Is Australia politics based on a two-party system? This may not completely accurate even thought many people agree with this statement. Apparently, the Labor and the Liberal are both the major parties in Australia, therefore this is the reason why people would believe this statement. However, through carefully examine this assertion from two main aspect: the formation of government and the passing process of legislation in this essay, we will realize that there are various party system existing in the history of government’s formation . On the other hand, the legislation’s making process is not always controlled by two parties only, because other minor parties and independents also have powers to generate influences. From the perspective …show more content…
of government’s formation, there are several perspectives of reasons can show the inaccuracy of this statement. Firstly, one-party system can be accounted in the history and the related statistics was found in the research paper (Parliament of Australia, 2014). Since 1 January 1901, the day Australia became an independent national, three different parties has dominated the office over a long period of time: the Liberal government dominated over 23 years, 13 years for the Labor government, following that, the Howard Coalition government take over for 11 year . According these statistic, the existence of one-party is proven and it remained a long time in the government’s formation history. Secondly, some people argue that it is a two-and-a-half party system.
Warhurst expressed that”The Australia party system remains best characterized as a two and a half party system” (Warhurst J, 2004) because the Liberal was always supported by National in order to defeat the Labor. Despite the Liberal is the main party who against the Labor, we should also consider the coalition of the National and the Liberal as a one-and-a-half party because the National is a independent party …show more content…
originally. Thirdly, Australia government was supposed to start from a mlti-party system because its liberal democracy and not “based on” two-party system fundamentally.
In fact, before 1944, the Liberal did not existed and it was a time of a multi-party system and a war zone established for the Labor and different contenders. Because of the liberal democracy, government should not only controlled by one powerful major party but have to “based on” a multi-party system to generate the rotation of office. Actually, a two-party system is happening “naturally” as the voting system has been used to eliminate or against the weakness and the minority (NationMaster Encyclopedia,’Two Party System), therefore, Australian politics is “based on” a multi-party system and just become a two-party system unavoidably. Finally, the Senate as one of the essential part of government’s formation is made by a multi-party system. Because of the system of proportional voting introduced in 1949 and allocates seats fairly, minor parties and independents are easier to win a place in the Senate, although a two-party system is still in the House of Representatives currently, a multi-party system is still safe in the Senate and it play an indispensable role in forming
government. After examine the assertion from the perspective of government’s formation, following that we are changing the direction to the passing process of legislation. Because of the fairness and the complicated steps within the passing process of legislation, a two-party system can not operate perfectly, and the aims of these two parties may not always success. In the parliament, the Senate or the Legislative Councils, some minor parties and independents play a critical role to determine weather law can be made. In 2012, some barriers are created in the O’ Farrell Coalition government in New South Wale because there are insufficient in majority in the Legislative Councils, weather the legislation can pass of not is depend on minority and independents. Furthermore, in 2010/11, Australia Green as a minor party has a great power to influence the legislation making-process. They introduced 77 private senator’s bills into the Senate, and 28 private member’s bills into the House of Representatives. This is a strong example can be used to prove Australian politics is not depend on a two-party system when we focus on passing legislation, because others parties also have the ability to make changes. In conclusion, it is an obvious fact that different party system can be found in Australia Government, although numerous individuals believe this statement, after a comprehensive analysis which organized by different points of view, in my personal opinion, Australian politics is not based on a two-party system.
It could be argued that Gladstone’s failure to unite his party, during a time when their ultimate support and confidence in his leadership was crucial, was a significant tactical error that contributed heavily towards the failure of the 1886 Home Rule Bill. The results of the 1885 general election were to have a significant impact on the political landscape of Britain; despite winning the most seats, the Liberals did not have an overall majority.As Parnell and the Irish Parliamentry Party (IPP) held the balance...
In 1944, the Liberal Party of Australia was founded after a three-day meeting held in a small hall not far from Parliament House in Canberra. The meeting was called by the then Leader of the Opposition (United Australia Party), Robert Menzies. Robert Menzies had already served as Prime Minister of Australia (1939-40), but he believed that the non-Labor parties should unite to present a strong alternative government to the Australian people. Eighty men and women from 18 non-Labor political parties and organisations attended the first Canberra conference. They shar...
In the 1906 election, the number of seats won by Liberals increased from 184 to 377, in contrast the numbers of seats lost by the Conservatives went from 402 seats won in 1900 to 157 seats lost in the 1906 election, this represented the lowest number of seats held by a Conservative government since 1832. This dramatic reversal of constituencies held, is due to a number of reasons. An argument is that, due to some poor decisions made by the Conservative governments, they in fact contributed largely to the landslide result in the 1906 election. ‘They were in effect the architects to the own downfall.’
Shadowing World War II, there was an amplified fear of communism in Australia. The influence of the threat of Communism in Australian local politics from 1945 to the 1950’s was very strong as you can see through Robert Menzies, the Petrov Affair, The fear of Ussr spies, the royal commission and the Alp split show relevant threats to the Australian Domestic politics by saying they are spies, traitors and liars.
Party is an inevitable feature of the democracy and it is defined as ‘an autonomous group of citizens having the purpose of making nominations and contesting elections in the hope of gaining control over governmental power through the capture of public offices and the organization of the government’ (Caramani, 2011, p.220). Parties are ubiquitous in modern political systems and they perform a number of functions, they are: coordination, contesting elections, recruitment, and representation (Caramani, 2011). Political parties are the product of the parliamentary and electoral game, and party systems reflect the social oppositions that characterize society when parties first appear (Coxall et al., 2011).
Australia is a monarchy of the United Kingdom. It always has been, and yet this does not seem to have significantly and adversely affected our development and growth towards our country. Thus, there seems no legitimate purpose to change this; since a republican Australia displays a lack of conclusive benefits towards our economy and ‘way of life.’ An Australian republic would cost billions to undertake and is simply unnecessary as there are more important issues facing Australia; and if the Australian citizens are not calling for a referendum, then any serious discussions from politicians or other related public figures are irrelevant and meaningless.
When Australia’s 21st Prime Minister, Gough Whitlam, was swept into power in December 1972 there was huge anticipation for dramatic and swift change. Australia had been under the control of a conservative liberal government for 23 consecutive years, and Whitlam’s promises if social change were eagerly anticipated. Whitlam, despite his failings as a negotiator, managed to implement a huge array of reforms and changes, many of which shaped Australia into the country it is today. However is that enough to say he succeeded? Even Whitlam today admits that he regrets doing “too much too soon”, and perhaps Whitlam’s government was a government that was too socially progressive for its time, which could perchance have been a foreshadowing of things to come for the most recent labor government of Julia Gillard which has been labeled by some as the most incompetent government since Whitlam. Gough Whitlam has had the most books written and published about him than any other Australian Prime Minister to Date. This essay will argue that Whitlam was a successful leader of the Australian Labor Party (ALP), who had the ability and charisma to lead Australia in an era of prosperity; he did however succumbed to a few grave errors of judgment that ultimately led to his downfall, however his ultimate goal was to transform Australia which he achieved. Whitlam’s’ errors were seen as being due to his inability take advice from senior figures on how to turn his amateur government into a competent one and his inflexible approach to dealing with the hostile senate that the Australian public gave him, and often led to his government being labeled the worst in Australian history and as a failure.
system produces conflicts between the Congress and the President and promotes very outdated beliefs that stem from the Constitution. A vast majority of the American population has the stern belief that the Constitution does not need to be changed in any way, shape, or form. This belief, however, is keeping the country from progressing along with other countries around the world. These single parties are holding control of multiple branches of government at once and monopolizing the power during their respective terms. The government “faces an incapacity to govern since each party works as a majority party” and believes there is no reason for innovation (Dulio & Thurber, 2000). The two parties are seemingly always clashing about one thing or the other, making it difficult for things to get accomplished, and proves the thesis correct that the two-party system is ineffective for a growing country.
If the parties in our governmental system would openly discuss about the difference in positions and in point of views within the groups in realizing these controversies will minimize the unnecessary troubles greatly. Another possibility of improvement would be following the great examples of other countries with the Westminster governance system. For example, in countries like Australia and New Zealand have already a well-established party discipline rules that are less strict than the ones in Canada and way more effective than the ones we have. In an article, it was said that” Australian parties are considerably more discipline than those in the UK an even those in Canada, although the degree of discipline in the latter has been the subject of much critical comment. Parliamentary votes in the UK are subject to varying degrees of party discipline, with the most rigid being the so-called” three-line whip’ votes. Neither Australia nor Canada has such gradations. In New Zealand party discipline has increased under its mixed Member proportional (MMP) electoral system and, unless party leaders have agreed to a conscience vote, standing orders require a party vote to be taken rather than individuals casting their votes in the chamber. “(Sawer, Abjorensen and Larkin
A two-party system is a political system in which only two parties have a realistic opportunity to compete effectively for control. As a result, all, or nearly all, elected officials end up being a member in one of the two major parties. In a two-party system, one of the parties usually holds a majority in the legislature hence, being referred to as the majority party while the other party is the minority party. The United States of America is considered to be a two-party system. A two-party system emerged early in the history of the new Republic. Beginning with the Federalists and the Jeffersonian Republicans in the late 1780s, two major parties have dominated national politics, although which particular two parties has changed with the times and issues. During the nineteenth century, the Democrats and Republicans emerged as the two dominant parties in American politics. As the American party system evolved, many third parties emerged, but few of them remained in existence for very long. Today the Democrats and Republican still remain as the dominant parties. These two parties hav...
Britain's and this becomes particularly important when looking at the years after 1979. If you look at the period between 1945-79, it seems fairly clear that a two party system exists. However, successive Conservative victories between 1979-97 make this proposition seem less credible. Another flaw in the two party concept arises when parties which have not had a sufficient majority to have any real parliamentary power have been assisted by a smaller third party in order to remain in government. Whilst falling short of becoming true coalitions, these alliances have taken place down the ... ...
With an understanding of the theoretical links between economic structures, relations of production, and political systems that protect economic structures in society this case study examines media as a contributor to democracy in Australia as well as a business with economic objectives. This section will provide a short explanation of Fairfax media history and position in 2012 prior to explaining Gina Rinehart’s role in the company. The print sector in Australia has historically exhibited relatively high levels of concentration, dominated by News Corp Australia, Fairfax and APN. The Australian print news media have experienced a long-term trend of a decrease in titles and owners. According to Geoffrey Craig, ‘in 1923 there were as many as
Today, political parties can be seen throughout everyday life, prevalent in various activities such as watching television, or seeing signs beside the road while driving. These everyday occurrences make the knowledge of political parties commonly known, especially as the two opposing political parties: the Republicans and the Democrats. Republican and Democrats have existed for numerous years, predominantly due to pure tradition, and the comfort of the ideas each party presents. For years, the existence of two political parties has dominated the elections of the president, and lower offices such as mayor, or the House of Representatives. Fundamentally, this tradition continues from the very emergence of political parties during the election of 1796, principally between Federalist John Adams and Anti-federalist Thomas Jefferson. Prior to this election people unanimously conformed to the ideas of one man, George Washington, and therefore did not require the need for political parties.1 However, following his presidency the public was divided with opposing opinions, each arguing the best methods to regulate the country. Ultimately, the emergence of different opinions regarding the future of the United States involving the economy, foreign relations, ‘the masses,’ and the interpretation of the Constitution, led to the two political parties of the 1790s and the critical election of 1800.
Pat Weller "Prime ministers" The Oxford Companion to Australian Politics. Ed Brian Galligan and Winsome Roberts. Oxford University Press 2008. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Hillsborough CommunityCollege. 23June 2011 http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t250.e290
For years, countries have had different legislatures bicameral and unicameral. The features of each legislatures are distinct from one another. It even accounts to various vices and virtues. Both legislatures exist in various countries in the world. The reason to which varies in each place. Legislatures are essential for a society to perform politically well. However, the political structure of every nations varies thus, there exist no simple generalization. The structural arrangements of different legislatures are distinct in relation to their number of chambers available. (Danziger, J. N. (1996))