I think Prialprang misunderstood what I wrote.
The public service is there to provide technical advice to ministers
and the minister decides policy, ie to whom the policy will be applied.
The senate committees seem to do a lot of work informing themselves of
the ins and outs of a policy.

Presidential systems have a poor record. A few presidential systems
have an arrangement where the president has similar powers to our
governor general.
The problem of electing a GG or president with similar powers is that
no matter what you do you get a politician.
That immediately generates a power centre.

No, leave it alone, it has evolved into a stable system that can even
survive upheavals that would cause revolution in lessor systems.

The single biggest problem with our system is that our elected representatives don't do their jobs. The member for Geelong, for instance, doesn't in any sense 'represent' Geelong, except as and when Geelong's interests happen to coincide with the line of his or her party. Geographical representation is merely a carry-over from the days when one had to physically appear at a polling booth to vote for a candidate -- there's no reason to hang on to it in the Internet age. We might as well scrap the whole idea of geographical representation and just divvy up the total vote -- every 200,000 votes entitles a party to one representative.

If we agree that direct representation is a good thing, though, perhaps we should be looking for other, more homogenous, groups of electors to represent. Occupational grouping seems like an obvious choice. What price the Member for Scientists, the Member for Mineworkers or the Member for Hairdressers?

Michael T,
Why is it that it is the Governments job to come up with policies. Why can't the public decide the policies of the country. Or another way of putting it, don’t you have any confidence in the Australian people to decide their own policies?

Jon J,
I would agree most MP's are a waste of taxpayer’s money. A pol conducted by the local newspaper found that over 60% of the public didn't know the name of the local federal MP, and they didn't care.

The local MP just votes along party lines and few ever cross the floor. They are there to get the numbers for voting, and they vote for what the party wants, which may not be what the local electorate wants. I have even seen the local MP fall asleep in a chair in front of an audience on an Australian Day ceremony.

There's a theme developing here:

>>...Two incompetent Labour politicians are unable to iron out their ambitions and personality differences. What's the solution? Change the Westminster system<<

>>The single biggest problem with our system is that our elected representatives don't do their jobs... perhaps we should be looking for other, more homogenous, groups of electors to represent<<

No system, of any kind, looks good when it is being abused. The answer cannot then be found in changing the system, but in changing the behaviour that is causing the abuse in the first place.

The Westminster system works better when its rules are observed, than when they are not. While the idea of a Member for Hairdressers is a highly attractive one ("just look at this mess. I don't know what your previous Minister did, but my goodness it will take a while to sort out..."), would it not be far simpler to address the shortcomings of the people in the current process, not the system itself.

Like agreeing that our representatives actually represent us. And that they are bound by the commitments they make at the ballot box, not those they make behind closed doors in the Party room.

Or is that far too simple?

A well argued position. Certainly, the present system is merely leading us from crisis to crisis. I’ve concluded that we do not need a government, per se. We need good governance. A parliament of proportionally elected representatives—independent in that they are not allied to any party system—would be required to debate issues until consensus is reached. Instead of ministers, your suggestion of unelected ‘experts’ in the field should be engaged to advice, provide facts and statistics and thus assist the elected representatives to make decisions that are in the best interests of the nation.
We certainly do not need a ‘strong leader’ with the power to promote and demote representatives. With a group of dedicated men and women, an unelected, competent chairperson [speaker] is all that would be required to keep the house in order. The current presidential style prime minister is counter productive and divisive, just as much as the confrontational style of politics that the present system demands and which actively prevents good governance.
At all costs, we must avoid the U.S.A. System of an elected ‘king’, advised by unelected, politically chosen advisers, thus reducing parliament to tax gatherers. The revolutions and bloodshed in so many countries with all-powerful presidents is due entirely to the granting of too much power to one person.

I don't understand what the difficulty is…

Most of the problem issues with the Westminster system as well as many of the solutions have been extensively and continuously covered in print, on the radio and on television for three decades.

'Yes Minister' and 'Yes, Prime Minister' by Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, would be funny… if it wasn't so true.

Whilst we are cogitating on the best ways to reprogram the mindset of our 'elected representatives ' that who and what they represent is us – not themselves and not their political parties – technology may give us an option for an interim solution.

Let's remove the concept of 'closed doors ' government.

Sessions of Parliament are broadcast – just extend the concept. An Internet site map of every room in Parliament house on which a simple mouse click would provide Skype type coverage 24/7 would work.

My grandmother once said never do anything you wouldn't want to see reported on the front page of the newspaper… This would go some way to making sure our elected representatives abided by that maxim. After all they're working for us and this way we can see or hear them working.

Plus it would allow many commenters on this forum to base their opinions more solidly on facts than fancy.