Comments:Australian Prime Minister denies striking a deal with predecessor
This page is for commentary on the news. If you wish to point out a problem in the article (e.g. factual error, etc), please use its regular collaboration page instead. Comments on this page do not need to adhere to the Neutral Point of View policy. Please remain on topic and avoid offensive or inflammatory comments where possible. Try thought-provoking, insightful, or controversial. Civil discussion and polite sparring make our comments pages a fun and friendly place. Please think of this when posting.
Use the "Start a new discussion" button just below to start a new discussion. If the button isn't there, wait a few seconds and click this link: Refresh.
Contents
| Thread title | Replies | Last modified |
|---|---|---|
| Parliamentary System Flawed | 1 | 00:27, 16 July 2010 |
The problem with the system is that nobody really votes for a change in the Prime Ministers office. Who elected this woman, apart from her local constituents?
Who decides who will lead the country: the politicians, the crown's representative or the public?!
Another weakness of the parliamentary system is that there are no free votes on major issues without the government falling.
Canada has a similarly flawed system. In the case of a minority government, it can be unclear which party should rule. Does the Governor General have the right to decide?
I like the Queen, The Governor-General and quite frankly the idea of having a neutral head of state. However, I dislike how everyone is pitted against each other and I especially dislike how we cannot vote for a single individual to be head of government and for that individual to be then able to pick the best people regardless of party to form their cabinet...nothing gets done cause they are always fighting each other...