And now it would seem that power lies with minority groups, NGO's and corporations. The common man seems to have lost his sovereignty and liberties and now must hand in his Lego blocks, wear a bike helmet, accept Sharia law and accept he no longer has the right to protect his own gift of life. I wonder when the guillotines will roll out again so that we may regain our true sovereign selves and liberties once again? It's overdue!

Loudmouth – A thread worthy of discussion

My only concern is it seems to be already evolving into the familiar pattern of what was and what needs to be. Soon partisan and religious overtones will start to flow in and the discussion will morph.

Very few that contribute to this forum go out on a limb and discuss or debate credible solutions however pie in the sky they are. I for one would like to see some contributors go out on a philosophical limb and express some original thought and propose solutions.

I have attempted for some time to highlight the lack of proportionality in this country’s parliaments which goes to the core of this threads topic. Until we irrespective of our personal view are able to accept that others with a different view have a right to have that view represented we will continue to be misrepresented. Power by default will continue to be top down although it will be packaged as democracy.

The law should be just and equally available to all. The system we have is not so and favours the wealthy and those in power. It is operated largely by individuals whose focus is on the dollar rather than the law and justice. We need to move from an adversarial system to an inquisitorial system that is publicly funded.

The greatest flow on from the Magna Carta is the Habeas Corpus writ everything else pales into insignificance.

You're right, Chris, and each was an abridgement of the powers of the sovereign in favour, eventually, of the people - one which allowed - ever so slightly - for people other than the king to have some input into the running of the affairs of state, and the other which - ever so slightly - recognised the rights of the individual to be free from arbitrary treatment by the king's courts.

And I guess we're still working through the full implications of each of those, in the long struggle tov transfer power from the sovereign, the state, to the people. .

Producer,

I'm not so sure if micro-representation solves anything - rule of the majority with safeguards for the rights of minorities may be as democratic as we can get it. In Lebanon, there are, I've heard, eighteen allocated blocs of seats for sectional interests in their parliament, and that doesn't seem to have gone all that well.

In unicameral systems, like in New Zealand and Queensland (and the NT and ACT), i.e. one house of parliament, then certainly the power of that one and only house, of members elected by seats, may be checked by the addition of representation on a proportional basis - a single parliament, but some elected individually to represent seats, others as part of a proportion of total votes across the state or territory.

For example, if, say, the Greens or Shooters' Party get 8 % of the vote at an election but not enough to win a seat, then they get 8 % of the proportional representation component of parliament.

But in every other state in Australia, and federally, we already have a 'proportional representation' component, called the Upper House or Senate. Not that that works wonderfully well either, they seem to be houses for party hacks, but again that's democracy.

Joe

Loudmouth – Sorry for not responding earlier. I am in reality a primary producer and had to produce some stuff to put food on the table.

I don’t for one minute suggest that proportional representation will solve anything. It does enable for better or worse government by the people for the people, democracy!

I also believe that proportional representation is conducive with a functional unicameral system as demonstrated in NZ. It allows for local representation as well as national proportionality providing a seat is won or a 5% threshold is met nationally. You participated in a thread I started in March last year “When will reap those for whom we vote”. This thread addresses your concerns in relation to local and national representation.

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=5047#135441

I think the senate is a poor proxy for proportional representation. The senate weighted by state not population. It has however served its purpose as a check on many occasions. I believe it would serve no real purpose if the country had a proportional system.

I believe the state system is surplus to requirement and more emphasis should be given to local government.