Parliament and Procedure

The logical pursuit and perseverance to maintain and manage and proceed in the politics of parliamentary law requires the right procedure and jurisdiction of evaluation. Of course cross talk and argumentative debate helps to see and establish the right outcome of passing the right laws. Now however there is reasonable justification to pursue the current and governmental system with high costs of administration adding up to ineffective procedure and incongruent outcomes that enable gross mis-expenditure of funds and tax payers incomes. This however is not easily fixed overnight or even when the next election comes along because there is simply too much red tape and hidden costs in allocating expenditure used up by politicians that prefer to line their back account then get work done and use up massive amounts in expense accounts that could be going to the betterment and expenditure on more important things that need funding like roads and transport, infrastructure, health, education and police departments. The fact that the west minister system has been a better proven system. So if it works so well, why change it? If it was fallacies and impractabilities, why can't they be fixed? If you want to change the whole system, you have to have a better system. I am not going to go into the everyday procedure of passing bulls nor am I going to try to change laws that work. What I want to do is to make the current system procedure more workable and streamline. To have a more effective system you have to manage what you have got better or change it completely. If the system is workable enough, leave it alone, right! But if the system is not workable enough it needs better management not political bickering and unresolved debating and argumentative behavior. Workable rules, laws and regulation bills must be put in writing and voted for. If you think oral or written communication is better vote for it at the next election.