The Rudd Government

The role of the minor parties within the Australian political system can be as their title suggests, quite minor. On the other hand, a minor party can influence the political proceedings of this country in more ways than one. Minor parties can highlight socio-economic problems that quite often fly under the radar of the larger political parties, or simply can broaden electoral debate. Often spawning from a social, or in the case of the Greens, an environmental movement, minor parties tend to only last through one election, due to a lack of support and relevance in the mainstream social fabric. The minor parties can become crucial players come election time, due to Australia’s law of Compulsory preferential voting. Jaensch (1983, p.21)

As the Prime Minister of Australia, it is my duty to present my democratic nation with their elected desires. The current issue is concerning the movement of Australia’s governing system from a constitutional monarchy to a republic. I believe that Australia should become a republic, as our sunburnt country has overtime developed culturally and democratically since 1901 when we become the Commonwealth of Australia, and started living under the ruling of Queen Elizabeth the Second. We have created a place that is in no way similar to the British Empire. As Australians we respect and acknowledge the traditional owners of our land, the Aborigines. Over time, it seems as though we have taken this country out of their hands and handed it to the

The checks and balances that the founders of our country put into place to limit the power of the executive branch have failed and allowed the Prime Minister to gather unprecedented and unchecked power. There is a need to establish or re-establish effective checks for the prime minister, at different steps along the policy making process. The traditional checks and balances on the executive branch have come from the house of commons, the senate, and the Governor General. These institutions are meant to work together to ensure that the country is being governed fairly and in the name of the people. However, over the last thirty years the power has been moving away from the legislative branch towards the executive. In a system where majority

As the most widely adopted form of democratic government there are many strengths associated with a parliamentary government. The parliamentary system is often praised for the fast and efficient way in which it is able to pass legislation. The reason this is possible is because unlike a presidential system the legislative and executive power in a parliamentary system are merged together. Due to this fusion of power legislation does not have to undergo a lengthy process and therefore laws can be formulated and put into place much quicker(Bates, 1986: 114-5). Another advantage of a parliamentary system is that the majority of the power is not held by one individual head of state but rather is more evenly divided among a single party or coalition. One of the main benefits of this is that as there is more of a division of power a parliamentary government is less prone to authoritarianism than a presidential system. Juan Linz argues that a presidential system is more dangerous due to the fact that; “Winners and losers are sharply defined for the entire period of the presidential mandate”(Linz, 1990: 56), this sharp line between winners and losers increases tension between these two groups and allows the winner to isolate themselves from other political parties (Linz, 1990: 56). Due to this tension and isolation a presidential system is at a higher risk of turning into an authoritarian regime than a parliamentary system.

Another mechanism of the Sydney lockout laws involves the NSW parliaments. The role of parliaments

While some may think otherwise, I do not think that some of Abbott’s refusals of bills were needed. Abbott might have

The Labor party aims to improve the working man’s life by protecting the rights and conditions of the Australian workforce in both the capital cities and regional areas of Australia. The Nationals party have instead, more concentration on the regional residents which seems unreasonable as they only make up less than a third of the population. Labor stands firm to the belief that for working Australians to be free and equal citizens, the need for civil and political as well as economical and industrial rights are undeniable, including the right to strike and to be heard in politics. As opposed to Liberal, Labor intends to protect the minimum wage and weekend penalty rate, as they understand the negative impact which abolishment can cause to some of Australia’s lowest income earners. I would vote for them,

The piece Advance Australia … within reason, was conveyed on the 5th of January by Amy Mackintosh, at the annual “University of Students for Youth Political Activism’ meeting held at The University of Melbourne. Mackintosh steadily argues the reasons why Australia should not have become a republic, and how the country should stay as a monarchy. The tone of the speech is very colloquial and even sarcastic, with the middle part being more analytical and serious. The speaker gives the impression that the argument for Australia to stay as a Monarchy is unbiased and logical.

Why are certain political parties highly unified in parliaments? This article investigates cases of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), in order to answer this question. According to the studies of Australian politics, the ALP is not ideological cohesive and it is difficult for the leadership of the ALP to impose discipline on their MPs. Existing theory predicts that such party’s unity would be low. However, in fact, Australian MPs rarely object to their party in roll call votes. To solve this puzzle, focusing on party organization, this article argues that intra-party coordination mechanism affects party unity. Qualitative case studies show that the ALP’s policy-making organizations called the caucus policy committees functioned as an intra-party

Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen, adjudicator, opposition and my fellow debaters. The topic for our debate is that ‘Australia should become a republic’. We, Gladstone Park Team 2 agree with the definition put forth by the affirmative team. However, we, the negative team, believe that statement is false.

It is very evident that Queensland does not have to reinstate an upper house to be an effect government. This is due to that the original upper house was unable to do its job effectively of reviewing and negotiating laws and bills. Especially amending money bills that the lower house passed, due to that its members came from elitist group of wealth and education (Queensland Parliament, 2010). This elitist upper house resulted in a lacked of diversity, therefore laws that where made for working class Queenslanders, were rarely passed.

The gradual decline of the mass membership parties from the late 1970’s to the early 1990’s, several fragmented groups of disaffected voters and the ability to be represented proportionally (MMP) have enabled a Muti-party government to flourish. In the early 1990’s MPs were growing break off movements in the Labor and National parties. With a stronger Multi-Party system developing it allowed for MPs and voters to break away from commonly held ideology’s and broken promises. For example: The third highest voting party from 1954, won 16% of the party vote in 1978 but gaining 1/ 92 in Parliament???? WAT?. Through this time there was growing public concern that the break always weren’t being allowed to have a fair shot at public voting, and

A high voter turnout secures legitimacy for the governing party that won with a majority, reiterating the idea that a mandate to govern is arguably one of the most prevalent principles of democracy. This essay will, therefore, be arguing that the system of compulsory voting in a democratic country such as Australia complements democracy rather than reducing the freedoms of the electorate.

the United Kingdom unlike most other countries does not have a codified constitution to restrict the powers of the Parliament, the main check on power of the British Parliament is the sovereignty of the future parliaments. The European Union has been growing since its establishment and its growth has been considered a threat to the Parliamentary Sovereignty of the UK, since their joining of the EU in 1973. This essay will showcase the treaties, institutions, cases, and acts that have eroded the sovereignty of the UK Parliament and will conclude that the development of the EU will only further reduce the power of Parliamentary Sovereignty as long as the United Kingdom stays a member of the EU.

The Rule of Law and the Orthodox Doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty are constitutional concepts which were popularised by Albert Venn Dicey, an influential 19th century constitutional lawyer. Therefore, it seems only appropriate to begin this discussion with Dicey’s interpretation. In Dicey’s formulation, Parliamentary Sovereignty is comprised of two aspects, the positive and the negative. The positive side is that Parliament can ‘make or unmake any law’ and the negative aspect is that ‘no court or other body’ is recognised as having the ‘right to override or set aside the legislation of Parliament. ‘The Rule of Law is a chameleon-like notion. Used by different people it may mean radically different things’. From this statement, it is