Hung Parliaments now very popular

[neddy]

http://www.smh.com.au/world/british-election-produces-hung-parliament-20100507-uhb6.html
British election produces hung parliament
Paola Totaro
May 7, 2010
The identity of Britain’s next prime minister could take days to emerge, with Gordon Brown and Conservative leader David Cameron in frantic battles for the keys to 10 Downing Street after a cliffhanger election.

With neither the Tories nor Labour winning the key 326 seats needed for a majority government, a hung parliament was declared as vote counting began wrapping up on Friday.

http://news.theage.com.au/breaking-...bo-after-voters-punish-pm-20100821-139eq.html
Australia in political limbo after voters punish PM
Marc Lavine
August 21, 2010
Ads by Google

MLC Financial Advisorswww.mlc.com.au
Sound financial advice, transparent fees. Talk to an MLC adviser now.
Australia was in political limbo Sunday after voters punished Prime Minister Julia Gillard for deposing her predecessor two months ago, leaving the nation facing its first hung parliament in 70 years.


Sweden has a hung parliament after election
SWEDEN'S ruling centre-right coalition won the most votes in a parliamentary election but fell short of a majority, final results showed today, as the anti-immigrant far-right entered a hung house with a key position.
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt's Alliance won 49.2 per cent of votes and 172 seats in Sweden's 349-seat parliament in yesterday's vote, three short of a majority, according to a final ballot count.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/breaking-new...on/story-e6frfku0-1225926642660#ixzz10Ae15cIg

 

[Ash007]

Notice all these countries are considered as being "advanced"? Having a hung parliament turns out to be great for Australia. The ASX and AUD actually increased during this period and is still going strong now. It actually opened up so many discussions about the country. If it happened in a country without the maturity/mentality to handle it, you would see riots on the streets.

 

[bic_cherry]

Hung Parliaments now very popular
British election produces hung parliament: Paola Totaro; May 7, 2010
The identity of Britain’s next prime minister could take days to emerge, with Gordon Brown and Conservative leader David Cameron in frantic battles for the keys to 10 Downing Street after a cliffhanger election.
With neither the Tories nor Labour winning the key 326 seats needed for a majority government, a hung parliament was declared as vote counting began wrapping up on Friday.
Australia in political limbo after voters punish PM: Marc Lavine; August 21, 2010
Australia was in political limbo Sunday after voters punished Prime Minister Julia Gillard for deposing her predecessor two months ago, leaving the nation facing its first hung parliament in 70 years.
Sweden has a hung parliament after election
SWEDEN'S ruling centre-right coalition won the most votes in a parliamentary election but fell short of a majority, final results showed today, as the anti-immigrant far-right entered a hung house with a key position.
Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt's Alliance won 49.2 per cent of votes and 172 seats in Sweden's 349-seat parliament in yesterday's vote, three short of a majority, according to a final ballot count.

Countries w 2 main strong parties: political wrangling +++.
1 party political dynasty e.g. GRC filled Singapore: No wrangling but dynasty rule prevails.
Moral of story, Politicians are selfish like the rest of us.
Way forward:
Honorable parties would stop gerrymandering, stop nonconstructive use of party whips in situation like these and let MPs vote sincerely and based on their morals and the electorate's wishes.

In fact:
Make all MP parliamentary actions transparent to the electorate.
Ban the party whip from influencing MP decisions in electing the cabinet or any parliamentary decision for that matter, ban overt partisan influence of parliament.
For the electorate vote either independent candidates or candidates from parties which do not place partisan interest over that of the electorate's.
Remove the partisan element from SG's GRC system of elections (it promotes gerrymendering) and slim it down to the minimum size and numbers necessary: see calculation proving that: '12': the correct number of (3-Memb) GRCs for Singapore- which explains why this optimum no. of GRCs, which also provides for 48 SMCs, based on the current 84seat parliament is able to balance racial minority interest whilst holding sacred the partisan independence of MPs in parliament.

Political parties (like any professional institution) should have the main role only of advancing political literacy amongst MPs and within communities; as beacons of scholarly learning which through reports and various publications, influence the decisions of the electorate and so their votes - they should NOT actively determine how an MP speaks or acts in parliament nor sway votes by threatening an MP's political career. For too long have political parties manipulated the government with their selfish egos and greed and I think that this is precisely the reason why people general distrust politicians.

BAN PARTY POLITICAL WHIPS.

In SG where even 'guidelines' about service fees is disallowed (from Drs to ppty agts- see e.g.(s) below), why is it that Mr Lim Swee Say is able to control the way MPs vote in parliament and punish them for non-conformity? Does voting a PAP MP equate voting by default for Mr Lim Swee Say's decisions rather then an MP's conviction/ his constituency's interest?

If these guys spend all their time "fixing the opposition", who then has the time/ energy to fix the world's/ society's problems?
Better don't trust a servile partisan politician with your vote.

"If you judge people, you have no time to love them." ~ Mother Teresa [Brainy Quote]
Matthew 25:40: "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'"- (NIV)

Reference(s):
- 'Fee guidelines for property agents deemed anti-competitive': "However, the CCS holds the view that even if the price recommendations are not binding, they will still provide a focal point for prices to converge. 'This will dampen competition and facilitate price coordination,' the commission said in a statement yesterday." [BT 6Aug2008]
- 'MTI says no to excluding doctors' Guideline on Fees from Competition Act': "After consulting the Ministry of Health (MOH), the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) has determined that the guidelines could create anti-competitive behaviour, and cannot be excluded from the Competition Act." [CNA 7June2010]
- 'Singapore lifts whip on orchestrated parliament': "The free vote is given to them when they make a request, and the Whip will consider. In the past it was simply: 'No you can't even request',' he said." [AFP 21Mar2002]
- 'Whip (politics)': "A whip is an official in a political party whose primary purpose is to ensure party discipline in a legislature. Whips are party 'enforcers', who typically offer inducements and threaten punishments for party members to ensure that they vote according to the official party policy." [Wikipedia article]
- 'What does the term political whip mean?': "The 'chief whip' will issue a note at the start of the week telling the members of his party what votes were coming up that week. Depending on how many times the vote is underlined (1,2 or 3) tells the MP's how they should vote and whether they will be punished should they vote against their party. " [Answers.com]
- 'Political changes are for “long term strength and stability”, says PM Lee': "PAP MP are bound by PARTY WHIP, ie they vote accordingly party line and not the constituencies interest and personal conviction." [TOC 27May2009]
- ''12' the correct number of (3-Memb) GRCs for Singapore.': "When X =12.2164, the number of SMCs= ... = 48 (rounded to the nearest multiple of 3/ based on optimal no. of GRCs)"[A1forums, 6Aug2010]
- 'Home > Cabinet Appointments > Mr Lim Swee Say': "Mr Lim joined the People's Action Party (PAP) in 1996. He was returned unopposed as Member of Parliament in the General Elections held in 1996, 2001 and 2006. He was first elected a member of the PAP Central Executive Committee in 1999, and chaired the Young PAP from 2000 to 2004. On 1 April 2007, he was appointed the Government Whip." [The Cabinet]

 

[zack123]

I thought you said well hung men are now popular......

 

[bic_cherry]

http://www.smh.com.au/world/british-election-produces-hung-parliament-20100507-uhb6.html
British election produces hung parliament...

My Response to a comment on another forum, similar thread:

Re: Vote for any PAP MP= vote (by default) for Mr Lim Swee Say?
Another post that makes no sense due to very bad editing on the Thread Starter's part.
Why do you think that countries are eager to quickly absolve a hung Parliament? It means its a dreadlock - nothing can be done, debated, or implemented. How can the politicians possibly serve the people in such a situation?

Thank you for your interest in my article.

Whilst it's obvious that 'Hung Parliaments' are the new bane of the 3 western democracies described, (you described: "a dreadlock(sic) - (where) nothing can be done, debated, or implemented").
It would be good if one could investigate the root causes of such a conundrum rather then merely stating the obvious.

What I have, in authoring 'Vote for any PAP MP= vote (by default) for Mr Lim Swee Say?' is to draw attention to the problem of the electorate falling during elections for the partisan politics game played out by insincere politicians from 'big church' political parties, exploiting the naivete and uninformed electorate.

In the case of Singapore (as my essay began with); all PAP MPs have to avow absolute abidance to party rules and, with the exception of prior permission being sought granted, vote according to party agenda: "The free vote is given to them when they make a request, and the Whip will consider. In the past it was simply: 'No you can't even request'" [Singapore lifts whip on orchestrated parliament]; the current PAP party whip being Mr Lim Swee Say. This obviously results often in conflicts of MP's constituency interest over partisan interest. The latter often being the default tie breaker must have instinctively invoked the forum participant to conclude: "PAP MP are bound by PARTY WHIP, ie they vote accordingly party line and not the constituencies interest and personal conviction."

This concept of partisan interest first, electorate interest second (post elections)- is by my observation, the same root cause for the 'hung parliament' problem in the 3 foreign parliamentary based democracies described; whereby an electorate naivete of the disruptive and 'anti-competitive' nature of partisan politics have permissively allowed such practices to pervade through out the political system- thus resulting in much partisan political bickering and leadership stalemates, whereby even the formation of a cabinet has become problematic if not impossible. The desperate co-opting of independents, minority parties being the eventual outcome- the pre-election promises now diluted by partisan bargaining.

The 2 local examples wherein professional bodies were disallowed publication of their respective 'guideline on fees' are examples of the high 'pro-competitive' standards the government requires of local professional bodies whereby publication of even non-binding fee guidelines by these societies- whatever the intent- have been deemed uncompetitive and thus made illegal.

It is thus shocking that in this internet age of high population literacy and even amongst 1st world economies, MPs still have to routinely compromise their personal convictions in support of partisan agenda/ political dynasty- or else face sanctions, even to the extent of disqualification from parliament as is the situation locally.

Why do people around the world still depend on 'big brother' politicians to govern their country? What has happened to cordial interpersonal relations, mutual cooperation and independent ingenuity that has guided humanity over the centuries? Must the conduct of every parliamentary session- from inception to dissolution- be done 'big brother' style and along partisan lines? Are good ideas so unique that they should be sole monopoly of only 1 party? Must our differences remain the focus amongst our politicians? Is a quiet festering 'civil war' the ideal outcome of democracy?

With hung parliaments sprouting as ubiquitously worldwide as the recent recession spread, the faith of people in 'big church' political parties must be wearing thin.

Using the example of small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) as a distant example: "SMEs form an important pillar of the city-state's economy, employing 56 percent of workforce and contributing 42 percent of gross domestic product (GDP)." even the economy is currently being populated by smaller, 'independently run' companies- not over sized MNCs nor their clumsy subsidiaries. - This local example also applies locally- where PAP is the 'big church' party and where excess partisanship and gerrymandering remain the core problems inherent in the current GRC system of elections in Singapore.

For how long more 'big church' political parties can continue play their dirty little partisan games in the midst of recurrent hung parliaments and an increasingly aware and literate electorate is a question that I hope can soon be answered, a case of not if but when.

Rgds
B.C.

References:
- 'Singapore lifts whip on orchestrated parliament': "The free vote is given to them when they make a request, and the Whip will consider. In the past it was simply: 'No you can't even request',' he said." [AFP 21Mar2002]
- 'Parliamentary democracy': "A parliamentary system is a system of government in which the ministers of the executive branch are drawn from the legislature and are accountable to that body, such that the executive and legislative branches are intertwined. In such a system, the head of government is both de facto chief executive and chief legislator." [Wiki Article]
- 'Singapore to roll out more schemes to help SMEs': "SMEs form an important pillar of the city-state's economy, employing 56 percent of workforce and contributing 42 percent of gross domestic product (GDP)." ['People': 05Mar2007]
- 'Betrayal of the original intent of the GRC system of elections. (By SMC minimization)': "As figures show, the original good intentions of the GRC system of elections have since been overwhelmed by obtuse manipulation for party political interest such that GRCs serve the PAP’s interest rather than the original objective of 'ensuring minority representation'"[A1forums, 25Aug2010]
- 'The new authoritarianism': "More and more of us are willing to trade freedom for wealth or security... ... A modern form of authoritarianism, quite distinct from Soviet Communism, Maoism or Fascism, is being born. It is providing a modicum of a good life, and a quiet life, the ultimate anaesthetic for the brain." [Guardian, 1July2008]
- 'Don’t risk real freedom for short-term material gain': "Our civil liberties are in jeopardy and we are to blame. We have reduced democracy to the right to make and spend money... (in return for) a temporary blanket of security and what turned out to be an illusory prosperity" [The Times, 7Sept2009]

 

[neddy]

My Response to a comment on another forum, similar thread:
Why do you think that countries are eager to quickly absolve a hung Parliament? It means its a dreadlock - nothing can be done, debated, or implemented. How can the politicians possibly serve the people in such a situation?

Personally, I think ...

A hung parliament can be a good thing sometimes. It is a reminder to the politicians not to take the people/voters for granted. There is a chance for reform provided the constitution is observed.

A minority govt that results from a hung parliament can work. Eg. The current Western Australia state govt is a minority Liberal-National govt and it is working fine. All major parties have to work hard to win back the trust of the voters next time round.

 

[steffychun]

Either the Westminster system or the crazy US system that allows a half term governor to become a political star overnight