 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
HAL
Please don't shout at me - I can't help it.
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
| Oh, you are a poet. Is that your final answer? Do not ask me any more questions please. |
|
|
|
 |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| nomadjack wrote: | | IMO the Senate works best when neither major party has an outright majority. When controlled by the govt it is little more than a rubber stamp. Likewise, when controlled by the Opposition it tends to become purely obstructionist for the sake of political pointscoring. It's role as a check on government and as a house of review works well with two or three minor parties or independents from different political persuasions holding the balance of power. |
While I agree with your point, mostly, then we get a situation where a Fred Nile has a significant amount of control over what happens, despite only representing a small minority.
I don't have a major problem with our current senate system, although I have at times wondered if it is kind of redundant (especially these days as upper house voting is almost purely dependent on party affiliation as opposed to state or territory affiliation).
As for what Labor has achieved, I can't argue with you on that point as I'm not sure exactly what policies have been brought in when. However, I do know that many changes occurred in Australia during the 60s (e.g. Indigenous citizenship), during Liberal government, and while people often cite Whitlam's reforms, his government's rather radical embrace of change kind of contributed to its downfall (overspending, etc...)
While change is very important in any nation's development (something, I'll concede, which is probably the forte of the left-leaning parties), there is also certainly a need for level-headedness and, not blindly adhering to, but considering the value of, tradition. The Howard government may not have made any great reforms, perhaps, but at the same time it has handled the country excellently, in many ways, and the fact that they have rejected unnecessary 'change' has probably made a large contribution to their success.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
stui magpie 
Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.
Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: In flagrante delicto
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I might sound confused Nomadjack, I meant wasting a vote when you vote for a finge party in the house of reps in a seat where they have no hope of winning. You vote just gets re distributed according to preferences.
Smaller parties provide an important role in the senate in keeping balance. When one party controls both the senae and house of reps completely, that is dangerous IMO. Look at New Zealand as an example of a country with no senate and the approach of legislation fluctuates wildly from one incumbent gov to the next. We don't have such wild fluctuations.
And your point about all the things Labor introduced, I find it a little ironic that a number of the reforms Labor introduced got the support of Liberal in the senate whereas if the coalition had introduced them, it may not have gone the same way.
_________________
Every dead body on Mt Everest was once a highly motivated person, so maybe just calm the **** down. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
