigration can be chronicaly sensitive to someone with even potential extra allegiances.

[HoreTore]

Are there no Dutch Turks serving in the Dutch armed forces?

There are Dutchies, Norwegians, Swedes, Brits, etc etc serving in various mercenary armies all over the world. A lot of them in mercernary armies we are not allied with, which is a whole lot worse than serving in our NATO-ally Turkey's defense force.

Does that mean the Dutch should be banned from holding public office in the Netherlands?

[Andres]

1) Why is it unreasonable to ask that a Dutch secretary of state has the Dutch nationality?
2) Why is it unreasonable that if a candidate has double nationality, he's asked to chose the Dutch one and to get rid of his other nationality?

[HoreTore]

1) Why is it unreasonable to ask that a Dutch secretary of state has the Dutch nationality?
2) Why is it unreasonable that if a candidate has double nationality, he's asked to chose the Dutch one and to get rid of his other nationality?

Why is it neccessary?

If his superiors deem him or her qualified, why should your country be denied the service of the best qualified applicant due to some passport-thingy?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Far as I am concerned double nationality should not be an issue per se. Treason or pressure from foreign countries are not limited to people with a double passport, either.

What is reasonable is to require that if one is to serve in the Dutch government/military he/she is to simply carry out his/her job without particular regard for the interests of another country. AFAIK that's what the various oaths already do.

[Hax]

Don't forget! Treason is just one tea away from reason!

[The Stranger]

Agreed. It's an ugly situation, especially in Turkey's case since you lose Dutch nationality for serving in a foreign army. Dutch government pays Turkey off, which they should imho, but it's also madness. Also worried about pressure, Turks are proud people, calling someone a bad Turk is a major insult (that is my experience at least), having just one nationality would relieve part of it. As it is, as harsh as it may sound, we can't trust them on key positions.

but why could you trust an american or a chinese in a such a position?

it is a hard conclusion based on many assumptions but barely on any facts.

[HoreTore]

Far as I am concerned double nationality should not be an issue per se. Treason or pressure from foreign countries are not limited to people with a double passport, either.

What is reasonable is to require that if one is to serve in the Dutch government/military he/she is to simply carry out his/her job without particular regard for the interests of another country. AFAIK that's what the various oaths already do.

Though, if we do deny people because of passports, why should we stop there?

Honestly, if that makes sense, why not ban people married to people from another country? Or someone who has worked or studied a long time abroad, it goes without saying that after spending 10 years living in another country, you usually end up with some feelings for that country... And what if you're employed by a multi-national company operating in your own country? Won't someone who has been employed by Opel for 20 years have stronger feelings towards Germany than others?

Or what about people who love food coming from other places? I love indian food, is that the reason why I have strong feelings towards India? Or perhaps it's my childhood friend from Punjab, does he make me more likely to sell my country to india?

[The Stranger]

I see.

Well, I would have the same opinion if it the official would have been directly elected and had been open about his/her nationality during campaign. If the British people want a Turk/Russian/Belgian/whatever to be their Prime Minister and he is directly elected by the people, then I see no objections. It wouldn't be my choice, but if that is what the majority of the people truly want




Matter of principle, perhaps?

Dutch secretary of state should be Dutch. Sounds pretty reasonable to me. I've never been a fan of double or triple nationalities and I think it should not be allowed to have more than one nationality, but that's just me.

perhaps not at all unreasonable, BUT then they should get rid of their secretary of state, which they dont. and that is hypocrite, and even better to defend themself they deny their hypocracy by advocating some sort of discrimination... way to go!!!

I actually feel strongly in favor of abolishing all passports, but I havent yet came up with a alternative so i cant really make that point...



i have to agree with horetore and tellos, it is not at all unreasonable to make such a demand but is it neccesary? does it fix the problem of having unreliable people in key positions. imo it doesnt, it is just some quick fix which will not hold together. and it is not like the person doesnt have the dutch nationality at all, that person has already been deemed "good" enough to get the dutch nationality (or the other one) and has proven him/herself to the party she is a member of, and then lets not forget that the intelligence service will no doubt run some background checks on the person in question.

[HoreTore]

I actually feel strongly in favor of abolishing all passports, but I havent yet came up with a alternative so i cant really make that point...

I'll give an alternative: No borders whatsoever. I don't see why the government should be able to decide who I talk to, who to be friends with, work with/for, love, marry, have children with, etc etc

The right demands strict control with those things, and at the same time they cry about "freedom".... I call BS.

[The Stranger]

I'll give an alternative: No borders whatsoever. I don't see why the government should be able to decide who I talk to, who to be friends with, work with/for, love, marry, have children with, etc etc

The right demands strict control with those things, and at the same time they cry about "freedom".... I call BS.

i also favor such a tendency but lets face it, it wont work just yet. but i hope that step by step humanity will move in that direction.

[gaelic cowboy]

1) Why is it unreasonable to ask that a Dutch secretary of state has the Dutch nationality?
2) Why is it unreasonable that if a candidate has double nationality, he's asked to chose the Dutch one and to get rid of his other nationality?

Well to be fair to dual nationals if they were elected to represent the people then there oath of office would mean in practice they would hold there local nationality above the other one.

Hence our current president Mary McAleese she is Head of State and basically the Commander in Chief of the Irish defence forces.



She was born in Belfast after partition and now serves her country quite well I might add and last time I checked only complete loons questioned the possibility she was unfit for office.