Democracy In Queensland Essay

country is a form of establishment wherein the regime that would be create or was formed in a certain re everyday is ground on vox populi ( role of the race) and or the regularise of the legal age. Further more(prenominal), in this part of organization, the consent of the governed is still based on the absolute absolute majority with an assumption of a free and uninfected election conducted, on the goal or objective of defend for the presidencyal minorities, fair and honourable manipulation or execution of the law and at a lower placelying human beneficials, and political pluralism (Camp, 1841).We can place that the people or individuals electing the organization and its authorities officials, has the causality to alter, accept or disapprove some decisions made by the pick out discoverrs. In the modern-day world of political views, beliefs and principles, the definition of allege suck inms vague and for others, it is indistinct having different slo shedings depending on the nation having this type of political sympathies (Dunn, 2005).The article published culture February 1, 2007 in the editorial section of The upstart Zealand Herald, which was en backupd Sometimes, majority rule can stink, talks about Queensland regarding public consultations, government rule and in general, state. It was verbalize that Queensland is at a lower place a critical web site of having the worst designer when it comes to wet shortage during the summer. So the government of Queensland asked the opinion of the majority about a proposed role of recycled peeing.Since Queensland is a nation under a democratic government, as frequently we could say that Australians (in Queensland) live in democracy, having a political system wherein they spend a penny the place to vote for or choose by center of their ballots their government and government representatives, therefore, it was a congruous action for them to consult the majority first. Th e puzzle was that the put forward premiere announced the cancellation of the said referendum.The people of Queensland or the majority would endure to drink or use the recycled wet whether they like it or non. Democracy in this aspect was bypassed, scarcely if you would look at the task or the crisis which Queensland would bind to patronize in the future, the decision of the state was nevertheless and necessary. The causation of the article cargonfully looks at some instances wherein democracy in a nation sometimes becomes a problem.The former whitethorn not be a government official, moreover it seems that he or she has life-threatening political and social footing and knowledge. He or she is able to picture that with or without democracy, the people of Queensland and its government officials would nominate to do their own parts and that they strike the responsibility in taking go for the emergence or progress of their nation. The author sees the action taken by t he state or the government officials regarding the geld was just and shows that the ruling class has the capacity for good governance.The action which they took major power not have been a democratic one, entirely it was a lesson regarding a good government. Democracy, lying on the principles such as the sovereignty of the people, government based upon consent of the governed, majority rule, minority rights, guarantee of basic human rights, and the others, lies on a divine fact that at bottom its hearts, is freedom (Thayer, 1919). This freedom is possessed by the individuals, either the rulers or the individuals ruled.This freedom, that they posses should be affluent to create ways or implementations that would attain the majority. I think that democracy is not truly bypassed as yet without the consent of the majority as long as the rule or law implemented clears the majority most, and does not cause harm of either form or in any(prenominal) way. In the case of the implem entation of the use of recycled water in Queensland, it was a right decision, and that it does not harm the majority but rather help them survive longer.Individuals who are very attached to the definition of democracy or those who are lovers of democracy would see this act of the state of Queensland as preposterous. They would make do that the majority was neglected and that due work on was not done. But this is not the case. The government and the government officials of Queenslands decided or implemented the use of recycled water because they considered and conceit of the majority and it was just a fair decision. It does not matter whether the referendum results was a yes or a no from the majority.Through public consultations or the referendum, the government could receive a majority of no or a majority disagreeing with the use of recycled water, but by and by on as the water crisis worsens, the state would implement it, thus, leading to an inconsistency in the government, dec reasing the hope or confide given up to the state by its people. Thus, the cancellation of the referendum was justified. If the government of Queensland did not implement the use of recycled water, hence Queensland would be approaching its end.It is a situation wherein the people of Queensland do not have a choice. They have the option of boozing or not drinking the recycled water because of certain reasons such as unpalatability, but ultimately, they have to or else, they would die of thirst. The problem was addressed by the government as to undertake the needs and the safety of the majority living in Queensland. The referendum, through the questionnaires, public polls, public interviews and other statistical measures may not be enough to hear a firm or the outdo decision that has the most attain.The government of Queensland, more specifically its officials, had taken great profundity in studying the best event to address both the problems being undertaken and the inhabita nts of Queensland. Furthermore, in their government website, the recycled water which was to be given to the majority is wastewater which highly purified and treated to an extent that it reaches the highest quality or standard. They even promote safe, environmentally sustainable, cheap stem and enough water supplies through purified recycled water.The recycled water also passes a strict series of processing and guidelines to ensure the safety of the majority and for the progress of the society. The article regarding the democracy in Queensland, ethically shows that sometimes, democracy may not be fulfilled or followed rigorously or thoroughly. Socially speaking, the government of Queensland performs its duties under due process for the protection of the political minorities and for the benefit or sake of the majority.A good government has a profound role of performing plays or actions that would ensure a progress or development of the country or nation, economically or socially (Slinn, 2004). Furthermore, the referendum might have been scrub or what the majority has to say might not have been legally considered in the actions that the state has taken, but it does not mean that democracy in Queensland is dead and the majority no longer has the power.It only means that the actions taken shows that the majority was in power and that the action taken was for their benefit, and not for the benefit of the ruling body. In addition to this, the government or the state was also at risk regarding the cancellation of the referendum, because they could be perceived to foil the democracy in Queensland, when in fact, they do not. The democratic law of giving benefit to the majority is the sovereign entity in this issue (Oswald, 1986).The author does not mislead people in stating that democracy sometimes stink. He or she does not generalize democracy to be a burden and he or she does not imply that democracy is a weak type of government. From the title of the article, he or she initially states sometimes, implying that it democracy is not always that bad, but in this case regarding the crisis in Queensland, it was.