New Passport Snafu
 

A new rule has come into effect that throws another rock in the road to getting a passport - you cannot get a passport at an office where you also have your birth certificate on record.

This mainly effects County Clerks and as you can also go to post offices in larger cities some folks out in the boondocks may find they have a long drive to a passport issuing post office over their county clerk.

But the ones protesting most are the country clerks as they sizeable portion of the passport fee they collect they will be missing out on.

I just checked, and the procedure remains the same. Simply apply on-line for either a new passport, or a renewal of an existing one. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade will do the rest.

adeben - do the rest? please clarify - i send in application for first passport and no birth certificate - i thought for a first passport you had to apply in person with an authorized agent and present birth certifate as well?

No personal appearance is needed. The forms for either a new passport or a renewal of an existing one can be found on the website of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. For either form of passport you will have to enter the relevant details from your birth certificate which can then be checked on the national data base. The procedure has, if anything, been simplified dramatically over the past few years.

I'm confused - are these EU passports you're talking about or American passports? If American, it says you do still have to appear in person at a passport facility (usually a post office) if you're applying for your first passport. If renewing or replacing, you can handle it via mail, but not online.

If you're referring to EU passports and you can handle them online, I'm so jealous!

Adenben - you are naughty ;). I thought The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade was uncommonly common. You are 100% correct ... for Australia.

Indeed! There's no indication in the original post that the 'new rule' was country-specific, so I assumed that the reference was to my country. In Australia, the process is now basically as I have described.

Absolutely, and it would be nice if people referred to USD, AUD, NZD etc rather than assuming all dollars are US.

yes we Yanks often make the mistake that since this is an American owned operated web site - by Random House that we often forget many Fodorfriends are 'foreingers' and i will try to keep that in mind in the future.

ditto to to the responses that don't indicate they are Australian rules - especially since so few Aussies are inlcuded in the overwhelming number of Fodorfriends.

I hate to be pedantic, but Random House is owned by Bertelsmann AG which is a privately owned German company. I don't think there is any US ownership.

Yes. but i'd think Random House is a registered U.S. company - much like RailEurope is though it's owned by the Swiss and French railways.

I think Random House may be considered an American company but take you point as well.

You could say that all Murdoch's news entities like Fox News is Australian owned i guess - though Fox News folks wouldn't like that. he may have American citizenship though. Which would mean the Times of London, News Corp, etc in UK are American owned - wouldn't go over well with many limeys.

No, it isn't the same as Newscorp is a publicly listed company and is listed in Delaware as well as well as Australia. It has US shareholders as well as Australian. Australian ownership is well under 50%. Its affiliate, BSkyB is listed in the UK.

Rupert Murdoch has not been an Australian citizen for decades.

From all available information I can find, there is no US ownership of Random House. Companies have wholly owned subsidiaries registered all over the world. It does not alter the ownership of the subsidiaries.

Kraft is registered in Australia, but no one would regard it as an Australian company. Coca Cola Amatil is listed on the Australian Stock Exchange and has CCA as a shareholder as well Australian shareholders. It therefore has a fiduciary duty to ensure all shareholders have are not disadvantaged.