TvCR theorem: For a Room Legislation and Policy Room
"A parliament that his true mission is to represent the whole Dutch nation ideally consists of two directly elected rooms with private functions and powers: the Policy 1man 1 jar Board and the Legislative Chamber." Prof. dr. WJ Witteveen supports this argument.
In his elegant column in the Times of March 19, 2011 Peter Middendorp 1man 1 jar describes a visit to the Senate. Hangs there a listless atmosphere. Senators fight sleep while a lady out its objections to the Electronic Patient Record. Boredom in the Senate actually does nice to, he writes, for a moment, no parliamentarians image that all the time are shocked or emotionally injured. By lunchtime startled the audience awake as a senator asks a question into the microphone. `We have heard all the objections against the Electronic Patient Record. But what I do not understand: what problem is actually solved 1man 1 jar it? Middendorp then writes:
"It was a good question, which was to be held more frequently. About disinterest 1man 1 jar was easily spoken evil, but if you all are all everyday was fascinating, as happened in the House, you lost the main sight, and you needed a listless Senate to bring the issue to the core . '
Apparently not only exists between the two Houses of the States General a striking difference in mentality and culture, from this anecdote speaks suspect that it is a fundamental difference. 1man 1 jar Maybe it's 1man 1 jar even better than if the two rooms take their jobs very differently and run. That is the starting point of my argument for a stronger parliament 1man 1 jar that are representative tasks can really deliver.
When it comes to the core task of the parliament - Article 50 Constitution is still representing the entire Dutch nation and so articulate and interpret the Public Interest - is both the Lower and the Upper House to criticism. The parliament puts too often especially the issues of the day. On the skin, sat by the media to make a spectacle of the political process, especially in debates about current issues and intense feelings dominate the cool facts. There is an interruption culture emerged, in which a debate no longer consists of lectures to listen on and which provide substantive responses, but which one speaker after a few sentences is interrupted for blame, objections and questions. The result 1man 1 jar is that no one - and certainly not the viewer - this spectacle a rope to tie. How common is it for a spokesman brought the debate to change their minds and that a fraction is actually bore convincing arguments? At the end of the discussions, the views are still the same but the case after the hassle and fuss have become much more complex. Since the rise and fall of Pim Fortuyn prevailed in all political parties the uneasy feeling that the people were excluded and that the feelings of the people had to be translated into one-liners. When the question was raised whether 1man 1 jar the PVV had to govern it, the argument was heard as the PVV would not participate this was contrary to the popular will, while still only a minority of the electorate has embraced the ideas of Geert Wilders . MPs do not know themselves well lake showing their constitutional role actually exists. 1man 1 jar
The Senate 1man 1 jar is often condemned to docility. At the end of the legislative process sometimes still substantial shortcomings forward, it is often even whether the law can solve any problem, but usually does not lead to the tune of the bill. Because the political primacy is now once due to the indirect composition of the Senate to the House, keep away many senators and let them laws by which they know very well that it does not solve problems or create new problems. There is in the Senate real expertise exists - and that is a great thing - but many members have a double cap on and his main concerns director of an organization or representative of an interest, so they tend not to have the Public Interest but a Placing the focus on minor importance. It has always amazed me that for instance in the committee that deals with research professors only place that still would be exposed to pressure from their own organizations. That the problems in primary education would probably be greater 1man 1 jar than they would not be covered up. This mechanism of selective interest representation is compounded by senators have no natural constituency, no electorate that wide and dive
"A parliament that his true mission is to represent the whole Dutch nation ideally consists of two directly elected rooms with private functions and powers: the Policy 1man 1 jar Board and the Legislative Chamber." Prof. dr. WJ Witteveen supports this argument.
In his elegant column in the Times of March 19, 2011 Peter Middendorp 1man 1 jar describes a visit to the Senate. Hangs there a listless atmosphere. Senators fight sleep while a lady out its objections to the Electronic Patient Record. Boredom in the Senate actually does nice to, he writes, for a moment, no parliamentarians image that all the time are shocked or emotionally injured. By lunchtime startled the audience awake as a senator asks a question into the microphone. `We have heard all the objections against the Electronic Patient Record. But what I do not understand: what problem is actually solved 1man 1 jar it? Middendorp then writes:
"It was a good question, which was to be held more frequently. About disinterest 1man 1 jar was easily spoken evil, but if you all are all everyday was fascinating, as happened in the House, you lost the main sight, and you needed a listless Senate to bring the issue to the core . '
Apparently not only exists between the two Houses of the States General a striking difference in mentality and culture, from this anecdote speaks suspect that it is a fundamental difference. 1man 1 jar Maybe it's 1man 1 jar even better than if the two rooms take their jobs very differently and run. That is the starting point of my argument for a stronger parliament 1man 1 jar that are representative tasks can really deliver.
When it comes to the core task of the parliament - Article 50 Constitution is still representing the entire Dutch nation and so articulate and interpret the Public Interest - is both the Lower and the Upper House to criticism. The parliament puts too often especially the issues of the day. On the skin, sat by the media to make a spectacle of the political process, especially in debates about current issues and intense feelings dominate the cool facts. There is an interruption culture emerged, in which a debate no longer consists of lectures to listen on and which provide substantive responses, but which one speaker after a few sentences is interrupted for blame, objections and questions. The result 1man 1 jar is that no one - and certainly not the viewer - this spectacle a rope to tie. How common is it for a spokesman brought the debate to change their minds and that a fraction is actually bore convincing arguments? At the end of the discussions, the views are still the same but the case after the hassle and fuss have become much more complex. Since the rise and fall of Pim Fortuyn prevailed in all political parties the uneasy feeling that the people were excluded and that the feelings of the people had to be translated into one-liners. When the question was raised whether 1man 1 jar the PVV had to govern it, the argument was heard as the PVV would not participate this was contrary to the popular will, while still only a minority of the electorate has embraced the ideas of Geert Wilders . MPs do not know themselves well lake showing their constitutional role actually exists. 1man 1 jar
The Senate 1man 1 jar is often condemned to docility. At the end of the legislative process sometimes still substantial shortcomings forward, it is often even whether the law can solve any problem, but usually does not lead to the tune of the bill. Because the political primacy is now once due to the indirect composition of the Senate to the House, keep away many senators and let them laws by which they know very well that it does not solve problems or create new problems. There is in the Senate real expertise exists - and that is a great thing - but many members have a double cap on and his main concerns director of an organization or representative of an interest, so they tend not to have the Public Interest but a Placing the focus on minor importance. It has always amazed me that for instance in the committee that deals with research professors only place that still would be exposed to pressure from their own organizations. That the problems in primary education would probably be greater 1man 1 jar than they would not be covered up. This mechanism of selective interest representation is compounded by senators have no natural constituency, no electorate that wide and dive
No comments:
Post a Comment