BF2S Forums Australian politics thread.

This is politics Dilbert, defending a bill/policy or criticising a bill/policy is all part of the legislative process. Putting a whole lot of "productive" bills in place is a tiny fraction of the work. Example; think of all the time, work and energy that has gone into the carbon tax. Whether or not you consider it to count as a productive bill, remember that the Coalition has pledged to undo all this work. In NZ during the 70s and 80s we were known for having "the fastest legislature in the west" due to how our parliament was set up. Heaps of bills were passed all the time, it was easy and required very little scrutiny. But then when the other party got into power they just quashed all the bills they didn't like when they were in Opposition. It was pointless, nothing got done. It's one of the reasons that today we're still playing catch-up on infrastructure projects.

Anyway, politics has more important aspects than just passing bills and if you can inject a little entertainment in the rest of it I'm all for it. That's why the late David Lange is still one of the most popular PM's here, he had an exceptionally quick wit and a clever and entertaining manner in delivering his arguments.

The adversarial nature of politics at a policy level it's democracy's fundamental strength - the basic assumption that no one has all the answers. Nothing sharpens up a piece of policy like people trying to tear it down for legitimate reasons. It makes them watertight.

It's messy and frustrating, but the only "clean" systems of government I know tend to be totalitarian.

Spark wrote:

The adversarial nature of politics at a policy level it's democracy's fundamental strength - the basic assumption that no one has all the answers. Nothing sharpens up a piece of policy like people trying to tear it down for legitimate reasons. It makes them watertight.

'Ad-libbing' doesn't have a place in it, debate should be on a well-read understanding of a bill, not rolling up, reading a one paragraph summary an assistant has prepared then wasting parliament's time trying to score dreary points and get a soundbite on the evening news.

I wish they'd read the bills they vote on, turn up for the debates, have some intelligent input to the debates, and vote according to what they think is best for the country, and stop wastng parliamentary time on asinine posturing and point-scoring.

Oh well.

Maybe PMs questions should be ended.

At least its not Wisconsin I suppose.

You guys should just let Papua New Guinea call the shots.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

You guys should just let Papua New Guinea call the shots.

It works. It's messy and annoying, but it works. I look at some of the absurdities of the last week over your way, and then I look at the rather disconcerting opacity of that other rather hugely important leadership change (China), and I'm pretty happy with the system we've got, thanks.

We have enough irritating Evangelical squits thankyou.

Like what?

We already have socialised healthcare and huge government, I imagine there'd be a riot if the PM tried to let in any Mexicans though.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2012-11-09 00:42:14)

Even the mainstream GOP position on immigration would be too left-wing. We get in an almighty tizz about 30 blokes in a leaky boat every few days ffs. Anything even remotely approaching DREAM would lose every single seat in Western Sydney.

Last edited by Spark (2012-11-09 00:44:21)

We have Greeks to fulfil the role of Mexican, but thanks.

Much less gassy though.

Anyway, we're not taking any Mexicans and thats it.

How about you send us 100,000 Texan strippers and unlock the F35s we're buying and we'll stop calling you fat?