Government Proposal Discussion: Presidential Parliamentarian (Closed) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:31:44 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Elections
  Atlas Fantasy Government
  Constitutional Convention (Moderators: Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee, Lumine)
  Government Proposal Discussion: Presidential Parliamentarian (Closed) (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Government Proposal Discussion: Presidential Parliamentarian (Closed)  (Read 5194 times)
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 466


« on: March 26, 2009, 04:43:44 PM »

I agree with Purple State. Should we implement such a plan, we should give power equally to the popularly-elected President and the PM elected by the Senators. Since our justice system does not seem to come in play much regarding constitutionality of laws, I suggest we keep two heads of state to promote the system of checks and balances.

Questions: Will there be a VP under this plan? Will there continue to be 5 regions under this plan?
Logged
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 466


« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2009, 05:42:45 PM »

I don't see why the position of the President cannot be a simple one.

1. Give him the power to veto
2. Give him the power to ask the House to dismiss the government/prime minister in a vote of no confidence.
3. Give him the power to introduce legilslation to the House in the form of a 'Presidential Slot' if you will where he has the power to introduce one bill at a time.

This makes him exercise power and also push for a legislative programme of sorts, which makes a campaign and a nationwide vote worthwhile.

I agree with this. This way, the President can check the PM if he gets out of control.
Logged
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 466


« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2009, 06:43:58 PM »

I don't see why the position of the President cannot be a simple one.

1. Give him the power to veto
2. Give him the power to ask the House to dismiss the government/prime minister in a vote of no confidence.
3. Give him the power to introduce legilslation to the House in the form of a 'Presidential Slot' if you will where he has the power to introduce one bill at a time.

This makes him exercise power and also push for a legislative programme of sorts, which makes a campaign and a nationwide vote worthwhile.

I agree with this. This way, the President can check the PM if he gets out of control.

In a way. The President is accountable to the people. The PM is accountable to parliament and is chosen by them - the President can ensure parliament 'play nice' and if it's the President who's acting up he can be removed at the next election by the people.

By "dismiss the government," do you mean call for impeachement of one particular parliamentary offender, or dismiss the entire Parliament? Also, will the President have the power to dismiss a Parliament member without a trial? I think that offenders should be put to trial at the suggestion of the President. I don't think the President should have the power to arbitrarily choose whether the Parliament is acting properly. I think he should only have the power to ask for a trial.

I also note that there is no mention of the Supreme Court. I believe we should have a three member Supreme Court, appointed by the Prime Minister. Also, impeachment trials should be held in front of the Supreme Court. This way the President does not have the Supreme Court in the palm of his hands, but neither does the PM, because only the President can call for impeachment.
Logged
Fine...I Made This More Civil
persepolis
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 466


« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2009, 07:19:04 PM »

This particular power that Afleitch is suggesting is even less powerful than the dismissal of the Government... it is asking the House to form a new Government. The Prime Minister, if he loses the vote, is not expelled from Parliament, it just gives the right of parties to negotiate and form a new Government in the House without going to an election (in other words... if there were three parties forming the whole of the Parliament, with one in coalition with another to form Government, and then it broke off and wanted to form a coalition Government with the other party instead).

Effectively that's what I am hoping for. If a government is failing, or it's authority is in question the President can ask the House to vote on whether they have 'confidence' in the current administration. If the government is strong enough it can win this and continue in government. However if it is not, and looses the vote then the government is dissolved.

The next part depends on elections. If they are fixed in the calendar then those elected remain 'seated' but a new government has to be formed. This may be by an opposing party or a new coalition. It may even involve the ruling party but with a new Prime Minister (it depends on the reasons for the no confidence vote - whether it's against government, party or the Prime Minister ) However if fresh elections can be called, then the PM may ask the President to dissolve Parliament and call new elections. The public may re-elect the government and may have a new mandate or they may vote them out of office vindicating the No Confidence Motion.

It's about coalition, collusion and calculation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parliamentary_dissolution

The three C's? I like it. That could possibly form the base of our Parliamentary system. I support this system more than the Universal sytem.

The President should be a representative of the people, if we will have a non-popularly elected PM. I suggest that every power of the PM's be put in check with the power of the President, and vice-versa. I think we should move away from the European model in that way. I do not want to vote for a President only to see his power diminished by a PM I do not like. I believe that the PM and the President should hold equal power.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.023 seconds with 14 queries.