Legislative supremacy: Why Australia should ditch the Senate

A Senate of 50 Senators would be a powerful and unrivaled institution in our political system.

It would be an unprecedented and significant change to the way our political processes are run.

The first order of business for a Senate of this size would be to abolish the Australian Greens.

This will require changing the Constitution so that only the Greens are permitted to hold the upper house of Parliament.

If the Greens were to win a majority in the Senate, they would be able to use their power to create an unelected senate.

This would mean that a majority of the Senate would be made up of Greens, and the Greens would be the only party to have a seat in the upper chamber.

Under the Constitution, the upper House is set by a majority vote of both houses of Parliament (the House of Representatives) and is the chamber of conscience.

But under the Greens’ proposed changes to the Senate’s structure, the Greens will have only a small percentage of the seats.

As the Australian Electoral Commission points out, the number of senators in the lower house is already capped at 35 per cent.

The Greens have already introduced legislation to increase the cap to 60 per cent, and this legislation will only need the support of two-thirds of the Senators.

In other words, if the Greens win 50 per cent of the votes, the bill will only require the support on two-fifths of the senators to pass.

And so it would only require a majority to override a two-party system and effectively give the Greens their own senate.

This means that under the proposed changes, the Senate is effectively the Parliament of the Greens, rather than the Parliament that has a legitimate role in governing Australia.

If this were to happen, the Australian people would be disenfranchised.

In addition, the majority of Australians would be disenchanted with the two-dimensional representation of the Australian political system, with two-people-one-vote.

The current system, where politicians are elected by a small number of party activists in marginal seats, creates a culture of political apathy and complacency.

The result is that a large majority of people vote for the political parties they most support, and then the parties that are the most comfortable with them, and with the Greens.

A majority of voters would be less likely to vote for a politician who is in line with their personal political views.

If we want to change the Australian system of government, we must change the system that gives the Greens power.

If we are serious about reform, then the Australian Parliament must be abolished, replaced by a constitutional monarchy, where all power rests with the people.

The Federal Government should set up a new, independent body that will be called the Senate of the Commonwealth.

It should have an independent judiciary, and should be entirely independent of the political power of the Government.

The new Senate would have the power to make amendments to the Constitution at any time, but would have no say in how they are ratified.

The Senate would also be the chamber that will decide whether a proposed bill is passed by the Senate.

It can vote against any proposed legislation, and would have veto power over any legislation that does not meet the conditions for approval.

The only exception to this would be legislation that directly addresses a specific matter of concern to the Australian public.

A Senate of 25 Senators would provide the necessary structure to ensure that the Australian democratic system functions properly.

When it comes to the structure of a Senate, the key difference between a parliamentary and a constitutional system is the proportion of members who are chosen by voters.

The Australian people elect their representatives to Parliament, but they are also responsible for deciding how the members of Parliament are chosen.

The Greens would have a significant impact on the composition of the House of Parliament if they were able to hold all the seats in the Upper House, and thus all of the upper houses of parliament.

But even if they did win a parliamentary majority, a Senate that is dominated by Greens would make it nearly impossible for the Greens to change their legislation and override a majority government.

The changes proposed by the Greens have been criticised by both Labor and the Coalition.

“This is not a good idea,” said former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in a statement.

“The Greens have no right to call themselves the party of change in the Commonwealth.”

“We will fight this on every front, and we will use every tool at our disposal to ensure we win this fight,” he said.

Labor’s leader Bill Shorten said the Greens had a chance to make changes to their legislation to change how the upper and lower houses of the Parliament work.

But he warned that the Greens could not be in a position to stop their bill being passed if the Senate were to abolish itself.

For most of its history, the Labor Party has been one of the biggest proponents of the two person one vote system, and has always been willing to work with other parties to improve the system.

But the Greens can be confident