Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: OT: For information only !

From:Joe <joe@...>
Date:Friday, June 18, 2004, 9:22
Nik Taylor wrote:

>Tristan Mc Leay wrote: > > >>Well it is, as far as I know... Certainly the Australian system has been >>described as a Washminster system (Wash- from Washington, DC, -minster >>from Westminster). The Senate of both countries is intended as a house >>of the states more than the people; the states each have equal >>representation regardless of the population (New States of Australia >>would,* and the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory >>do, have fewer Senators though). Both Senates wield a lot of power; one >>of Australia's Prime Ministers, Gough Whitlam, was fired because his >>government had no access to money because the Senate refused to pass the >>Budget. I assumed the American Senate was elected from the word go, but >>apparently it wasn't till 1913 (so Australia's Senate was elected even >>earlier). The Australian Senate wasn't proportional till 1949 >> >> > >Wait ... is Australia's senate proportional representation or equal >representation? > > >
Speaking for the Australian politics I know nothing about, I think the following is true: Each state is equally represented, but within the states, the members are represented proportionally to the voters in that state.