Comment on Why did there need to be a vote?
PlogLod@lemmy.world 8 months agoBut the Australian people already voted in Anthony Albanese, so whatever he does as the democratically elected leader is basically democratic isn’t it? Why would we need a separate vote for each decision when he could just make those decisions as the elected head of parliament?
Australians do not vote for a Prime Minister, we vote for a political party which nominates its Prime Minister in the event of an election victory.
By convention parties nominate the PM before and promote them during the campaign. PMs can however be chucked out by their own party without a vote by the public, as happened with Kevin Rudd.
we vote for a political party
We vote for a local representative, who may or may not be a member of a political party.
You are correct, I will leave my post as is though.
PMs can however be chucked out by their own party without a vote by the public, as happened with Kevin Rudd
Infact, Scott Morrison was the first PM to last a full term since John Howard
Ain’t nothing democratic about the same two parties always winning.
Albo was simply the least shit option, not chosen because he represented our wishes.
As much as I hate the result I still feel like this is a good way to go about things, the prime minister shouldn’t be able to alter the constitution willy nilly, it’s not their country it’s ours.
plumbercraic@lemmy.sdf.org 8 months ago
amending the constitution of Australia requires a referendum in which the proposed amendment must be approved by a “double majority”: a majority of voters nationwide and a majority of voters in a majority of states.
PlogLod@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Fair enough, but then why did Albanese suggest he had the ability to override the vote but was opting not to?
Nath@aussie.zone 8 months ago
He can put a body in place. We’ve had them before. The trouble is: the opposition gets in and gets rid of it again.
By having the body enshrined in the constitution, it’s permanent. Another party can’t come along and get rid of it again.
alex@agora.nop.chat 8 months ago
He doesn’t have the power to override the vote and put it in the constitution, but the body doesn’t need to be in the constitution to exist.
They could form it legally without that section, there’s just nothing stopping it being torn down after the next election if he does, because the constitution wouldn’t be enforcing it. The whole point was to make it more resilient to attacks.
Even if it were in the constitution, the government of the time would be able to choose the shape the Voice took, but I suppose the expectation would be that, if it were enshrined in the constitution, that’s a very strong message that messing with it would put the majority of the country against you.
PlogLod@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Maybe he should just form the body anyway and hope that by the time the opposition are in power, people have realised it’s a good thing and won’t reverse the decision?