topic Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate.... in Community Spirit

Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:46:30 GMT

I found this but could someone explain process of voting leading up to and process of a Double Dissolution? Thanks.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

pct001wine — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:51:08 GMT

Bit of wishful thinking there paint or just getting your ducks in a row ?

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

bluecat*dancing — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:54:12 GMT

If the House of Reps and the senate fail to reach an agreement on a piece of legislation twice, then, the government can ask the GG to dissolve both upper and lower houses which result in a new election being called.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

Anonymous — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:54:24 GMT

The Senate has to refuse to pass a bill twice, with a 3 month gap between votes. If the Senate sends the bill back a 2nd time, the Government go to Gov General and ask for Government to be disolved.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

bluecat*dancing — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:55:08 GMT

When the Upper and Lower Houses are deadlocked.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:59:52 GMT

thanks people.

Aren't there moves afoot to 'change' voting so that it will be harder at an election for minority parties to get elected?.....

Also, saw this headline "Clive Palmer to run for PM if double dissolution called"
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/clive-palmer-to-run-for-pm-if-double-dissolution-called-20140516-zreer.html

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

azureline** — Fri, 16 May 2014 05:59:37 GMT

@paintsew007 wrote:
thanks people.
Saw this headline "Clive Palmer to run for PM if double dissolution called"
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/clive-palmer-to-run-for-pm-if-double-dissolution-called-20140516-zreer.html

I hope not

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

debra9275 — Fri, 16 May 2014 06:01:07 GMT

oh no, not sure I''d want Clive for PM lol

perhaps hes banking on everone casting protest votes

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Fri, 16 May 2014 06:05:01 GMT

to az and debs. Yeah! a bit of a worry.

Honestly the state that our Federal Parliament has gotten into, it's shameful. They should ALL be put out to do time in the community for 6 months I reckon.....for wasting our time, money and not representing us diligently but puttinging their self interests first.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Fri, 16 May 2014 06:09:49 GMT

found this:

Double Dissolution

A double dissolution occurs when both the Senate and the House of Representatives are shut down (dissolved), in order for a federal election to take place. A double dissolution election is different to regular elections, when only half the Senate seats are contested. In a double dissolution, the Governor-General dissolves both the Senate and the House of Representatives at the same time, meaning every seat in both chambers is contested. This is the only time that all senators stand for election at the same time

The House of Representatives chamber

A double dissolution can only happen when there is a deadlock between the two houses of Parliament; it usually occurs at the request of the Prime Minister.

Purpose

The Australian Constitution gives almost identical powers to the House of Representatives and the Senate. A bill (proposed law) must be agreed to by both houses in order to become law. The drafters of the Constitution saw the possibility of a deadlock occurring between the two houses, in which there may be disagreement over a bill. Section 57 of the Constitution provides a mechanism to resolve the disagreement, by dissolving both houses of Parliament and calling an election to let the voters decide what the outcome will be. The double dissolution mechanism only relates to a bill that originates in the House of Representatives.

The Senate chamber

Procedure

Section 57 of the Australian Constitution details the conditions for a double dissolution:

The House of Representatives passes a bill and sends it to the Senate.
The Senate rejects or fails to pass the bill, or passes it with amendments to which the House will not agree.
Three months pass from the time the Senate disagrees with the bill.
The House of Representatives passes the same bill and sends it to the Senate again.
The Senate again rejects or fails to pass the bill, or passes the same bill with amendments to which the House will not agree.

More than one bill may act as a trigger for a double dissolution.

Once these conditions (called triggers) have been met, the Prime Minister may recommend to the Governor-General that a double dissolution of the Parliament take place. A federal election then follows for all members of the House of Representatives and all senators.

A double dissolution cannot take place within six months of the end of a three-year term of the House of Representatives.

Joint sitting in 1974 (House of Representatives, Old Parliament House)

Joint sitting of Parliament

After a double dissolution election, the bill(s) which triggered the double dissolution may be presented to both houses of Parliament again. If a deadlock occurs once more, the Governor-General may order a joint sitting of both houses of Parliament. At a joint sitting, all members of parliament from both houses meet together to vote on the bill(s). A joint sitting has only occurred once in the Australian Parliament, in 1974.

In this instance, the government led by Prime Minister Gough Whitlam had a majority of nine votes in the House of Representatives but did not have a majority in the Senate. By April 1974, the Senate had twice refused to pass six bills and these became double dissolution triggers. The Prime Minister requested the Governor-General to use section 57 to dissolve both houses of Parliament and call an election for 18 May.

The government won the election but with a reduced majority in the House of Representatives; it still did not have a majority in the Senate. The disputed bills were again introduced into and passed by the House of Representatives. The Senate again rejected the bills. As a result, the Governor-General convened a joint sitting of both houses of Parliament on Tuesday 6 August and Wednesday 7 August 1974 to vote together on the bills. Three of these bills related to electoral matters, two related to health insurance and one related to setting up the Petroleum and Minerals Authority. The Whitlam government held a majority of all the combined votes, with government members voting together to ensure that the six bills were passed by an absolute majority of all members of parliament.

Mr Whitlam speaks on the steps of Old Parliament House, Canberra, after his dismissal

History

There have been six double dissolutions of the Australian Parliament: in 1914, 1951, 1974, 1975, 1983 and 1987. In 1914, 1975 and 1983, the government lost the election that resulted from the double dissolution. The most famous of these double dissolutions occurred in 1975. The Senate refused to pass the supply (Budget bills) of the government, led by Prime Minister Gough Whitlam. This caused a deadlock which could be used as a double dissolution trigger. The Prime Minister did not want a double dissolution election; however, Governor-General Sir John Kerr dismissed the government and an election was called by caretaker Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

azureline** — Fri, 16 May 2014 06:11:23 GMT

I can't read all that.......................... I remember the Whitlam one very well!

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Fri, 16 May 2014 06:14:40 GMT

yes i can remember it too az. Sorry if that was too much but thought some might be interested.

I am interested to see if Palmer is wooed successfully by TA....and who these minority party senators esp the Indep ones will side with. Am guessing that the Greens will side with the ALP.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

aftanas — Sat, 17 May 2014 03:53:11 GMT

@paintsew007 wrote:
thanks people.

Aren't there moves afoot to 'change' voting so that it will be harder at an election for minority parties to get elected?.....

Also, saw this headline "Clive Palmer to run for PM if double dissolution called"
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/clive-palmer-to-run-for-pm-if-double-dissolution-called-20140516-zreer.html

No, the proposal is to change the criteria for the recognition of a political party. Currently an organisation only needs 500 members to be so recognised, whereas the proposal is to increase that number to 1,500. There is also a proposal to change the way preferences are allocated in above the line voting.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Sat, 17 May 2014 06:28:44 GMT

Thanks for this info aftanas,

paintsew007 asked:

Aren't there moves afoot to 'change' voting so that it will be harder at an election for minority parties to get elected?.....

and aftanas answered:

I am very pleased to hear that something is going to be done about how preferences are dealt with and specifically allocated. Was very 'sneaky poos' the way we had it IMO.

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

spotweldersfriend — Sat, 17 May 2014 11:23:23 GMT

Tony would never call for a DD. He's gutless

Re: Please explain a Double Dissolution and numbers in Senate....

fourandsixpants — Sun, 18 May 2014 02:37:58 GMT

Tony would never call for a DD. He's gutless

........................................................................................................................................

Thought it was all huff and guff....or is it....and perhaps we should be very concerned about what plans are afoot?