tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7914719480258204642.post7906434831795666112..comments2010-03-05T18:50:33.719+08:00Comments on The Jaded Prime: What is wrong with a Mandarin-speaking Bulldozer?: Pt 2Jimmyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05333532876314009469noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7914719480258204642.post-25531580315949180532009-02-23T16:05:00.000+09:002009-02-23T16:05:00.000+09:00I just feel uncomfortable when one person has the ...I just feel uncomfortable when one person has the power to singlehandedly pass or block a piece of legislation because all the other minor parties have fallen back to traditional alleigences in the Upper House and a perfect split forms. It can lead to that one person making unreasonable demands knowing that the legislation won't be passed without them, but when used responsibly it can benefit the legislation greatly. <BR/><BR/>That being said, the Westminster system is the best system we have and usually no one person has too greater power. I think that's why I'm uncomfortable with the question of one person having power over legislation in this fashion, as it can show the flaws in the system.<BR/><BR/>It's a difficult question though, and one which won't be solved any time soon.Jimmyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05333532876314009469noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7914719480258204642.post-46321044139306068762009-02-20T22:32:00.000+09:002009-02-20T22:32:00.000+09:00"It was a demonstration of the power Xenophon coul..."It was a demonstration of the power Xenophon could potentially wield in the senate if conditions played out right, and one has to question whether one man having so much power over legislation is beneficial to a constitutional monarchy such as ours, but perhaps that discusion is best held for another time."<BR/><BR/>I'm personally ecstatic that this is so. Our Westminster system does a pisspoor job of allowing dissent against the executive within his/her party to express itself on the floor of the houses. If it's not a moral issue you get in line and shut up. In that case (and that is the case for all intents and purposes) when the Government has an absolute majority in the lower house and/or the upper house, those houses may as well be bypassed: the government can be assured to pass its legislation.<BR/>The only counterbalance to this is the opposition, which in most cases does not have the majority in the lower house even with the help of independents or the smaller parties. So in other words, the only thing stopping the Government is the upper house.<BR/>As the upper house allows independents and those from the minor parties to squeak in, it's the last vital recourse to consultation; the Government can't ignore those few voices in the senate that hold the balance of power. So 99% of the time the government needs to pander to a handful of independent voices in the upper house. It's not ideal, but the only other alternative in the Westminster system is an absolute majority for the government in both houses (or even the houses split between both major parties). No one but the Government wants that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com