Well, you have a different view of how government should work, and that's fine. I even agree with you to some extent. But how it works in a parliamentary democracy is there's a ruling party/coalition and the opposition. The ruling party for the most part comes up with the plans for fulfilling their own agenda. The opposition provides critique and usually votes against the ruling party's plans, but the ruling party pushes their plan through because they have a majority of the votes in the house of commons (equivalent to congress, but here there's no midterms and so it's rare for a ruling party/coalition to lose it's house majority -also, fwiw our equivalent of a 'senate' is the house of lords which is basically just a bunch of old geezers who got appointed not elected, and who just rubber stamp everything, so they're kind of useless really).
In this case, the ruling party came up with several plans, and had their own members supported any of them unanimously, one of them would have gone through. In every case, some of their own party rebelled, and the plans got axed. So I'm not sure you can blame that on the opposition members. First, they weren't asked to get involved in making the plans afaik. Second, they voted the way they always voted, and the governing party couldn't unite its own members behind its own plans (presumably because their own plans were shit).
If you think that everyone should just vote their conscience and ignore the party line then yeah, that'd be nice. But rarely does it happen. It's so rare in fact that when it does happen it's usually because a proposal is so shitty some of the ruling party refuse to vote for it. That's what happened here.
Reply With Quote