Prof Power\'s Proposal - more info: Under Professor Power\'s proposal, the Head of State has the responsibility of reporting to the nation as to the integrity and capacity of the various Executive Councils. The Council of State would be the monitoring institution.
It is the most effective reform one could imagine for a republic as it is not heavy handed, flexible, decidedly apolitical, progressive and would prevent ministers from being above the law.
Consider how a Bill of Rights would be enforced. At the regulatory and executive order level, the Governor\'s role could be crucial. Otherwise, it is left to the courts. Bad decisions are resolved after months or years and a legal bill which only the rich or big corporations can pay. This is the Bill of Rights that Australians fear.
My comment you found confusing, let me expand: Under the paradigm, executive power is held by the Head of State, separate from the Governors who exercise it, and separate again from the Ministers who direct its use.
The philosophical cues are from Rousseau. Nevertheless, as one cannot effectively use Montesquieu to critique the Westminister System - that would be to adopt the formula without understanding its basis. Anyway, people say our legislature is beholden to the executive, but I have thought of it as the other way around. The Prime Minister is firstly a parliamentarian.
Let\'s get back to putting real proposals forward which state the objectives, which are supported in the general will of the people. That\'s what the Copernican Paradigm does. In fact, in order to get a Bill of Rights politically, one would need to adopt the paradigm in a progressive form, as found in Professor Power\'s proposal for a Council of State, so that these rights would manifest themselves directly in the executive rather than in judicial review.
Comments