4 ms·
Would you prefer China's model more then? Just one party. No gridlock, ever. Having more parties is a good thing. It implies negotiation between them and it le
by higherpurpose 11y ago
Would you prefer China's model more then? Just one party. No gridlock, ever.
Having more parties is a good thing. It implies negotiation between them and it leads to more rational laws. When you have just one or two parties it's much easier for them to abuse their power and pass crazy laws.
- platz 11y agoNo, but maybe something like Canada's. If the majority loses favor with the public, (simplifying a bit here) they just schedule an election and vote them out .
- xemoka 11y agoI'm not sure you realise how the Canadian government works then. Once you have a majority in the House, you are effectively in power until your term is up and you ask the Governor General to dissolve the house and hold an election. Now if a party holds a minority government (the way parliamentary systems are meant to be), there can be a vote of non-confidence to oust the governing party. At that point, the governor general has to choose between allowing a coalition (if that is indeed what the other parties want) or hold another election. Public opinion does not hold sway in these matters. Our current majority government (now branded The Harper Government) was elected with ~24% of eligible voters (40% of those who actually showed up to vote). Take a look at some of the Ekos [1] polls, our governing party does not have the majority of Canadian support. There is also no way to do a MP recall campaign at the federal level, some provinces provide this though, such as BC. We very much need electoral reform in Canada. Our senate is too partisan (not to mention, appointed at the whims of the governing party) and first-past-the-post is a broken electoral system. My hopes are for Mixed Member Proportional Representation similar to Germany and New Zealand. [1] http://www.ekospolitics.com/ http://www.ekospolitics.com/
- platz 11y agoThanks for this summary