Thought brought on by recent election.

What is the function of Parliament?
If the primary function of parliament is to modify laws then there are other ways to modify laws, such as tort, case law and the Supreme court.
If the primary function of parliament is to set Australia’s budget, then there are people better qualified in financial administration.
If the primary function of parliament is to set up commissions, then they’re doing a pretty bad job.

Which leads to the question of why we need a parliament at all.

mollwollfumble said:

Thought brought on by recent election.

What is the function of Parliament?
If the primary function of parliament is to modify laws then there are other ways to modify laws, such as tort, case law and the Supreme court.
If the primary function of parliament is to set Australia’s budget, then there are people better qualified in financial administration.
If the primary function of parliament is to set up commissions, then they’re doing a pretty bad job.

Which leads to the question of why we need a parliament at all.

Yes I think the Monarchy is enough.

This isn’t rocket science, the function of Parliament is facilitate governance.

Fundamentally that is the making and passing of laws that relate to supply as well as the definition of the ideological direction of how taxes are raised and spent.

1. We have to do something with the big clothes horse on Capital Hill.

2. It keeps a lot of megalomaniacs and petty bureaucrats off the streets.

Parliaments are elected legislative bodies. Their role is twofold: a) to represent the will of the electors, and b) to govern.

Typically, governing powers are divided into three sectors: legislative, judicial and executive. Nominally, Australia’s executive branch consists solely of the Monarch, represented by the Governor General. The judicial branch exists largely by appointment and hence is not directly answerable to the electors. Parliament, then, is the branch by which the will of the electors has influence over the set of laws and the collection and expenditure of centrally controlled funds.

The primary function of Parliament is to control the workings of the so-called free market to ensure as far as possible that no-one is unduly disadvantaged by people in positions of power manipulating the market for their own benefit.

Whilst it is true that they do a pretty lousy job of it, no other system yet tried has done a better job, and most do a much worse job.

mollwollfumble said:

Thought brought on by recent election.

What is the function of Parliament?
If the primary function of parliament is to modify laws then there are other ways to modify laws, such as tort, case law

Just on this first one. I disagree strongly. The courts is a less efficient way to do it. The courts will tend t follow precedent wherever they can, which locks in old ideas and old ways of thinking. Also the time frame for change is very slow. Plus it requires an actual test case to probe new ground and set new precedents, which means someone with the funding and the desire to pursue their case through the courts and appeals, which locks out your average Joe.

Parliaments can abolish precedent and start again from scratch with a new set of laws if change is required. Courts don’t do reforms and new paradigms very well, if at all.

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

Thought brought on by recent election.

What is the function of Parliament?
If the primary function of parliament is to modify laws then there are other ways to modify laws, such as tort, case law

Just on this first one. I disagree strongly. The courts is a less efficient way to do it. The courts will tend t follow precedent wherever they can, which locks in old ideas and old ways of thinking. Also the time frame for change is very slow. Plus it requires an actual test case to probe new ground and set new precedents, which means someone with the funding and the desire to pursue their case through the courts and appeals, which locks out your average Joe.

Parliaments can abolish precedent and start again from scratch with a new set of laws if change is required. Courts don’t do reforms and new paradigms very well, if at all.

Was it Winston that said “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for those other forms which have been tried from time to time”?

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

Thought brought on by recent election.

What is the function of Parliament?
If the primary function of parliament is to modify laws then there are other ways to modify laws, such as tort, case law

Just on this first one. I disagree strongly. The courts is a less efficient way to do it. The courts will tend t follow precedent wherever they can, which locks in old ideas and old ways of thinking. Also the time frame for change is very slow. Plus it requires an actual test case to probe new ground and set new precedents, which means someone with the funding and the desire to pursue their case through the courts and appeals, which locks out your average Joe.

Parliaments can abolish precedent and start again from scratch with a new set of laws if change is required. Courts don’t do reforms and new paradigms very well, if at all.

Parliaments are the best place to put the most dangerous and destructive members of a community so that they can be better controlled, and have their destructive actions minimised.

It’s the representative (of, for, and by people) input to administering the state, which presently is being neutered because it’s seen as (in substantial part) a parochial liability by globalists (particularly global capital).

parliament is derived from French – parle ( to speak )

parlement – speaking

parliament as we know it evolved from st Stephen chapel in London – now part of the Houses of Parliament , it was an addition to st Stephens chapel where the political parties faced off with each other a few paces from each other – this traditional was kept when the Victorians built the structure we know today , oh yes , people used to hang around the lobby infront of the parliament , trying to get the ear of MPs – these were known as “lobbyists”

wookiemeister said:

oh yes , people used to hang around the lobby infront of the parliament , trying to get the ear of MPs – these were known as “lobbyists”

Lobbyist is an American term.

we have parliament because history dictates the middle class always overthrow the monarchy

Rome, America, France ,

any country with a bit of money always faces the prospect of the merchants overthrowing the monarchy

what happens then is that the “revolution” is staged as a way to “help” people when of course it’s naturally purely a vehicle to serve the interests of the merchants and power hungry. there’s a purge and it’s not too long before infighting the middle class breaks out. Pericles himself from a powerful family that helped run Athens eventually declares himself king in all but name as first among equals by using the support of the Hoi polloi , starting a war on Sparta that he could neither win not finish – he dies from plague as The surrounds of Athens are under siege from the Spartans ( at that time principally a constitutional monarchy of sorts )

as a result Socrates and Plato his pupil come to the opinion that “democracy “ is a dangerous and stupid thing as it relies on intelligent and wise leaders to be elected to make far reaching decisions.

parliament in our times creates laws and discusses current events that are of interest to the state and its survival

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

oh yes , people used to hang around the lobby infront of the parliament , trying to get the ear of MPs – these were known as “lobbyists”

Lobbyist is an American term.

they told me at parliament they invented it

In a report carried by the BBC, an OED lexicographer has shown that “lobbying” finds its roots in the gathering of Members of Parliament and peers in the hallways (“lobbies”) of the UK Houses of Parliament before and after parliamentary debates where members of the public can meet their representatives.

wookiemeister said:

they told me at parliament they invented it

Some from parliament lying? Well I never…

wookiemeister said:

In a report carried by the BBC, an OED lexicographer has shown that “lobbying” finds its roots in the gathering of Members of Parliament and peers in the hallways (“lobbies”) of the UK Houses of Parliament before and after parliamentary debates where members of the public can meet their representatives.

Hmmm… maybe I’m the one who is wrong. Mark the day Wookie, for the first and only time you have bested me.

in practical terms parliament is a ship of fools commanded by a blind , deaf captain with nothing but his own interests to serve

elections are won by the lowest common denominator , namely very stupid people that have never reasoned for themselves why things are going wrong

thus the government we have today

be like Malcolm – your your money in a bank far from this country

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

In a report carried by the BBC, an OED lexicographer has shown that “lobbying” finds its roots in the gathering of Members of Parliament and peers in the hallways (“lobbies”) of the UK Houses of Parliament before and after parliamentary debates where members of the public can meet their representatives.

Hmmm… maybe I’m the one who is wrong. Mark the day Wookie, for the first and only time you have bested me.

it’s ok

everyone gets wookied at some point , for some sooner , others later

wookiemeister said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

wookiemeister said:

In a report carried by the BBC, an OED lexicographer has shown that “lobbying” finds its roots in the gathering of Members of Parliament and peers in the hallways (“lobbies”) of the UK Houses of Parliament before and after parliamentary debates where members of the public can meet their representatives.

Hmmm… maybe I’m the one who is wrong. Mark the day Wookie, for the first and only time you have bested me.

it’s ok

everyone gets wookied at some point , for some sooner , others later

it might help if you quote the whole article Wookie…

In a report carried by the BBC, an OED lexicographer has shown that “lobbying” finds its roots in the gathering of Members of Parliament and peers in the hallways (“lobbies”) of the UK Houses of Parliament before and after parliamentary debates where members of the public can meet their representatives.

One story held that the term originated at the Willard Hotel in Washington, DC, where it was supposedly used by President Ulysses S. Grant to describe the political advocates who frequented the hotel’s lobby to access Grant—who was often there in the evenings to enjoy a cigar and brandy—and would then try to buy the president drinks in an attempt to influence his political decisions. Although the term may have gained more widespread currency in Washington, D.C. by virtue of this practice during the Grant Administration, the OED cites numerous documented uses of the word well before Grant’s presidency, including use in Pennsylvania as early as 1808.

The term “lobbying” also appeared in print as early as 1820:

Other letters from Washington affirm, that members of the Senate, when the compromise question was to be taken in the House, were not only “lobbying about the Representatives’ Chamber” but also active in endeavoring to intimidate certain weak representatives by insulting threats to dissolve the Union. — April 1, 1820

stumpy_seahorse said:

wookiemeister said:

Witty Rejoinder said:

Hmmm… maybe I’m the one who is wrong. Mark the day Wookie, for the first and only time you have bested me.

it’s ok

everyone gets wookied at some point , for some sooner , others later

it might help if you quote the whole article Wookie…

In a report carried by the BBC, an OED lexicographer has shown that “lobbying” finds its roots in the gathering of Members of Parliament and peers in the hallways (“lobbies”) of the UK Houses of Parliament before and after parliamentary debates where members of the public can meet their representatives.

One story held that the term originated at the Willard Hotel in Washington, DC, where it was supposedly used by President Ulysses S. Grant to describe the political advocates who frequented the hotel’s lobby to access Grant—who was often there in the evenings to enjoy a cigar and brandy—and would then try to buy the president drinks in an attempt to influence his political decisions. Although the term may have gained more widespread currency in Washington, D.C. by virtue of this practice during the Grant Administration, the OED cites numerous documented uses of the word well before Grant’s presidency, including use in Pennsylvania as early as 1808.

The term “lobbying” also appeared in print as early as 1820:

Other letters from Washington affirm, that members of the Senate, when the compromise question was to be taken in the House, were not only “lobbying about the Representatives’ Chamber” but also active in endeavoring to intimidate certain weak representatives by insulting threats to dissolve the Union. — April 1, 1820

the Americans always want to take credit for everything

party_pants said:

mollwollfumble said:

Thought brought on by recent election.

What is the function of Parliament?
If the primary function of parliament is to modify laws then there are other ways to modify laws, such as tort, case law

Just on this first one. I disagree strongly. The courts is a less efficient way to do it. The courts will tend t follow precedent wherever they can, which locks in old ideas and old ways of thinking. Also the time frame for change is very slow. Plus it requires an actual test case to probe new ground and set new precedents, which means someone with the funding and the desire to pursue their case through the courts and appeals, which locks out your average Joe.

Parliaments can abolish precedent and start again from scratch with a new set of laws if change is required. Courts don’t do reforms and new paradigms very well, if at all.

Good points.

> Was it Winston that said “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for those other forms which have been tried from time to time”?

I wouldn’t call the Westminster system of parliament a “Democracy”.