A contribution to the ongoing discussion of Australian citizenship. The articles reveal the complexity of Australian legislation as it has tried, over the years, to accommodate changing ideas about exactly what citizenship entails, and who is, or is not, eligible for it.

Australia and Canada are both lively, multicultural societies with British constitutional traditions. Historically, they have faced similar challenges in defining and sustaining citizenship that reach back into a common past. They also have similar approaches to address contemporary issues and anticipate the challenges of a 21st century future. New perspectives on the culture and politics of citizenship emerge in this timely text that is essential reading for those interested in the steadily expanding ties between Australia and Canada.

3. Is the constitution to blame.

Definition and reinterpretation of the term Aboriginal native during the first half of the twentieth century as a way of defining the boundaries and meanings of Australian citizenship; concentrates on attitudes of ministers and bureaucrats who had to define terms for purposes of legislation.

The Australian Constitution contains no express references to Australian citizenship. Despite this, the constitutional validity of Commonwealth citizenship law is not in doubt. Until 2005, citizenship was largely regarded as a statutory matter, and the Commonwealth Parliament was considered free to define citizenship as it wished. Recently, however, a shift has been signalled, with McHugh J's suggestion in Hwang v Commonwealth that citizenship law is shaped and limited by the Constitution itself. The question now arises: what is the constitutional character of Australian citizenship?In this article, I argue that the constitutional concept of citizenship is defined, specifically, by the right of abode in Australia. This is not a freestanding concept, but is grounded in the constitutional heads of power that the High Court has, from time to time, identified as supporting citizenship laws, namely, the 'aliens' and 'immigration' powers (respectively, ss 51(xix) and (xxvii)). The relationship between citizenship and the right of abode has evolved but, as I seek to demonstrate, it has been recognised in Australian case law since 1908.

Australians have much to celebrate in the hundred years of their citizenship, but also a good deal to be ashamed of. The authors argue that good citizenship depends on moral citizens, able to discern between what is worthy of respect and pride and what is shameful in national life. Galligan and Roberts from Uni.of Melbourne.

In this eleventh volume in The World Over series, Simon and Brooks examine and compare the rights and responsibilities of citizenship across twenty-one countries. The countries included are Canada, the United States, Argentina, Brazil, Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Israel, Egypt, Iran, Nigeria, South Africa, India, China, Japan, and Australia. In addition to reporting on the rights that citizens enjoy in these countries, as for example the right to run for and hold public office, vote, obtain scholarships, and hold government positions, the authors also describe the responsibilities that are attached to the role of citizen_for example, to serve in the military, serve on a jury, and pay taxes. When available, Simon and Brooks report on public opinion data on how proud respondents are of the country in which they are citizens, as measured by such variables as whether they would rather be a citizen of their country over any other country in the world, how proud they are of their country's political influence in the world, how democracy works in their country, and whether they believe they should support their country even if it is in the wrong. Following a brief chapter on the history of citizenship, the book is organized such that the first section provides a country-by-country profile of each of the issues describing rights and responsibilities and reports on the public opinion data. The second part is explicity comparative and describes the countries against each other.