Actually, one of the primary benefits of a multi party / minority government is that things don't get done, at least not quickly. It's very hard for a new PM to enact sweeping changes because he/she never has the votes to simply override opposition.

The US system is not so fortunate, but thankfully our founders envisioned this and set up checks and balances with the court system to limit the majority party's ability to force legislation. Of course, after a few more executives like Bush, we might as well get rid of Congress.

 

While it's true what you say about the see-saw of changes in a two party system, you would be surprised at how much more gets accomplished in a minority gov't than when a party has a majority.

The give and take compromises between the (usually) two parties governing combined with the need for both of those parties to 'make an impact' mean that often more gets done than when a majority party sits back to do little. Sitting back is a common strategy for a majority govt since, by doing something you may piss someone off or make a mistake.

 

Where have you been the last 6 years Jed?

 

LOL!! I'm not talking about this country.

 

 

Is Canada still relevent?

 

Was it ever?

 

At some point in time I'm sure it was. Maybe the French and Indian war?

 

Moving to the politics forum

















(Oh, just realised I'm not allowed to do that !! )

 

Arse.