@ any Germans and Poms

on behalf of fisico, thankyou

hehe...now how would he properly reference that? "Morbid, guy on forum, 2004"

LoL!

I can provide sources to published books and essays if needed. Just ask.

---

It's only after we've lost everything, that we are free to do anything.

lol, thanks for the lengthy post morbid! i will read it a few more times I think. Much appreciated.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Currently Driving: Watkins Glen Original
Current PB: 1:07.43
Using: Xbox Controller

whatever happened to the "morbid for president of the universe" campaign anyway

it should be kicked off again!

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Currently Driving: Watkins Glen Original
Current PB: 1:07.43
Using: Xbox Controller

I personally think that first past the post and the unelected House of Lords can actually be seen to enhance the British democracy.

The advantage of first past the post over proportional representation is that with P.R. you quite often get coalition governments, which, although producing a better demographic representation of the population, provide the obstacle of needing cross-party co-operation, which is not usually necessary with first past the post. Instead, the only obstacle is getting your own MPs to back your policies, something which proves a problem far more than it should do at the moment, in my opinion.

The House of Lords, IMO, also helps to enhance democracy. What is the point of two elected chambers, when they would be elceted by the same people, as this potentially provides the danger that the two chambers would think along the same lines. It may seem that the House of Lords makes a mockery of democracy, but the people in that chamber are different people from those of the Commons, and very often hold different views, which can help to keep in check any potentially damaging policies that could arise from the Commons. The debate and differences between the two chambers enhances democracy even with the Parliament Act.

I am, of course, certain that many will not share my opinion!

Noel - Hertford and Stortford CLP: soon to be in George Galloway's constituency - nooooooooooo!

Germany also has two houses - the Bundestag (elected by the people) and the Bundesrat (with representatives of the Federal States). Every law proposed by the government has to be agreed on in both houses. If they do, the Bundespräsident still has to sign the law. He can refuse to do so and make the government revise the law. This is the only real political power the president has. Apart from that he only has a representative function.

Proportional representation and coalition can be a drawback because it takes more time to get things done. On the other hand it helps to prevent that one party becomes too powerful - unless they get 50% + of the votes (absolute majority) and can rule alone. Btw - to make changes in the constituation you need the so-called "two-thirds majority" (at least 66,6 %) in parliament, so normally it only works when the oposition agrees.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS

>If they do, the Bundespräsident still has to sign the law

Sounds a bit like our Govenor General. It's essentially a ceremonial role.

Normally the Bundespräsident will sign the law, simply becaus eit is the result of a democratic process. There have been cases, however, where the president refused to do so because the law was against his ethic principles.

---

REHAB IS FOR QUITTERS