It is hardly surprising , but irresponsible , for Ms Bishop to demand an election . This is the popular catchcry of the shock jocks and many talkback radio callers .

If an election must be called every time there is an issue which attracts sufficient criticism from talkback radio , it will render parliamentary government unworkable . Apart from the instability which constant elections [ or threats of elections ] cause , an election costs many millions . They may still result in an inconclusive outcome .

The trouble is that all the wannabe PMs on offer are so unappetising.

I am hardly a Gillard or Rudd fan but I question whether a Tony Abbott government would be an improvement on one headed up by either of that pair.

Here is a suggestion for an alternative electoral system.

Instead of parties spending vast sums trying to persuade an increasingly cynical electorate to vote for their buffoon instead of some other party's buffoon we simply auction off the constituencies on eBay. Every constituency is sold to the highest bidder and the proceeds are distributed equally among the registered voters in that constituency.

The advantage of this system is that the voters get a direct benefit. We cut all the media consultants, PR consultants and ad agencies out of the loop.

We could also agree that whoever paid the most for his or her constituency becomes prime minister, the second highest successful bidder becomes treasurer and so on. The person who pays the least for his or her constituency becomes minister for Aboriginal affairs.

Just to make sure the voters really do benefit we could make the auction of constituencies an annual event to coincide with Australia day. If you want to keep your seat just keep shelling out the dosh.

I mean can this system produce a worse result than the one we already have?

First of all let me congratulate the liberal party on successfully bringing on a crisis in the Labour party through the liberal owned newspaper media and sympathetic radio outlets.
It was a brilliant campaign that has now reached a conclusion.
The whisper campaign has built up to a crescendo the unrest in labour ranks.
It will be very helpful in the possible gaining of power at the next election of the liberals.
The fact that it will not help in any way the governing of the country will not matter to the liberal hierarchy as long as they can grasp the reigns.
Your article is a final gloat over your success.

The thought of Abbott as prime minister is almost too terrifying to contemplate. If there has ever been a better example of someone who will say or do anything just to be leader then I don't know it. (Come back Turnbull, all is forgiven!)

But the Labor Party shows just how decrepit it is by even contemplating bringing back Rudd to replace Gillard. Don't they remember what Rudd was like? What does it say about them that they have no other alternative?

I despise Labor for its relationships with the property industry and for pushing high rates of population growth in the face of all the evidence of how this is damaging us and will lead to a poorer Australia for our children. However, at least Gillard has guts and gets things done even in the face of the anti-tax howling brigade. (Even if her manner of speaking makes me want to bang my head against a wall.) And she wipes the floor of parliament with Abbott.....

Well, well. So Gillard v Rudd is all the Liberal party's fault aided and abetted by their mates in the media. No mention of the fact that the ALP has sacked its leader 6 times in the past 20 years, including two Prime Ministers, Bob Hawke and Kevin Rudd. Even 'The Age', not known for its support for the Liberal Party has been running the instability at the heart of this government for months.

What will happen now is anyone's guess but it's hard to disagre with Jule Bishop. If the government can't decide who the Prime Minister should be then,in the true spirit of Westminster representative democracy, the people must decide. That's how the system is supposed to work. It's time to ensure that it does.

Ms Bishop is hardly an impartial observer. Her demand for an election is made solely because her party leads in the polls and would be the likely winner of any election. A simple test: would the Coalition be so strident in its demands for an election if they were languishing behind in the polls? The answer is, of course not.

But there are serious issues to be addressed about the dysfunctional state of the Labor Party. One has to recognise that the Labor party is itself a coalition of often uneasy bedfellows, forced (as are Liberal and National) to coalesce for the sake of gaining and retaining power.

I would suggest that the whole electoral system needs to be revamped, preferably by a modified form of proportional representation, that would allow the emergence of parties with a truer commonality of interest. Policies would have to be progressed on their merits by convincing a majority in the House to support any given program. It would eliminate the artificiality of the present system and not incidentally be more democratic.

Scandanavia and New Zealand among others show what can be achieved.