Liberal Party clearly anti-women.

Originally posted by Scott th Ratbag ↑

"naturally there'd be a lot of details". ..... and imo these would be sorted out by the members.

there would need to be total rethink of how govt is structured. would MPs decide to maintain the status quo, or would they move toward a panel of experts in the area of the departmental criteria of responsibility?

the key problem with the current system is that elected MPs, who have little knowledge of the department or area of responsibility, are placed in charge. This enables departments to be run by ideological beliefs and this is where most of the damage is done, eg. AG Porter and Taylor on Energy. in terms of Labs, Farrell in Trade and Shorten in NDIS. no bloomin' wonder we get so many ***kups in so many departments when such dolts are in charge.

the good thing is that the Constitution doesn't specify how departments are managed. so changes would be a matter for MPs to decide.

as to the Senate, states, under the constitution, must have representation and the right to review and hold Inquiries. imo this is a good thing. the Constitution dictates the representation, but doesn't state that political parties should be the representatives. imo this is where sortition would be best used.

Expand

''there would need to be total rethink of how govt is structured. would MPs decide to maintain the status quo, or would they move toward a panel of experts in the area of the departmental criteria of responsibility?
the key problem with the current system is that elected MPs, who have little knowledge of the department or area of responsibility, are placed in charge. This enables departments to be run by ideological beliefs and this is where most of the damage is done''

now, when I read that ----------- what instantly came to mind is that - regardless of if we have a system change or not and regardless of what you and I might like to see or sit down to discuss about what we'd like to see -

something BIG - is in the pipeline that's going to turn that all on its head anyway -

AI

I assume that AI will actually get 'I' sooner or later ----------- my guess is within 10 years for sure, probably sooner

AND - it WILL be used. AND it will be far far far far far far smarter than any department heads or workers or consultants ---------- it will be smarter, look far broader, look down the track and back at where we've come from and it will do it ------------ probably as good as instantly

AND - I believe it will come up as the 'authority'. And I really really don't see how humans will be able to get around what the 'authority' has as an opinion

on the journey to it being actually intelligent and knowing true from not true - even in it's stumbling toddler steps -------------- right now - it's bringing up factors, facets and ideas and connections that 99.9% of humans wouldn't think of -

that can be investigated by humans and confirmed - then used or not used in argument

now, I know that's a little way off what you were saying - but, it's going to have a major impact on the knowledge of MP's, minders and departmental staff and heads of departments, which was one of your points

AI already is way way way way in advance of google searches ------- there will be just so many 'what about' questions happening now and in the very near future (like months and a year) that we never had before -

and in years to come - and, not many years - we will have systems that know so much more that all of our MP's and departmental staff combined

times - have and are most clearly - changing ----------- at an incredible rate