|
Post by Turcote on Apr 10, 2010 20:10:58 GMT -5
So, I'm studying for my Political Science test, and one thing that I have to know is the difference between a parliamentary system and a presidential system. I understand how, say, here in America we elect our representatives and our President, and over there you elect your representatives and then THEY pick the chief executive (prime minister) So, whatever political party has the most representatives that term, that's the political party that the prime minister will be, got it.
However, some of the smaller details are eluding my understanding.
Take this passage:
"Members of parliament can usually make only one important decision---whether to support the government (the government consisting of the prime minister and various cabinet officers selected from the party that has won the most seats in the election). If members of a party in power in parliament vote against their leaders, a new government must be formed. Thus the party leaders insist that all party members vote together on most issues under threat of not being renominated."
Soooooo does that mean that members of parliament HAVE to vote for their party's stance on a particular issue/subject even if they personally favor the other party's stance on just that one issue? I'm confused. I mean, sure, here in America, generally representatives vote in favor of their party's general stance, but it isn't exactly uncommon for a liberal representative to favor a more conservative-minded bill being passed or vice versa. (right?) But in Britain, you ONLY vote for your party's choice? I'm confused.
Help would be appreciated. =)
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Apr 10, 2010 20:54:32 GMT -5
No, you don't always have to vote with your party. If you look here, this is where people voted on the Iraq War: www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2003-03-18&number=118If you scroll down to the Party Summary table, you'll see that 84 Labour voted against the Iraq War despite Labour being for it. The red boxes signify who rebelled against their party. However, some votes for smaller things a lot of politicians don't bother turning up to. Exhibit A, the Digital Economy Bill: www.publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2010-04-07&number=132Now look at the Party Summary in contrast. Gordon Brown told all of the Labour team to turn up. Not how to vote, but just to turn up. The conservatives knew it was a losing battle so most of them didn't turn up because they would've lost anyway. The Lib Dems at least tried and voiced their opposition, but it still failed because there's less of them. Basically he can't tell them where to vote, but on smaller things they will go with their party. They don't have to, though. It's all about numbers and majorities really. On smaller votes like Digital Economy, Labour knew not many would turn up, so asked 100+ Labour to go so that they'd win. When you say "I mean, sure, here in America, generally representatives vote in favor of their party's general stance, but it isn't exactly uncommon for a liberal representative to favor a more conservative-minded bill being passed or vice versa." It's pretty much the same here
|
|
|
Post by Turcote on Apr 10, 2010 21:05:50 GMT -5
Well, then...fuck. I'm so confused hahaha.
Now I can't use that as a difference between the systems on my test lol.
|
|
|
Post by Turcote on Apr 10, 2010 21:28:34 GMT -5
Oh wait, I read something online that seems to clear this up for me.
It says that if the prime minister loses the support of his majority party on a significant vote, then he has to resign and a new election is held immediately. So, that current gov't dissolves and a new one is formed. SO that's why the members of parliament generally try and stick to their party's votes, because they don't want to have to get a new prime minister and start the whole process over again?
|
|
|
Post by Scrumtrulescent on Apr 11, 2010 11:54:16 GMT -5
Yeah aren't they about to hold prime minister elections now?
I'm learning things from my TV being stuck in BBC America, but the British gov't system has always confused me.
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Apr 11, 2010 14:16:37 GMT -5
Yes we are and I'm 5 days too young to vote I turn 18 on May 11, election is on May 6. I really, really wanted to vote Liberal Democrat too I'm trying to encourage my friends who can vote to do it for me, haha. If you have any other question Liz or Rachel, ask Last election we had I was 12/13 (they're every 5 years) so this is the first one I'm really properly getting into, so it's interesting for me too when you ask things. Fun fact: In the latest Doctor Who episode he gets a call from Winston Churchill at the end (that isn't a spoiler) and the Doctor was going to say "Well at least he wasn't a Tory when he phoned me!" But they had to cut it because it was biased, lol. Churchill was Conservative, then Liberal, then went back to Conservative, so I guess he called the Doctor in the liberal phase, lol. They cut it anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Scrumtrulescent on Apr 11, 2010 16:46:45 GMT -5
LOL they had to censor it? Oh we don't do that here in Amerikuh Or is it b/c it was on the BBC?
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Apr 18, 2010 19:39:24 GMT -5
Supposedly because we all pay a license fee to the BBC we should all be represented fairly... which is why they're closing BBC Asian Music and 6 Music. I still think they should've said it.
Also - 3 people I completely hate have said they're voting Conservative. I am not surprised by this. One of them said "Well in Glamour magazine they did a breakdown of each party and I agree with the Conservatives most." Ummm this bitch can vote and I can't?! Glamour magazine?!
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Apr 19, 2010 7:58:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Scrumtrulescent on Apr 19, 2010 20:45:28 GMT -5
YAY!
I love that your elections happen so fast and isn't this interiminable, drawn out, horrific process of unending stress and aggravation.
Or maybe that's 'cause during the last election I was going to FoxNews Baptist Church of Glen Beck three times a week.
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Apr 20, 2010 8:54:00 GMT -5
I thought your election was between Obama and Hillary at first because of all of the publicity, then I was like "wait, what?! They're campaigning to be the leader of one party and they might not even win?" Then about a year later Obama was made President. Such a lot of time and money used up. Over here it's 6 weeks between announcing the election and the actual election.
|
|
|
Post by Scrumtrulescent on Apr 20, 2010 14:49:37 GMT -5
That's the way it SHOULD be done. The outcome probably would have been the same here, without all the wasted time and money. I saw a bit of the televised debate between the candidates, I was only 10% listening but I was amazed at how often the US came up. Really?
I hope the Lib Dems get elected but if they're like ours, don't expect any actual governing to go down, ours are into pointing out whats wrong than actually growing a pair and fixing it.
|
|
|
Post by Emma on Apr 20, 2010 14:55:53 GMT -5
Yeah well the US basically started the economic crisis and a lot of stuff you do affects us so it has to be discussed.
|
|
|
Post by Turcote on Apr 22, 2010 11:24:13 GMT -5
Update: I got like an 87% on that Political Sciene test! Yay!
|
|
|
Post by Scrumtrulescent on Apr 22, 2010 16:12:28 GMT -5
Score! I knew you'd kill it
Yeah and my Dad and Nick are all "Obama hasn't fixed shit! Taxes are going up!"
I want to pull my hair out and throw things
|
|