If you order your custom term paper from our custom writing service you will receive a perfectly written assignment on Is Federal Parliament in decline?. What we need from you is to provide us with your detailed paper instructions for our experienced writers to follow all of your specific writing requirements. Specify your order details, state the exact number of pages required and our custom writing professionals will deliver the best quality Is Federal Parliament in decline? paper right on time.
Out staff of freelance writers includes over 120 experts proficient in Is Federal Parliament in decline?, therefore you can rest assured that your assignment will be handled by only top rated specialists. Order your Is Federal Parliament in decline? paper at affordable prices with cheap essay writing service!
Democratic parliaments are expected to be the central institution that converts political inputs into outputs and to be the means by which the 'will of the people' is expressed. Chapter one of the Constitution defines the Australian Federal Parliament as the Queen, the Senate and the House of Representatives. Federal Parliament was established to sit alongside the existing six state parliaments; its authority limited to national matters set out in the Constitution as exclusive powers or concurrent powers, shared with the States. The bicameral structure was intended to allow for popular government but also sought to protect the States interests, and the two chambers were given distinct identities but similar powers. The roles of parliament include the Legislative Function, the Representative Function, the Responsibility Function, and be a Forum for Debate. Federal Parliament has long been the subject of strong criticism; commentators' arguing that there has been a 'decline of parliament'. This thesis argues that Parliament has long been little more than an 'electoral college' whose role is to support, not scrutinize, the executive. The decline of Parliament is evident in how it performs its roles today. It fails to provide effective scrutiny on Bills because of limited time; members of Parliament are loyal to parties rather than to their electorate; and because Parliament sits for only a limited time each year, it is not effective as a forum for debate. But with reforms being introduced into both Houses of Parliament, such as ensuring that at least 16 questions are asked during Question Time and setting a timetable for parliament; the decline of parliament may reverse, and the Australian Federal Parliament may cease to decline, and become more accountable to the people it represents rather than the Executive. The Legislative Function specifies that parliaments should initiate, deliberate and finally pass legislation. This image of parliament suggests that legislative proposals are raised by both the Government and ordinary MPs drawing on a variety of sources. Bills should be thoroughly scrutinized and if necessary amended by parliament. But the decline of parliament thesis claims Parliament retains its legislative function in only a formal sense because it is dominated by party loyalty, which prevents it from fulfilling its essential functions. Few Bills are really initiated in the House of Representatives, opportunities for debate are limited, and government legislation is assured of passage through the House. An election result in almost always produces a government consisting of the majority party in the Lower House; and in the Lower House the government can use its majority to control the procedures of parliament to ensure its legislation is passed. The House of Representatives does not provide for the deliberative assessment and refinement of legislation; legislation is orchestrated by Cabinet and regimented by disciplined parties, and this shows how the Legislative Function has undergone a decline, and lost its traditional roles. But major proposals being considered could ensure that the legislative function of parliament doesn't continue its decline. The radical proposal is to have two streams of debate taking place at the same time; one in the lower Chamber of the House (as now) and the other in a new committee to consider legislation called the Main Committee, where all members could attend either forum. It would provide that no divisions could take place in the committee but disagreements would reported back to the main chamber for resolution there. This change would result in more time being spent on each bill and also give members more opportunities to take part in debate, reducing the pressures in the House.The Representative Function implies that parliament should provide a voice for the interests and opinions of the electors. The Australian public expect Parliament to be representative in three distinct ways to reflect the will of the people; for MHRs to represent the views and interests of their electorate; and that the Parliament reflects a broad cross-section of society. But the decline of parliament prevents parliament from effectively performing its representative functions. The electoral system used in the HOR benefits the major parties, and effectively prevents minor parties from winning individual seats. In the HOR the predominant role of the MHRs is as partisans; which reflect the fact that electors tend to vote according to party rather than for individual candidates. In parliament, MHRs follow the party line. The procedures in the House allow for only limited opportunity for MHRs to speak 'on behalf' of their electorate, restricting the capacity for MHRs to be trustees of delegates of the electorate interests. Australian political parties also impose strong discipline on elected representatives. In the ALP, parliamentarians are pledged to support the party policy and vote as a bloc in parliament. The Liberal Party theoretically gives parliamentarians the free vote, but effectively they almost always 'follow the leader' and vote according party policy. The membership of Federal Parliament does don't mirror the demographic pattern of Australia. To reduce the partisan voting in Parliament, it has been proposed that Members be given the free vote to all matters that are not clearly set out in the Government's election policy platforms. This will allow Members to vote according to their constituents' desires, and also have opportunities to voice their own opinions rather than vote according to party line. This reform would ensure that Parliament continues to be representative, rather than continue the decline that critics argue is occurring.The Responsibility Function is to check the executive, and ensures it is accountable for its decisions and actions. Parliaments have always been seen as a check on executive power. Modern parliaments are expected to carry out detailed scrutiny of government administration and to hold the executive responsible for its decisions. Australia has inherited the British Westminster system of Parliament. Under the Westminster system, the executive is part of the legislature, which means that theoretically, the HOR 'makes' the executive (government). The government consists of the party with majority support in the lower house. Governments must resign if they lose the support of the house. But the majority requirement in the HOR, ensure that the government dominates, that the Lower House of Parliament is just a rubber stamp for the government's legislation. But to reduce the level of party dominance in parliament, Senate Committees have been proposed to have their investigative role strengthened to emphasise the greater scrutiny of legislation and executive actions. These include giving Senate Committees more extensive powers of inquiry; requiring Senate confirmation of major foreign policy initiatives; and allowing automatically for a six month period for the Senate to consider non-money bills. This would provide a greater check on the Exevcutive and ensure that it acting in the Nation's best interests.
Do my essay on Is Federal Parliament in decline? CHEAP !
Parliament is also expected to be a forum for debate where issues of national importance are raised and evaluated. Parliamentary committees often investigate and report on general issues, which provided an opportunity for the expression of community views and raises awareness of issues. Parliament can debate major policy issues directly as a means of assessing policy alternatives and public support for change. However, commentators argue that Parliament is not very effective for a forum for debate because of the decline of parliament. Parliament sits for a very limited time each year, typically 60 days a year and it is questionable whether even this time is allocated in a manner that provides for non-government business. During debate, government can use the gag, guillotine and floodgating to limit discussion. During Question Time, government backbenchers ask 'Dorothy Dixers' which allow ministers to highlight their achievement and use up valuable. The time on the agenda of parliament to raise and debate issues is in practice dominated by the party battle and mostly consists of 'political point scoring' by both the government and the Opposition with their eyes on the next election. To reduce the level of government control during debate and to also ensure that Parliament is an effective and successful forum for debate, reforms have been introduced. These include having a longer sitting time which provides for more debate; ensuring that during Question Time, at least 16 questions are asked, which provides more opinions are heard; and making changes to Question Time, such as drawing up a roster to ensure all Ministers are faced with questions, not exclusively just the PM.Parliament is clearly unsuccessful in achieving its traditional functions, a failure highlighted by the 'decline of parliament' thesis, which argues that Parliament is controlled by the majority party and has become a 'rubber stamp' of executive will. Where parliament was expected to represent the whole of Australia, effectively scrutinize bills and allow for wide-ranging input from everyone, it is now dominated by major parties, Members are loyal to their party rather than their electorate, and Bills only received limited inquiry. But the decline of parliament thesis looks back to a 'golden age' of parliament where debate was more constructive. This point of view fails to understand that earlier parliaments were different, rather than 'better'. Critics tend to emphasise the costs and ignore the benefits of the impact of parties of Parliament. While party control does reduce the opportunities for debate and reduces the capacity of the house to enforce Ministerial responsibility, it also has strong benefits the stability of Australian politics partly reflects the established 'two party' system; parliament is presented with a clear set of policies that can be defended with electoral mandate; and parliament is capable of dealing with the large legislative agenda required by modern society. Reforms also being introduced into both Houses of parliament ensure that more representation is occurring, that Bills are being more effectively scrutinized and that the Executive function is being appropriately made accountable. Therefore, commentators who argue the decline of parliament, fail to look beyond the costs to the benefits, and do not consider the effect the reforms will have on the functions of parliament.
Please note that this sample paper on Is Federal Parliament in decline? is for your review only. In order to eliminate any of the plagiarism issues, it is highly recommended that you do not use it for you own writing purposes. In case you experience difficulties with writing a well structured and accurately composed paper on Is Federal Parliament in decline?, we are here to assist you. Your cheap custom college paper on Is Federal Parliament in decline? will be written from scratch, so you do not have to worry about its originality.
Order your authentic assignment from cheap essay writing service and you will be amazed at how easy it is to complete a quality custom paper within the shortest time possible!
